Food intake can be improved by using a supervised dining room, and this will potentially lead to weight gain and corresponding improvements in nutritional status and rehabilitation.
Fumigation of high-containment microbiology facilities is an international requirement and in the UnitedKingdom this process is still commonly undertaken using formaldehyde vaporization. Formaldehyde usage is simple and inexpensive, but concerns exist over its toxicity and carcinogenicity. Alternative fumigants exist, although independent, parallel comparison of these substances is limited. This study determined the level of biocidal efficacy achievable with formaldehyde and compared this with other commonly used fumigants. Three different hydrogen peroxide-based fumigation systems were evaluated (two vapor and one dry-mist methods), along with true gas systems employing ozone and chlorine dioxide. A range of challenge microorganisms was used at different room locations to assess the efficacy, usability, and safety of the fumigation equipment. These microorganisms included Geobacillus stearothermophilus, Clostridium difficile, Mycobacterium fortuitum, and Vaccinia virus. Only chlorine dioxide and formaldehyde fumigants gave consistently high levels of antimicrobial efficacy across all bacterial challenge tests (typically greater than a 5-log reduction). All systems performed similarly against Vaccinia virus, but variable results were noted for Geobacillus, C. difficile, and M. fortuitum for the hydrogen peroxide-and ozone-based systems. The study also revealed inconsistencies in system reliability and reproducibility, with all fumigant systems aborting midcycle on at least one occasion. In contrast, formaldehyde fumigation was confirmed as extremely reliable, largely because of its simplicity (liquid plus hot plate). All the fumigants tested have UK workplace exposure limits of 2 ppm or less, yet residual fumigant was detected for the formaldehyde and hydrogen peroxide systems following cycle completion, even after room aeration. Articles
Summary 1.Many studies have examined the impacts of tropical habitat disturbance. However, the effects of moderate habitat disturbance on species diversity show little consensus, with both increased and decreased diversity following disturbance being reported with approximately equal frequency. Previous work has shown that the spatial scale of sampling affects the reported changes in diversity following habitat disturbance, and here we present new theoretical and empirical data which explain why this is so. 2. We assume that habitat disturbance reduces the slope of the species-area relationship (SAR), and we show theoretically that this reduction in the slope results in a scale-dependent response of diversity to disturbance. Thus, following moderate habitat disturbance, diversity is reported to increase when measured at small spatial scales but declines when measured at large spatial scales. Our findings suggest that even a very small change in the SAR slope following disturbance corresponds with a scale-dependent response of diversity to disturbance. 3. We analyse new empirical data for tropical butterflies at a range of spatial scales ( ≈ 3-80 ha). Our results support our theoretical findings and the notion of scale-dependence in estimates of diversity. We show that this scale-dependence occurs because α and β diversity increase with spatial scale at a significantly faster rate in undisturbed forest compared with disturbed forest. This is due to reduced habitat heterogeneity and reduced spatial autocorrelation of butterfly diversity data following disturbance. 4. Synthesis and applications . There is little consensus in the reported responses of species diversity to moderate tropical habitat disturbance, and the spatial scale at which studies are carried out largely pre-determines the findings. Here we demonstrate, both theoretically and empirically, the mechanisms that produce a scale-dependent response of diversity to habitat disturbance. There is little agreement among researchers about the best methods for sampling tropical species in the field, and our findings highlight the problems of using diversity changes that do not account for the spatial scale of sampling. We conclude that in the future, studies should assess spatial patterns in diversity over a range of spatial scales and should not evaluate changes in diversity at a single spatial scale.
Background:The Great Britain (GB) Asbestos Survey is a prospective cohort of asbestos workers in GB. The objective of this study was to investigate determinants of mesothelioma latency, paying particular attention to indicators of intensity of asbestos exposure such as occupation, sex, and presence of asbestosis.Methods:The analysis included members of the cohort who died with mesothelioma between 1978 and 2005. The primary outcome was the latency period defined as the time from first occupational exposure to asbestos to death with mesothelioma. Generalised gamma accelerated failure-time models were used to estimate time ratios (TRs).Results:After excluding missing data, there were 614 workers who died with mesothelioma between 1978 and 2005. Total follow-up time was 9280 person-years, with a median latency of 22.8 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 16.0–27.2 years). In the fully adjusted model, latency was around 29% longer for females compared with males (TR=1.29, 95% CI=1.18–1.42), and 5% shorter for those who died with asbestosis compared with those who did not (TR=0.95, 95% CI=0.91–0.99). There was no evidence of an association between latency and occupation.Conclusion:This study did not find sufficient evidence that greater intensity asbestos exposures would lead to shorter mesothelioma latencies.
This study suggests that pesticide users in the PUHS are generally healthier than the national population but may have excesses of non-melanoma skin cancer, testicular cancer and multiple myeloma.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.