Synopsis A certain number of hairdressing parlour employers have been taken to court because their employees allegedly suffered from lung allergies caused by the vapours from PPD (paraphenylendiamine) which allegedly developed when applying hair dyes. These conclusions may be reached if the specific hazards of the rubber and particularly leather and fur dyeing industry are extrapolated as is widely reported in literature, to hairdressing employees. The purpose of this study is to assess the actual exposure rate to PPD vapours of hairdressing employees during a working day, on the basis of the type and characteristics of the salon (small, medium and large), the number of dye applications per day and the chemical-physical characteristics of the oxidation dyes. The results prove that, even under the hypothesis of experimental conditions pushed to the extreme, it is not reasonable to speak of exposure to PPD through the lungs of hairdressing employees.
This paper studies the economic effects of testing during the outbreak of a novel epidemic disease. I propose a model where testing permits isolation of the infected and provides agents with information about the prevalence and lethality of the disease. Additional testing reduces the perceived lethality of the disease, but might increase the perceived risk of infection. As a result, more testing could increase the perceived risk of dying from the disease - i.e. “stoke fear” - and cause a fall in economic activity, despite improving health outcomes. Two main insights emerge. First, increased testing is beneficial to the economy and pays for itself if performed at a sufficiently large scale, but not necessarily otherwise. Second, heterogeneous risk perceptions across age-groups can have important aggregate consequences. For a SARS-CoV-2 calibration of the model, heterogeneous risk perceptions across young and old individuals mitigate GDP losses by 50% and reduce the death toll by 30% relative to a scenario in which all individuals have the same perceptions of risk.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.