No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Public health agencies, the news media, and the tobacco/vapor industry have issued contradictory statements about the health effects of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). We investigated the levels of trust that consumers place in different information sources and how trust is associated with cultural worldviews, risk perceptions, ENDS use, and sociodemographic characteristics using a nationally representative sample of 6051 U.S. adults in 2015. Seventeen percent of adults were uncertain about their trust for one or more potential sources. Among the rest, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), health experts, and the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) elicited the highest levels of trust. In contrast, tobacco and vapor manufacturers, vape shop employees, and, to a lesser extent, the news media were distrusted. Adults who had higher incomes and more education or espoused egalitarian and communitarian worldviews expressed more trust in health sources and the FDA, whereas those identifying as non-Hispanic Black or multiracial reported less trust. Current smokers, those who identified as non-Hispanic Black or other race, had lower incomes, and espoused hierarchy and individualism worldviews expressed less distrust toward the tobacco and vapor industry. Greater trust (or less distrust) toward the tobacco and vapor industry and an individualism worldview were associated with perceptions of lower risk of premature death from daily ENDS use, greater uncertainty about those risks, and greater odds of using ENDS. Public health and the FDA should consider consumer trust and worldviews in the design and regulation of public education campaigns regarding the potential health risks and benefits of ENDS.

Background Refugees are at an increased risk of chronic Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) infection because many of their countries of origin, as well as host countries, have intermediate-to-high prevalence rates. Refugees arriving to the US are also at risk of serious sequelae from chronic HBV infection because they are not routinely screened for the virus overseas or in domestic post-arrival exams, and may live in the US for years without awareness of their infection status. Methods A cohort of 26,548 refugees who arrived in Minnesota and Georgia during 2005–2010 was evaluated to determine the prevalence of chronic HBV infection. This prevalence information was then used in a cost-benefit analysis comparing two variations of a proposed overseas program to prevent or ameliorate the effects of HBV infection, titled ‘Screen, then vaccinate or initiate management’ (SVIM) and ‘Vaccinate only’ (VO). The analyses were performed in 2013. All values were converted to US 2012 dollars. Results The estimated six year period-prevalence of chronic HBV infection was 6.8% in the overall refugee population arriving to Minnesota and Georgia and 7.1% in those ≥ 6 years of age. The SVIM program variation was more cost beneficial than VO. While the up-front costs of SVIM were higher than VO ($154,084 vs. $73,758; n=58,538 refugees), the SVIM proposal displayed a positive net benefit, ranging from $24 million to $130 million after only 5 years since program initiation, depending on domestic post-arrival screening rates in the VO proposal. Conclusions Chronic HBV infection remains an important health problem in refugees resettling to the United States. An overseas screening policy for chronic HBV infection is more cost-beneficial than a ‘Vaccination only’ policy. The major benefit drivers for the screening policy are earlier medical management of chronic HBV infection and averted lost societal contributions from premature death.