FairWarning’s stories and op-eds have appeared in…
The Baltimore Sun
The Dallas Morning News
Houston Chronicle
The Kansas City Star
Los Angeles Times
Mother Jones
msnbc.com
The Orange County Register
The Oregonian
San Francisco Chronicle
The Washington Post
» See more
News & Notes
Monday Briefing
May 21, 2012 |
United Kingdom lowers expectations for shale gas. Supporters of the controversial drilling practice known as fracking — which blasts water, sand and chemicals at extreme pressures to release gas trapped deep in rock – have argued it could transform Britain’s energy market. But the government is backing away from the idea. Industry experts disclosed at a meeting attended by top officials, including Prime Minister David Cameron, that the UK’s reserves were smaller than thought and could be uneconomical to extract. The disclosure, ahead of energy market proposals due this week, is certain to be welcomed by environmentalists. Separately, there still are high hopes for shale gas in Australia. The Independent, The Sydney Morning Herald
Rampant sand mining taking an environmental toll in India. The sand is being excavated for use in the nation’s construction industry, the world’s third-biggest. But the unprecedented scale of the mining of sand — needed to build offices, factories, high-rise apartments, schools and highways — is creating problems. Sand is a natural aquifer, and ecologists say the mining, some of it unauthorized, reduces the recharge of rivers. It also increases the risk of flooding and harms coastal farm soil by making it saline. Fishermen say it is killing fish, and wells in riverside villages are drying up. In addition, excavation has eroded the stability of roads and railway bridges. The Washington Post
Worker deaths often lead to only minor penalties. In 2009, 4,551 people were killed on the job in the U.S., a toll that eclipsed the nation’s deaths from the nine-year Iraq war. Yet the typical fine for a worker death is about $7,900. “These deaths take place behind closed doors,” said Michael Silverstein, recently retired head of Washington State’s workplace safety agency. “They occur one or two at a time, on private property. There’s an invisibility element.” The Center for Public Integrity
Diabetes soars among adolescents. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention researchers found that 23 percent of youths ages 12 to 19 had diabetes or pre-diabetes in 2008. That was up from 9 percent in 2000, although experts cautioned that measurement techniques may have exaggerated the increase. The study also found that 50 percent of overweight teens, and 60 percent of obese teens, had at least one risk factor for cardiovascular disease, including diabetes, borderline-high or high cholesterol levels or high blood pressure. In people with diabetes, the body does not make enough of the hormone insulin or doesn’t use it properly. Long-term complications can include heart attacks, blindness and kidney failure. USA Today, MyHealthNewsDaily
Texas power plant developer challenging new environmental rules. When the Environmental Protection Agency issued new limits on emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants last December, it was expected to lead to the closing of some coal-fired power plants. But the developers of a proposed Texas power plant — in Matagorda County, about 90 miles southwest of Houston — have gone to court to challenge the regulations. Developers of the White Stallion Energy Center say the federal rules, formally known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, cannot be achieved with existing pollution controls. The $2.5 billion plant would be fueled by coal and petroleum coke. Houston Chronicle
Recalls: Jeep Wranglers, J&B Group steakhouse burgers, Caribeña papayas, River Ranch Fresh Foods bagged salads, Foster Farms turkey burgers, Lancaster Frozen Foods and G&W ground beef, Gills diced red onions, West Coast Nutritionals Firminite and Libidron capsules, Santos flours, legumes and spices
Compiled by Stuart Silverstein
Leave a CommentFriday Briefing
May 18, 2012 |
Panel examines whether anthrax vaccine should be tested on children. The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues is expected to decide by the end of the year whether pediatric studies are warranted on the vaccine and other treatments being stockpiled in case of a bioterror attack. The reason for such research is that, ...


The Most Primary of Care — Talking about Driving and Distraction
By Amy N. Ship in the New England Journal of Medicine on June 10, 2010
Imagine the scene: three young women are traveling in a car. It is a sunny morning, traffic is light, and all are wearing their seat belts and are not intoxicated. They are talking about a friend — “You like him, don’t you?” It is happy, benign teenager chatter. Then the driver decides to include that other friend in the conversation. While steering, she sends him a short text message on her cell phone.
Suddenly, the car swerves into oncoming traffic and metal hits metal at high speed. Bodies are thrown. Glass breaks. Blood splatters. When the car finally comes to a stop, only the driver is conscious. Her screams speak of not only the agony of her injuries but also the realization that she has just killed her two friends — by texting.
This scene appears in a British public service announcement. The video (www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0LCmStIw9E) is horrifying to watch, but although it is obviously staged, the scenario is hardly a fiction: driving while distracted — by talking or texting — increases the likelihood of accident and injury. And some of these accidents kill people.
Although it is difficult to assess the absolute increase in the risk of collision attributable to driver distraction, one study showed that talking on a cell phone while driving posed a risk four times that faced by undistracted drivers and on a par with that of driving while intoxicated.1 Another study showed that texting while driving might confer a risk of collision 23 times that of driving while undistracted.2 Although there are many possible distractions for drivers, more than 275 million Americans own cell phones, and 81% of them talk on those phones while driving.3 The adverse consequences have reached epidemic proportions. Current data suggest that each year, at least 1.6 million traffic accidents (28% of all crashes) in the United States are caused by drivers talking on cell phones or texting.4 Talking on the phone causes many more accidents than texting, simply because millions more drivers talk than text; moreover, using a hands-free device does not make talking on the phone any safer.
Acknowledging these risks, all but 11 states have passed laws regarding cell-phone use while driving. And the U.S. government is concerned: in January 2010, the secretary of transportation and the National Safety Council announced the creation of FocusDriven, an organization devoted to reducing the prevalence of distracted driving. The Department of Transportation has also launched a Web site, www.distraction.gov.
At the medical school and academic practice where I teach, students and residents routinely query patients about habits associated with harm, asking about the use of helmets, seat belts, condoms, cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. There is little solid evidence that asking these screening questions has any benefit. But we continue to ask them — as I believe we should. And as technology evolves, our questions must be updated in keeping with the risks: it’s time for us to ask patients about driving and distraction.
Although no direct correlation can be made, we know that counseling patients about dangerous behaviors can have powerful consequences. According to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, even 3 minutes spent discussing the risks of tobacco use increases the likelihood that a patient will quit smoking. Context matters. When a doctor raises an issue while providing overall preventive care, the message is different from that conveyed by a public service announcement nestled between ads for chips and beer or a printed warning on a product box.
Read the entire commentary here.
Posted in Commentary