Childhood cancer and environmental integrity: a commentary and a proposal

Improvements in the health standards of developed and developing societies depend primarily on the relationships between economy and environment. Recent long-term changes in the chemical composition of man-made environments may be linked to changes in the biology of human beings. Here we argue that children are at the greatest risk of being affected by the dangerous effects of these changes, with particular reference to cancer. The concept of cancer risk must be extended to new contexts. Considering the increasing rates of chemical pollution and its spreading in the environment, we illustrate a proposal aiming to protect the human health, in an intra- and intergenerational perspective. A surveillance system of occupational and residential exposures should be implemented to prevent cancer risk in embryos and children

Lateral reading and monetary incentives to spot disinformation about science

Peer reviewe

Efficacy and safety of two different tolvaptan doses in the treatment of hyponatremia in the Emergency Department

Hyponatremia (plasma sodium concentration or P[Na(+)] <136 mEq/L) is the most common electrolyte unbalance in clinical practice. Although it constitutes a negative prognostic factor, it frequently remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. Tolvaptan is an oral V2-receptor antagonist which produces aquaresis. Given its emerging role in the treatment of dilutional hyponatremia, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of two different doses of this drug in an Emergency Department (ED) setting. Consecutive patients with moderate-severe euvolemic or hypervolemic hyponatremia were sequentially assigned to the 15 mg Group and to the 7.5 mg Group, and were revaluated at 6, 12 and 24 h. Further evaluations and administrations were scheduled daily until P[Na(+)] correction was achieved or the maximum period of 72 h was exceeded. A 1-month follow-up was performed. Twenty-three patients were enrolled: 12 were included in the 15 mg Group, 11 in the 7.5 mg Group. Both doses significantly elevated the P[Na(+)] over 24 h, although the 15 mg Group showed faster corrections than the 7.5 mg Group (12 vs 6 mEq/L/24 h; P = 0.025). An optimal correction rate (within 4-8 mEq/L/24 h) was observed in 45.4 % of the 7.5 mg Group against 25.0 % (P n.s.). The standard dose led to dangerous overcorrections (>12 mEq/L/24 h) in 41.7 % of the patients, while the low dose did not cause any (P = 0.037). No osmotic demyelination syndrome was observed. A 7.5 mg tolvaptan dose can be considered both effective and safe in treating hyponatremia in the ED, while a 15 mg dose implicates too high risk of overcorrection

Countering vaccine hesitancy through medical expert endorsement

Scientists and medical experts are among the professionals trusted the most. Are they also the most suitable figures to convince the general public to get vaccinated? In a pre-registered experiment, we tested whether expert endorsement increases the effectiveness of debunking messages about COVID-19 vaccines. We monitored a sample of 2,277 people in Italy through a longitudinal study along the salient phases of the vaccination campaign. Participants received a series of messages endorsed by either medical researchers (experimental group) or by generic others (control). In order to minimise demand effects, we collected participants’ responses always at ten days from the last debunking message. Whereas we did not find an increase in vaccination behaviour, we found that participants in the experimental group displayed higher intention to vaccinate, as well as more positive beliefs about the protectiveness of vaccines. The more debunking messages the participants received, the greater the increase in vaccination intention in the experimental group compared to control. This suggests that multiple exposure is critical for the effectiveness of expert-endorsed debunking messages. In addition, these effects are significant regardless of participants’ trust toward science. Our results suggest that scientist and medical experts are not simply a generally trustworthy category but also a well suited messenger in contrasting disinformation during vaccination campaigns

Medical Expert Endorsement Fails to Reduce Vaccine Hesitancy in U.K. Residents

ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL OF TRIAL AND ERROR: https://doi.org/10.36850/e15 In this report we outline the null findings of a pre-registered experiment on vaccine hesitancy in the United Kingdom. The experiment targeted vaccine misconceptions common among participants by presenting a correction to such claims endorsed by a group of medical experts. The experiment had the aim to increase vaccination intention and actual uptake during the 2021 COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Our results revealed that, contrary to a similar study conducted with Italian residents, our intervention was unsuccessful in changing participants’ attitudes and behaviour towards COVID-19 vaccines. The report concludes with a discussion of the potential reasons for these null findings

Childhood cancer and environmental integrity: a commentary and a proposal

Improvements in the health standards of developed and developing societies depend primarily on the relationships between economy and environment. Recent long-term changes in the chemical composition of man-made environments may be linked to changes in the biology of human beings. Here we argue that children are at the greatest risk of being affected by the dangerous effects of these changes, with particular reference to cancer. The concept of cancer risk must be extended to new contexts. Considering the increasing rates of chemical pollution and its spreading in the environment, we illustrate a proposal aiming to protect the human health, in an intra- and intergenerational perspective. A surveillance system of occupational and residential exposures should be implemented to prevent cancer risk in embryos and children

The missing link between human ecology and public health: The case of cancer

The primary role played by the ‘ecological context’ in clarifying the causes and dynamics of human health and disease is the topic of this article. It emphasizes that the challenging incidence of cancer and other diseases can be charged primarily to the effects of the worldwide dominant economic model. Human culture may act as a powerful force affecting the environment, biology and health of humans and other species. Human culture can be viewed as a special and extreme case of ‘niche construction’, where human-specific traits, technologies and beliefs act together. The feedback between human activities and the environment can promote different trends in public health. This should provide the opportunity to rethink the consequences that our economic model produces both on the environment and on physical, mental and social health of our species

Countering vaccine hesitancy through medical expert endorsement

Scientists and medical experts are among the professionals trusted the most. Are they also the most suitable figures to convince the general public to get vaccinated? In a pre-registered experiment, we tested whether expert endorsement increases the effectiveness of debunking messages about COVID-19 vaccines. We monitored a sample of 2,277 people in Italy through a longitudinal study along the salient phases of the vaccination campaign. Participants received a series of messages endorsed by either medical researchers (experimental group) or by generic others (control). In order to minimise demand effects, we collected participants' responses always at ten days from the last debunking message. Whereas we did not find an increase in vaccination behaviour, we found that participants in the experimental group displayed higher intention to vaccinate, as well as more positive beliefs about the protectiveness of vaccines. The more debunking messages the participants received, the greater the increase in vaccination intention in the experimental group compared to control. This suggests that multiple exposure is critical for the effectiveness of expert-endorsed debunking messages. In addition, these effects are significant regardless of participants' trust toward science. Our results suggest that scientist and medical experts are not simply a generally trustworthy category but also a well suited messenger in contrasting disinformation during vaccination campaigns. (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Peer reviewe