Health Data and Privacy in the Digital Era

In 2010, the social networking site Facebook launched a platform allowing private companies to request users’ permission to access personal data. Few users were aware of the platform, which was integrated into Facebook’s terms of service. In 2014, Cambridge Analytica, a UK-based political consulting firm, developed a data-harvesting app. That app prompted Facebook users to provide psychological profiles, including responses such as “I get upset easily” and “I have frequent mood-swings” as part of a “research project.” The Facebook platform allowed users to share their friends’ data as well, enabling Cambridge Analytica to access tens of millions of personal profiles, identifying voters’ political preferences. The controversy revealed risks to identifiable health data posed by social media and web services companies’ practices. After the Cambridge Analytica controversy, Facebook suspended a project that aimed to link data about users’ medical conditions with information about their social networks. Individuals often reveal detailed, sensitive health information online. Through wearable devices, social media posts, traceable web searches, and online patient communities, users generate large volumes of health data. Although some individuals participate in online patient forums and wellness information sharing apps under their own names, others participate via pseudonyms, assuming their privacy is preserved. Many users believe their data will be shared only with those they designate

The International Health Regulations (2005), the threat of populism and the COVID-19 pandemic

The global response to the COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare weaknesses and major challenges in the international approach to managing public health emergencies. Populist sentiment is spreading globally as democratic nations are increasing their support for or electing governments that are perceived to represent “traditional” native interests. Measures need to be taken to proactively address populist sentiment when reviewing the IHR (2005) effectiveness in the COVID-19 pandemic. We discuss how populism can impact the IHR (2005) and conversely how the IHR (2005) may be able to address populist concerns if the global community commits to helping states address public health threats that emerge within their borders

Establishing Public Health Security in a Postwar Iraq: Constitutional Obstacles and Lessons for Other Federalizing States

The public health consequences of the conflict in Iraq will likely continue after the violence has subsided. Reestablishing public health security will require large investments in infrastructure and the creation of effective systems of governance. On the question of governance, the allocation of powers in the new constitution of Iraq is critical. Given the ease with which public health threats cross borders, the constitution needs to grant to the federal government the legal authority to manage such threats and simultaneously meet international requirements. Unfortunately, the draft constitution does not accomplish this objective. If politically possible, the constitution should be amended to provide the federal government with this authority. If not possible, the Iraqi federal government would have two options. It could attempt to use alternative constitutional powers, such as national security powers. This option would be contentious and the results uncertain. Alternatively, the federal government could attempt to establish collaborative relationships with regional governments. Residual sectarian tensions create potential problems for this option, however. Reflecting on the Iraqi situation, we conclude that other federalizing countries emerging from conflict should ensure that their constitutions provide the federal government with the necessary authority to manage threats to public health security effectively

Parental views on pediatric vaccination: the impact of competing advocacy coalitions

The debate on pediatric vaccination policy has been characterized by the presence of two distinct coalitions: those in favor of current vaccination policies and those expressing concern about these policies. The target of these coalitions is the vaccination decision of parents. To determine their influence, we conducted four focus groups in Toronto, Canada examining parental decision-making concerning pediatric vaccination. Our focus groups consisted of both fathers and mothers and parents who fully vaccinated and those who did not. Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework as an analytic guide, we identified several themes that provided insights into how effective the two coalitions have been in conveying their viewpoints. In general, we identified a variety of levels of belief systems existing amongst parents concerned about vaccination, some more amenable to change than others. We found that the choice to not vaccinate was largely a result of concerns about safety and, to a lesser extent, about lack of effectiveness. These parental views reflected the ability of the coalition concerned about vaccination to challenge parents' trust in traditional public health sources of information. In contrast, the parental decision to vaccinate was due to recognizing the importance of preventing disease and also a consequence of not questioning recommendations from public health and physicians and feeling pressured to because of school policies. Importantly, parents who fully vaccinate appear to have weaker belief systems that are potentially susceptible to change. While current policies appear to be effective in encouraging vaccination, if trust in public health falters, many who currently support vaccination may reevaluate their position. More research needs to be conducted to identify approaches to communicate the risks and benefits of vaccination to parents

Adverse events associated with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation. A systematic review and meta-analysis of one hundred and twenty studies involving 177,390 individuals

Abstract Background Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is the most common form of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy and has proven efficacy for the treatment of tobacco dependence. Although expectations of mild adverse effects have been observed to be independent predictors of reduced motivation to use NRT, adverse effects associated with NRT have not been precisely quantified. Objective A systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of NRT versus inert controls and all observational studies to determine the magnitude of reported adverse effects with NRT. Methods Searches of 10 electronic databases from inception to November 2009 were conducted. Study selection and data extraction were carried out independently in duplicate. RCTs were pooled using a random effects method with Odds Ratio [OR] as the effect measure, while proportions were pooled from observational studies. A meta-regression analysis was applied to examine whether the nicotine patch is associated with different adverse effects from those common to orally administered NRT. Results Ninety-two RCTs involving 32,185 participants and 28 observational studies involving 145, 205 participants were identified. Pooled RCT evidence of varying NRT formulations found an increased risk of heart palpitations and chest pains (OR 2.06, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.51-2.82, P < 0.001); nausea and vomiting (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.37-2.04, P < 0.001); gastrointestinal complaints (OR 1.54, 95% CI, 1.25-1.89, P < 0.001); and insomnia (OR 1.42, 95% CI, 1.21-1.66, P < 0.001). Pooled evidence specific to the NRT patch found an increase in skin irritations (OR 2.80, 95% CO, 2.28-3.24, P < 0.001). Orally administered NRT was associated with mouth and throat soreness (OR 1.87, 95% CI, 1.36-2.57, P < 0.001); mouth ulcers (OR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.05-2.20, P < 0.001); hiccoughs (OR 7.68, 95% CI, 4.59-12.85, P < 0.001) and coughing (OR 2.89, 95% CI, 1.92-4.33, P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant increase in anxiety or depressive symptoms associated with NRT use. Non-comparative observational studies demonstrated the prevalence of these events in a broad population. Conclusion The use of NRT is associated with a variety of side effects. In addition to counseling and medical monitoring, clinicians should inform patients of potential side effects which are associated with the use of NRT for the treatment of tobacco dependence

Efficacy of pharmacotherapies for short-term smoking abstinance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Smoking cessation has important immediate health benefits. The comparative shorttermeffectiveness of smoking cessation interventions is not well known. We aimed to determinethe relative effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and varenicline at 4weeks post-target quit date. Methods: We searched 10 electronic medical databases (inception to October 2008). Weselected randomized clinical trials [RCTs] evaluating interventions for our primary outcome ofabstinence from smoking at at-least 4 weeks post-target quit date, with biochemical confirmation.We conducted random-effects odds ratio (OR) meta-analysis and meta-regression. We comparedtreatment effects across interventions using head-to-head trials and calculated indirectcomparisons. Results: We combined a total of 101 trials evaluating delivery of NRT versus inert controls atapproximately 4 weeks post-target quit date (total n = 31,321). The pooled overall OR is OR 2.05(95% Confidence Interval [CI], 1.89-2.23, P =&lt; 0.0001). We pooled data from 31 bupropion trialscontributing a total n of 11,118 participants and found a pooled OR of 2.25 (95% CI, 1.94-2.62, P=&lt; 0.0001). We evaluated 9 varenicline trials compared to placebo. Our pooled estimate forcessation at 4 weeks post-target quit date found a pooled OR of 3.16 (95% CI, 2.55-3.91, P =&lt;0.0001). Two trials evaluated head to head comparisons of varenicline and bupropion and found apooled estimate of OR 1.86 (95% CI, 1.49-2.33, P =&lt; 0.0001 at 4 weeks post-target quit date.Indirect comparisons were: NRT and bupropion, OR, 1.09, 95% CI, 0.93-1.31, P = 0.28; vareniclineand NRT, OR 1.56, 95% CI, 1.23-1.96, P = 0.0002; and, varenicline and bupropion, OR 1.40, 95%CI, 1.08-1.85, P = 0.01. Conclusion: Pharmacotherapeutic interventions are effective for increasing smoking abstinencerates in the short-term

Health food store recommendations: implications for breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Many breast cancer patients use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). We aimed to determine what advice health food store employees present to individuals seeking treatment options for breast cancer. METHODS: Eight data gatherers asked employees of all retail health food stores in a major Canadian city, what they recommended for a patient with breast cancer. The data gatherers inquired about product safety, potential drug interactions, costs and efficacy. They also enquired about employee training related to the products. RESULTS: Thirty-four stores were examined. A total of 33 different products were recommended, none of which are supported by sufficient evidence of efficacy. The average cost of the products they recommended was $58.09 (CAD) (minimum$5.28, median $32.99, maximum$600) per month. Twenty-three employees (68%) did not ask whether the patient took prescription medications. Fifteen employees (44%) recommended visiting a healthcare professional (naturopaths (9), physicians (5), nutritionists (1). Three employees (8.8%) discussed potential adverse effects of the products. Eight employees (23.5%) discussed the potential for drug interactions. Two employees (5.9%) suggested a possible cure with the products and one employee (2.9%) suggested discontinuing Tamoxifen. Four employees (11.8%) recommended lifestyle changes and three employees (8.8%) recommended books for further reading on the products. CONCLUSION: This study draws attention to the heterogeneity of advice provided by natural health food stores to individuals seeking treatments for breast cancer, and the safety and cost implications of some of the products recommended. Physicians should enquire carefully about the use of natural health food products by patients with breast cancer. Regulators need to consider regulations to protect vulnerable patients from incurring significant costs in their purchasing of natural health food products lacking evidence of benefit and of questionable safety

The New International Health Regulations and the Federalism Dilemma

The recent revision of the International Health Regulations, say Wilson and colleagues, is both long overdue and eminently necessary to face the challenges of an increasingly globalized world