| 1. |
- Jacquet, Jennifer, et al.
(författare)
-
Support US OCTOPUS Act to keep octopuses wild.
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Science (New York, N.Y.). - 1095-9203. ; 385:6710, s. 721-722
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Commercial octopus farming is incapable of meeting welfare requirements, unsustainable, and unnecessary for sustenance. Although no commercial octopus farms currently exist, a Spanish seafood company plans to build one in the Canary Islands for Octopus vulgaris. In March, the US state of Washington banned octopus farming. Similar legislation has been introduced in California and Hawai‘i . Now, the federal government is proposing action. The US Congress should pass the OCTOPUS Act, a federal law that would prohibit commercial octopus aquaculture in the United States and the import of commercially farmed octopus or octopus products.
|
|
| 2. |
- Cramér, Per, 1958, et al.
(författare)
-
See You in Luxembourg? EU Governments´ Observations Under the Preliminary Reference Procedure
- 2016
-
Bok (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Historically, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has played a central role in the development of the EU’s legal system. Although it is a judicial institution, the Court’s decisions are often regarded as “political” because of their strong impact on the economic and social conditions of Member States. This report deals with the juridico-political tension in the development of EU law. It presents some of the main findings of a research project from the University of Gothenburg which explores the relationship between the CJEU and Member State governments in the interpretation of EU law.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Peters, Susan, et al.
(författare)
-
Narrative review of occupational exposures and noncommunicable diseases
- 2024
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF WORK EXPOSURES AND HEALTH. - 2398-7308 .- 2398-7316. ; 68:6, s. 562-580
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective Within the scope of the Exposome Project for Health and Occupational Research on applying the exposome concept to working life health, we aimed to provide a broad overview of the status of knowledge on occupational exposures and associated health effects across multiple noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) to help inform research priorities.Methods We conducted a narrative review of occupational risk factors that can be considered to have "consistent evidence for an association," or where there is "limited/inadequate evidence for an association" for 6 NCD groups: nonmalignant respiratory diseases; neurodegenerative diseases; cardiovascular/metabolic diseases; mental disorders; musculoskeletal diseases; and cancer. The assessment was done in expert sessions, primarily based on systematic reviews, supplemented with narrative reviews, reports, and original studies. Subsequently, knowledge gaps were identified, e.g. based on missing information on exposure-response relationships, gender differences, critical time-windows, interactions, and inadequate study quality.Results We identified over 200 occupational exposures with consistent or limited/inadequate evidence for associations with one or more of 60+ NCDs. Various exposures were identified as possible risk factors for multiple outcomes. Examples are diesel engine exhaust and cadmium, with consistent evidence for lung cancer, but limited/inadequate evidence for other cancer sites, respiratory, neurodegenerative, and cardiovascular diseases. Other examples are physically heavy work, shift work, and decision latitude/job control. For associations with limited/inadequate evidence, new studies are needed to confirm the association. For risk factors with consistent evidence, improvements in study design, exposure assessment, and case definition could lead to a better understanding of the association and help inform health-based threshold levels.Conclusions By providing an overview of knowledge gaps in the associations between occupational exposures and their health effects, our narrative review will help setting priorities in occupational health research. Future epidemiological studies should prioritize to include large sample sizes, assess exposures prior to disease onset, and quantify exposures. Potential sources of biases and confounding need to be identified and accounted for in both original studies and systematic reviews.
|
|
