The right to know and the duty to disclose hazard information.

Baram, Michael

doi:10.2105/ajph.74.4.385

Cited by 51 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These days, advanced technologies are applied for better effective communication on answering the "want to know" questions that Michael S. Baram [5] summarized the concept of "genetic right-to-know laws" on hazard communication in manufacturing work environment. Risk communication between governmental agents and individual personnel would be focused in different ways.…”

Section: Risk Communication In Emergency Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional and Technical Methods of Information and Risk Communication

Yi¹,

Park²

2019

Perspectives on Risk, Assessment and Management Paradigms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risks of natural and anthropogenic disasters can appear at any moment without warning. All levels of government agencies from federal to township, and the systems of the specialized agencies, like weather-specialists, flood control, electricity suppliers, and educational organizations are standardized and the communication has been improving. The systems of the governments and agencies, meteorologists, flood control, electricity suppliers, and educational organizations are standardized and the communication has been improving. In this chapter, government manuals, procedures for agencies and professional responders, and public awareness, perceptions, and capabilities, are reviewed in three international cities: Seoul, Tokyo, and Toronto. Each city is unique with experiences of different disasters. Communication of supports and vital information of risks without understanding the language and culture of the people may lead the public to large-scale panic. Individuals can access government websites and interpret the information, like WebGIS maps, and risks by themselves. In terms of risk communication, all urbanized cities require their own specialized risk management with reasonably effective technologies, which enhance community resilience. Even better is to have a measure of development for the care of the public after the disaster to help the people get back on their feet, such as various public insurances.

show abstract

Section: Risk Communication In Emergency Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional and Technical Methods of Information and Risk Communication

Yi¹,

Park²

2019

Perspectives on Risk, Assessment and Management Paradigms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to informed consent guidelines, numerous laws and regulations now dictate that employees have a right to know about specific hazards [Baram, 1984;McGarity, 1984; Schulte and Ringen, 1984; Ashford and Caldart, 1985;Bunn, 19851. Such laws may be helpful to the physician who is concerned about possible toxic substance exposure to a patient [Himmelstein and Frumkin, 19851 and might similarly be helpful to researchers.…”

Section: Legal and Risk Management Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recontacting subjects in mutagen‐exposure‐monitoring studies: II. Results of a questionnaire study of mutagenesis researchers, with review of the pertinent literature

Busch

Easterling

Leventhal

et al. 1988

Environ and Mol Mutagen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A questionnaire on the attitudes of mutagenesis researchers regarding the health significance of and the use of data from tests of human mutagen exposure or genetic damage was completed by 71 of 312 (23%) individuals who had been participants in meetings or organizations concerned with mutagenesis research. On a point scale of 0 to 10, with 0 indicating strong disagreement, 5 indicating uncertainty, and 10 indicating strong agreement, the average respondent felt (8.31 +/- 2.27) that data indicating a probable health hazard should be shared automatically with the subjects, but was also moderately concerned about psychological distress of subjects learning of study results indicating abnormally high mutagen exposure (6.14 +/- 2.57) or genetic damage (6.94 +/- 2.48). The average respondent felt that follow-up of subjects could improve the quality of mutagen-exposure-monitoring studies (8.33 +/- 1.49), disagreed that subjects whose laboratory data suggested unusually severe exposure or damage should not be asked about possible sources of exposure (1.15 +/- 1.32), and disagreed that it was ethical to follow up but not discuss results with subjects having laboratory evidence of abnormal mutagen exposure (3.78 +/- 3.43) or genetic damage (3.06 +/- 3.17) to see how many developed cancer relative to a control group. Fifteen specific tests for measuring mutagen exposure or genetic damage were rated on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being "totally experimental" and 10 being "absolutely diagnostic of degree of exposure or genetic damage." Values ranged from 6.13 +/- 2.67 for karyotyping leukocytes to 3.43 +/- 2.43 for quantifying frequency of rare red cells with mutant protein. This study may help in decision making regarding follow-up of mutagen-exposed subjects.

show abstract

“…Court activity to resolve the preemption issue will continue, and probably result in decisions from different jurisdictions that may be contradictory. The federal standard is generally viewed as less restrictive than most stateand local laws (Baram, 1984b;Bingham, 1984). The most obvious reasons cited are that the federal regulations cover only manufacturing industries (only 32% of the U.S. workforce [OSHA, 1983]), makes it easier for a manufacturer to claim a trade secret, and varies in its allocation of duties and rights (Baram, 1984b).…”

Section: Present Status Of Right To Know Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Right-To-Know and the Occupational Health Nurse

Sk¹

1985

Occupational Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of occupational health and safety is seeing a major shift in the prevention of work-related injuries and illnesses. The passage of right-to-know laws has legislatively joined employees and employers in a partnership of prevention, These laws assign the duty to employers to know what toxic agents they utilize, teach the employee what they are, how they can be harmed, and how to avoid toxic exposures. Implict in the laws is the responsibility of the employee to utilize this knowledge to preventadverse exposure. The development of these laws has come over many years and literally exploded over the last six years, This work was completed with the partial support of a traineeship from the National

show abstract

The right to know and the duty to disclose hazard information.

Cited by 51 publications

References 1 publication

Functional and Technical Methods of Information and Risk Communication

Functional and Technical Methods of Information and Risk Communication

Recontacting subjects in mutagen‐exposure‐monitoring studies: II. Results of a questionnaire study of mutagenesis researchers, with review of the pertinent literature

The Right-To-Know and the Occupational Health Nurse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About