Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review

Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is a respiratory irritant and dermal sensitizer that has been associated with occupational asthma in a small number of case reports. Those reports have raised concern that it might be a respiratory sensitizer. To better understand that possibility, we reviewed the in silico, in chemico, in vitro, and in vivo toxicology literature, and also epidemiologic and occupational medicine reports related to the respiratory effects of MMA. Numerous in silico and in chemico studies indicate that MMA is unlikely to be a respiratory sensitizer. The few in vitro studies suggest that MMA has generally weak effects. In vivo studies have documented contact skin sensitization, nonspecific cytotoxicity, and weakly positive responses on local lymph node assay; guinea pig and mouse inhalation sensitization tests have not been performed. Cohort and cross-sectional worker studies reported irritation of eyes, nose, and upper respiratory tract associated with short-term peaks exposures, but little evidence for respiratory sensitization or asthma. Nineteen case reports described asthma, laryngitis, or hypersensitivity pneumonitis in MMA-exposed workers; however, exposures were either not well described or involved mixtures containing more reactive respiratory sensitizers and irritants.The weight of evidence, both experimental and observational, argues that MMA is not a respiratory sensitizer

Balancing Public and Private Value for the Digital Television Era

As the digital switchover is the result of the dynamic interplay between economic, social and political interests, this article reflects on the role of all stakeholders involved in the switch to digital television services. It aims to discuss the trade-off between public and private policy interests focussing on strategies for preparing the transition process and the digital take-off as well as on future opportunities that become available in the spectrum (digital dividend). Based on a comparative study amongst three European countries, it is demonstrated that government has played an important role in the development of the digital television landscape in the past, and it is argued why policy makers should continue to do this in the future. Instead of a solely market-driven approach, a strong plea is made for a better understanding of stakeholders’ expectations in deploying public policies and business strategies concerning the digitised media landscape