Risks of androgen therapy

Elderly men with clinical and laboratory evidence of androgen deficiency are eligible for testosterone treatment.

With proper monitoring this is acceptably safe.

In the first year of testosterone treatment there should be a digital rectal examination of the prostate and measurement of prostate specific antigen every three months, thereafter yearly.

The rate of increase of prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels is more significant than its absolute values.

Levels of haemoglobin and the haematocrit should be monitored.     

A comprehensive review of intake estimates of di-isononyl phthalate (DINP) based on indirect exposure models and urinary biomonitoring data

Di-isononyl phthalate (DINP) is a high molecular weight general purpose plasticizer used principally in the manufacture of flexible polyvinyl chloride (PVC) articles. DINP metabolites can be measured in biological media such as blood and urine. However, measurement of a substance in the blood or urine does not by itself mean that the chemical causes or is associated with adverse health outcomes. This is particularly pertinent given the advances in modern analytical techniques whereby ever diminishing trace amounts of substances can be detected. Therefore, it is a scientific necessity that risk assessors understand the relationship of biomonitoring data to estimation of exposure so that appropriate comparisons can be made to the no observed adverse effects levels (NOAELs) or other points of departure from toxicological studies in animals. In this paper, estimates of daily DINP intake are calculated for various population segments based on urinary biomonitoring data and are compared to estimates of exposure based on indirect methods and to health-based exposure guidance values. In general, intake estimates converge on a mean of 1–2 μg/kg/day regardless of source of exposure or population cluster; a value 2-orders of magnitude lower than health-based exposure guidance values, ranging from 120 to 290 μg/kg/day, which have been established by regulatory authorities and other authoritative bodies as representing acceptable levels.     

Liver,pancreas and small bowel transplantation: Current ethical issues

We describe the medical state of the art in liver, pancreas and small bowel transplantation, and portray the ethical issues. Although most ethical questions related to these transplantations are not specific for liver, pancreas and small bowel, they do challenge ethical analysis as well as new policies and clinical procedures. Firstly, outcomes continue to be of utmost concern, as information is only limited available, is developing over time and is surrounded by many uncertainties. Secondly, characteristics of donors and recipients should be carefully evaluated. The question of what qualifies a donor and a recipient should be considered against the background of a quest for extended criteria, embracing marginal cases, and a judgment with regard to what counts as a good enough outcome. Thirdly, ethical principles of autonomy and fairness are pushed, given the circumstance of severe scarcity, towards limits that can easily be crossed.     

On the justification of justification in radiation protection - legal and sociological considerations

ObjectivesThe objectives of the review were to investigate the legal and sociological basis of justification in society in order to fully assess its relevance to radiation protection. The difference between the justification of practices as distinct from the justification of reasons for the justification of individual activities within a practice and the relevance of cost–benefit analysis to this process are key elements.Key findingsJustification of practices as a principle of radiation protection is automatically enshrined within the appropriate legislation once it has been enacted. However, the justification of reasons for justification of activities within a practice are subject to many sociological factors, which are often conflicting and indeterminate and can be subject to political, economic and environmental factors that may change over time. This applies especially to new developments where the primary reason for justification is based upon potential but possibly ill-defined future benefits.ConclusionThe primary mechanism whereby society develops a collective consensus on the justification of practices lies within a legal framework. This represents the mechanism by which society defines the accepted standards that must be applied for acceptance of a practice. The justification of reasons for justifying activities that form part of a practice has largely been ignored within the framework of radiation protection.Implications for practiceThe employment of justification of practices as a fundamental principle of radiation protection should be eliminated since it is already enshrined within the legal framework applicable to applications of ionising radiation. Justification of reasons for pursuing new or modified practices is based upon their perceived benefits to society, which underpins most developments in society.     

Knowing the risk of SUDEP: Two family's perspectives and The Danny Did Foundation

There is much debate in the epilepsy community about whether neurologists should discuss the risk of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) with their patients and family members. Those in favor purport that patients have a right to know about SUDEP. Opponents say the risk is so low that discussions only worry patients and families, especially if there is nothing that can be done to prevent SUDEP. North American surveys show that the epilepsy community knows little about SUDEP and neurologists are unlikely to talk about it. However, surveys of those bereaved by SUDEP show that an overwhelming majority of the parents, spouses, and family members want to be told about SUDEP immediately after the diagnosis of epilepsy. This article is written by two families bereaved by SUDEP and their strong belief that neurologists should have the discussion about the risk of SUDEP soon after the diagnosis of epilepsy.     

Risks,prices, and positions: A social network analysis of illegal drug trafficking in the world-economy

BackgroundIllegal drug prices are extremely high, compared to similar goods. There is, however, considerable variation in value depending on place, market level and type of drugs. A prominent framework for the study of illegal drugs is the “risks and prices” model (Reuter & Kleiman, 1986). Enforcement is seen as a “tax” added to the regular price. In this paper, it is argued that such economic models are not sufficient to explain price variations at country-level. Drug markets are analysed as global trade networks in which a country's position has an impact on various features, including illegal drug prices.MethodologyThis paper uses social network analysis (SNA) to explain price markups between pairs of countries involved in the trafficking of illegal drugs between 1998 and 2007. It aims to explore a simple question: why do prices increase between two countries? Using relational data from various international organizations, separate trade networks were built for cocaine, heroin and cannabis. Wholesale price markups are predicted with measures of supply, demand, risks of seizures, geographic distance and global positioning within the networks. Reported prices (in $US) and purchasing power parity-adjusted values are analysed.ResultsDrug prices increase more sharply when drugs are headed to countries where law enforcement imposes higher costs on traffickers. The position and role of a country in global drug markets are also closely associated with the value of drugs. Price markups are lower if the destination country is a transit to large potential markets. Furthermore, price markups for cocaine and heroin are more pronounced when drugs are exported to countries that are better positioned in the legitimate world-economy, suggesting that relations in legal and illegal markets are directed in opposite directions.ConclusionConsistent with the world-system perspective, evidence is found of coherent world drug markets driven by both local realities and international relations.     

Beliefs about abortion risks in women returning to the clinic after their abortions: a pilot study

Background

Misinformation regarding the risks of abortion is prevalent and commonly includes medical inaccuracies about health, depression, infertility and breast cancer. This pilot study sought to assess misinformation among abortion clients as well as the origin(s) of their abortion knowledge.

Study Design

Women who presented to the Mount Sinai School of Medicine Family Planning Division for postabortion follow-up were recruited for participation. Participants completed a researcher-administered survey regarding knowledge and beliefs about abortion.

Results

Sixty-seven women completed the survey between 1/11/10 and 8/6/12. Common sources of abortion information included clinicians (79.1%), Web sites (70.1%), friends (50.7%) and family (40.3%). Over two thirds of women (77.6%) overestimated the health risks, and close to half (43.3%) overestimated the risk of depression after a first trimester abortion.

Conclusions

Misperceptions about the health risks of abortion were prevalent among this sample. Education tools should be developed to provide accurate information about the risks of abortion.     

Applying Nightingale charts to evaluate the heterogeneity of biomedical waste in a Hospital

OBJECTIVES:

to evaluate the heterogeneity of biomedical waste (BW) using Nightingale charts.

METHOD:

cross-sectional study consisting of data collection on wastes (direct observation of receptacles, physical characterisation, and gravimetric composition), development of a Management Information System, and creation of statistical charts.

RESULTS:

the wastes with the greatest degree of heterogeneity are, in order, recyclable, infectious, and organic wastes; chemical waste had the most efficient segregation; Nightingale charts are useful for quick visualisation and systematisation of information on heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION:

the development of a management information system and the use of Nightingale charts allows for the identification and correction of errors in waste segregation, which increase health risks and contamination by infectious and chemical wastes and reduce the sale and profit from recyclables.