Body piercing

OBJECTIVE: To review the current information on medical complications, psychological implications, and legislative issues related to body piercing, a largely unregulated industry in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a MEDLINE search of English language articles from 1966 until May 1998 using the search terms “body piercing” and “ear piercing.” Bibliographies of these references were reviewed for additional citations. We also conducted an Internet search for “body piercing” on the World Wide Web. MAIN RESULTS: In this manuscript, we review the available body piercing literature. We conclude that body piercing is an increasingly common practice in the United States, that this practice carries substantial risk of morbidity, and that most body piercing in the United States is being performed by unlicensed, unregulated individuals. Primary care physicians are seeing growing numbers of patients with body pierces. Practitioners must be able to recognize, treat, and counsel patients on body piercing complications and be alert to associated psychological conditions in patients who undergo body piercing

Scientists appeal to Quebec premier Charest to stop asbestos exports to the developing world

We note that your government and the asbestos industry have successfully lobbied the Canadian government to block the listing of chrysotile asbestos as a hazardous substance under a U.N. environmental convention (the Rotterdam Convention), thus preventing the recommendation of the Convention’s expert scientific body from being implemented and thus also jeopardizing the mandate of the Convention. The Rotterdam Convention was created specifically to protect people in developing countries and countries in economic transition from being harmed by hazardous substances. It provides the basic human right of prior informed consent, requiring that countries be informed that a substance they may import is hazardous. It is extremely troubling to see Quebec instigate sabotage of a U.N. environmental convention and thus deny a basic human right that is taken for granted in Quebec itself. This obstruction helps the industry’s sales. But it brings Quebec into international disrepute. Under Canadian law, chrysotile asbestos is classified as a hazardous substance, but the Quebec government has successfully lobbied to prevent it being recognized as such under international environmental law, thus creating a double standard of protection as if some lives were less deserving of protection than others. We note that at the December 2009 Copenhagen Conference you called on Canada to show stronger commitment to implementing the UN Climate Change Convention. We ask you to show similar commitment to implementing the UN Rotterdam Convention. In light of the above disturbing facts, we appeal to you, as you are about to leave on a trade mission to India, to show the integrity and honour that the world expects of Quebec. We ask that you listen to the overwhelming evidence put forward by independent health experts, including your own Quebec health experts, and not succumb to the political lobbying of the asbestos industry. We call on you, as well as the leaders of the other Quebec political parties, to end Quebec’s export of asbestos, to stop funding the Chrysotile Institute, to support the listing of chrysotile asbestos under the UN Rotterdam Convention, to assist the last 340 asbestos miners and their community with economic diversification and to address the asbestos disease epidemic in Quebec