Choking injuries in children represent a severe public health burden. Although most choking injuries are due to food, parents have often been found to be unaware of the choking hazards presented by food. In this context, healthcare professionals may play an important role in choking prevention by educating families. We investigate the perception of choking injury risk among healthcare profession students by comparing their awareness and knowledge of choking hazards with those of people without a specific health education. A survey was conducted among a sample of final year healthcare profession students from two universities in northern Italy and a sample of adults from the general population without any health education.Respondents were asked to look at ten pictures and identify the items that pose the greatest choking hazard to children of different age groups. Seventy-one students and 742 adults without any health education responded to the survey. A higher percentage of the adults without a health education identified a food item as posing the greatest choking hazard in comparison to the percentage of healthcare profession students. The results of this study suggest that there is a need to include specific educational modules on choking prevention in healthcare-related degree programs.

The present research combines real data and parameters found in recent literature that were used to design realistic scenarios demonstrating the potential effects (benefits and costs) of the World Health Organization (WHO)’s risk communication regarding the consumption of processed meat, which was proven to be associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in an International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)/WHO report. The impact of the risk communication of processed meat consumption was simulated using Monte Carlo microsimulation models. The results showed that a 1% reduction in the number of high-level processed meat consumers may lead to a yearly decrease in CRC cases of 406.43 (IC 95%: −243.94, 1056.81), while the more extreme scenario of a 15% reduction may lead to 2086.62 fewer cases (IC 95%: 1426.66, 2746.57). On the other hand, if demand contraction in the processed meat sector resulted in a 0.1% loss in employment, one could expect 27.23 all-cause mortalities attributable to job loss (IC 95%: 16.55, 37.80). This simulation study demonstrates that caution should be taken when implementing public awareness campaigns, particularly when the prevention message is not straightforward.