Integrating Human Health into Environmental Impact Assessment: An Unrealized Opportunity for Environmental Health and Justice

The National Environmental Policy Act and related state laws require many public agencies to analyze and disclose potentially significant environmental effects of agency actions, including effects on human health. In this paper we review the purpose and procedures of environmental impact assessment (EIA), existing regulatory requirements for health effects analysis, and potential barriers to and opportunities for improving integration of human health concerns within the EIA process. We use statutes, regulations, guidelines, court opinions, and empirical research on EIA along with recent case examples of integrated health impact assessment (HIA)/EIA at both the state and federal level. We extract lessons and recommendations for integrated HIA/EIA practice from both existing practices as well as case studies. The case studies demonstrate the adequacy, scope, and power of existing statutory requirements for health analysis within EIA. The following support the success of integrated HIA/EIA: a proponent recognizing EIA as an available regulatory strategy for public health; the openness of the agency conducting the EIA; involvement of public health institutions; and complementary objectives among community stakeholders and health practitioners. We recommend greater collaboration among institutions responsible for EIA, public health institutions, and affected stakeholders along with guidance, resources, and training for integrated HIA/EIA practice

Endemic cryptosporidiosis and exposure to municipal tap water in persons with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS): A case-control study

BACKGROUND: In persons with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), Cryptosporidium parvum causes a prolonged, severe diarrheal illness to which there is no effective treatment, and the risk of developing cryptosporidiosis from drinking tap water in non-outbreak settings remains uncertain. To test the hypothesis that drinking tap water was associated with developing cryptosporidiosis, we conducted a matched case-control study among persons with AIDS in San Francisco. METHODS: Among patients reported to the San Francisco AIDS Registry from May 1996 through September 1998, we compared patients who developed cryptosporidiosis to those who did not. Cases were individually matched to controls based on age, sex, race/ethnicity, CD4(+ )T lymphocyte count, date of CD4(+ )count, and date of case diagnosis. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated. RESULTS: The study consisted of 49 cases and 99 matched controls. In the multivariable analysis with adjustments for confounders, tap water consumption inside and outside the home at the highest exposure categories was associated with the occurrence of cryptosporidiosis (inside the home: odds ratio (OR), 6.76; 95% CI 1.37–33.5, and outside the home: OR 3.16; 95% CI 1.23–8.13). The PAF was 85%; that is, the proportion of cases of cryptosporidiosis in San Francisco AIDS patients attributable to tap water consumption could have been as high as 85%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the results from this observational study cannot be considered definitive, until there is more data, we recommend persons with AIDS, especially those with compromised immune systems, consider avoiding tap water

Application of the HIV prevention cascade to identify, develop and evaluate interventions to improve use of prevention methods: examples from a study in east Zimbabwe

Introduction: The HIV prevention cascade could be used in developing interventions to strengthen implementation of efficacious HIV prevention methods, but its practical utility needs to be demonstrated. We propose a standardized approach to using the cascade to guide identification and evaluation of interventions and demonstrate its feasibility for this purpose through a project to develop interventions to improve HIV prevention methods use by adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) and potential male partners in east Zimbabwe. Discussion: We propose a six-step approach to using a published generic HIV prevention cascade formulation to develop interventions to increase motivation to use, access to and effective use of an HIV prevention method. These steps are as follows: (1) measure the HIV prevention cascade for the chosen population and method; (2) identify gaps in the cascade; (3) identify explanatory factors (barriers) contributing to observed gaps; (4) review literature to identify relevant theoretical frameworks and interventions; (5) tailor interventions to the local context; and (6) implement and evaluate the interventions using the cascade steps and explanatory factors as outcome indicators in the evaluation design. In the Zimbabwe example, steps 1-5 aided development of four interventions to overcome barriers to effective use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in AGYW (15-24 years) and voluntary medical male circumcision in male partners (15-29). For young men, prevention cascade analyses identified gaps in motivation and access as barriers to voluntary medical male circumcision uptake, so an intervention was designed including financial incentives and an education session. For AGYW, gaps in motivation (particularly lack of risk perception) and access were identified as barriers to PrEP uptake: an interactive counselling game was developed addressing these barriers. A text messaging intervention was developed to improve PrEP adherence among AGYW, addressing reasons underlying lack of effective PrEP use through improving the capacity (“skills”) to take PrEP effectively. A community-led intervention (community conversations) was developed addressing community-level factors underlying gaps in motivation, access and effective use. These interventions are being evaluated currently using outcomes from the HIV prevention cascade (step 6). Conclusions: The prevention cascade can guide development and evaluation of interventions to strengthen implementation of HIV prevention methods by following the proposed process

Impact of housing on the survival of persons with AIDS

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Homeless persons with HIV/AIDS have greater morbidity and mortality, more hospitalizations, less use of antiretroviral therapy, and worse medication adherence than HIV-infected persons who are stably housed. We examined the effect of homelessness on the mortality of persons with AIDS and measured the effect of supportive housing on AIDS survival.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The San Francisco AIDS registry was used to identify homeless and housed persons who were diagnosed with AIDS between 1996 and 2006. The registry was computer-matched with a housing database of homeless persons who received housing after their AIDS diagnosis. The Kaplan-Meier product limit method was used to compare survival between persons who were homeless at AIDS diagnosis and those who were housed. Proportional hazards models were used to estimate the independent effects of homelessness and supportive housing on survival after AIDS diagnosis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 6,558 AIDS cases, 9.8% were homeless at diagnosis. Sixty-seven percent of the persons who were homeless survived five years compared with 81% of those who were housed (p < 0.0001). Homelessness increased the risk of death (adjusted relative hazard [RH] 1.20; 95% confidence limits [CL] 1.03, 1.41). Homeless persons with AIDS who obtained supportive housing had a lower risk of death than those who did not (adjusted RH 0.20; 95% CL 0.05, 0.81).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Supportive housing ameliorates the negative effect of homelessness on survival with AIDS.</p

Biennial report of the Department of Public Health of San Francisco.

Report ends June 30.Mode of access: Internet