Health Product Risk Communication: Is the message getting through?

Risk communication is an important component of improving the health and safety of Canadians. For numerous departments and agencies at all levels of government, as well as public and private organizations, effective risk communication can protect Canadians from preventable hazards. The Minister of Health, on behalf of Health Canada (the Sponsor), asked the Council of Canadian Academies (the Council) to provide an evidence-based and authoritative assessment of the state of knowledge on measurement and evaluation of health risk communication. This assessment focuses on identifying tools, evaluation methods, gaps in the literature, and barriers and facilitators to carrying out successful communication and evaluation activities. Specifically, this assessment examines the following questions: How can the effectiveness of health risk communications be measured and evaluated? • What types of instruments/tools are currently available for health risk communication? • What methodological best practices can be used to evaluate the reach, use and benefit of health risk communication? • What research could be done to inform the measurement of the effectiveness of risk communications? • What are the existing barriers to effective risk communications and what best practices exist to address these challenges? To address the charge, the Council assembled a multi-disciplinary panel of 11 experts (the Panel) from Canada and abroad. The Panel’s composition reflected a balance of expertise, experience, and demonstrated leadership in academic, clinical, and regulatory fields. Each member served as an informed individual, rather than as a representative of a particular discipline, patron, organization, or region

Modelling the Health Impact of an English Sugary Drinks Duty at National and Local Levels

Increasing evidence associates excess refined sugar intakes with obesity, Type 2 diabetes and heart disease. Worryingly, the estimated volume of sugary drinks purchased in the UK has more than doubled between 1975 and 2007, from 510ml to 1140ml per person per week. We aimed to estimate the potential impact of a duty on sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs) at a local level in England, hypothesising that a duty could reduce obesity and related diseases. Methods and Findings We modelled the potential impact of a 20% sugary drinks duty on local authorities in England between 2010 and 2030. We synthesised data obtained from the British National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS), drinks manufacturers, Office for National Statistics, and from previous studies. This produced a modelled population of 41 million adults in 326 lower tier local authorities in England. This analysis suggests that a 20% SSB duty could result in approximately 2,400 fewer diabetes cases, 1,700 fewer stroke and coronary heart disease cases, 400 fewer cancer cases, and gain some 41,000 Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) per year across England. The duty might have the biggest impact in urban areas with young populations. Conclusions This study adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting health benefits for a duty on sugary drinks. It might also usefully provide results at an area level to inform local price interventions in England

CMS physics technical design report : Addendum on high density QCD with heavy ions

Peer reviewe

The precautionary principle in the EU: Why a formal review is long overdue

This article, through a series of case studies, ranging from European court cases to the Swedish decision to ban Bisphenol A, shows how regulators, policy makers and the European courts are misinterpreting the precautionary principle and not following the European Commission's Communication on the topic. In conclusion, the article puts forward a number of short-term and long-term recommendations on how to make the precautionary principle more evidence based and risk informed going forward. Among the recommendations highlighted include the updating of the Communication on the precautionary principle, establishing a proper European academy of sciences and training regulators and policy makers in evidence-based risk communication.</p

Transparency in Health Care: Disclosing Adverse Events to the Public

The topic of transparency has received increasing academic interest in recent years. Transparency can be interpreted as conducting affairs in the open, being subject to public scrutiny, or admitting to problems when they arise. This chapter analyses transparency in disclosing adverse events to the public in Norway. We use the widely publicized Daniel case to show the communication between the regulator and the public, discussing key elements of transparency in the healthcare setting, including the role of media. The Daniel case describes an accidental tonsillectomy characterized by cover-up, failure of the initial regulatory and hospital follow-up, coming to a head when media shone a spotlight on the case. The media coverage caused social amplification of the risk communication resulting in regulatory follow-up having to apply new forms of transparency strategies to rebuild trust in the public. By using the Daniel case as emblematic of Norwegian risk communication strategies in health care, improvements should be made along the lines of direct and adequate information exchange according to patient rights, and efforts to foster open and transparent regulatory and organizational cultures to ensure public trust.publishedVersio