ObjectivesLittle is known about health outcomes related to electronic cigarette (EC) use, despite its growing popularity. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between EC use and asthma.MethodsThe study design is a cross-sectional study. A total of 35,904 high school students were included as the final study population. The presence of asthma was based on a student’s self-reported doctor diagnosis of asthma in the past 12 months.ResultsPrevalence rates of asthmatics in ‘current EC users’ (n = 2,513), ‘former EC users’ (n = 2,078), and ‘never EC users’ (n = 31,313), were 3.9% (n = 98), 2.2% (n = 46) and 1.7% (n = 530), respectively. Comparing ‘current EC’ users with ‘never EC’ users, the unadjusted OR for asthma was 2.36 (95% CI: 1.89–2.94). In order to control for the effect of conventional cigarette (CC) smoking, after stratifying the subjects by the three CC smoking categories (never CC, former CC, and current CC), within the ‘never CC’ category, the unadjusted OR for asthma for ‘current EC’ users was 3.41 (95% CI: 1.79–6.49), and the adjusted OR was 2.74 (95% CI: 1.30–5.78). Severe asthma was reflected by the number of days absent from school due to asthma symptoms; current EC users had the highest adjusted OR for severe asthma compared to ‘never EC’ users.ConclusionsWhen compared to a reference population of high school students in South Korea, EC users have an increased association with asthma and are more likely to have had days absent from school due to severe asthma symptoms. In conclusion, the results indicate that EC use may be a risk factor for asthma. The results may be useful in developing a scientific basis for the evaluation of a potential health hazard by EC.

Control banding (CB) strategies offer simplified processes for controlling worker exposures in the absence of firm toxicological and exposure information. The nanotechnology industry is an excellent candidate for applying such strategies with overwhelming uncertainties of work-related health risks posed by nanomaterials. A recent survey shows that a majority of nanomaterial producers are not performing a basic risk assessment of their product in use. The CB Nanotool, used internationally, was developed to conduct qualitative risk assessments to control nanoparticle exposures. Nanotoxicology experts have requested standardization of toxicological parameters to ensure better utility and consistency of research. Such standardization would fit well in the CB Nanotool's severity and probability risk matrix, therefore enhancing the protection of nanotechnology industry workers. This article further evaluates the CB Nanotool for structure, weighting of risk factors, and utility for exposure mitigation, and suggests improvements for the CB Nanotool and the research needed to bolster its effectiveness.

No abstract

No abstract

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a Department and Energy (DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) research and development (R&D) facility that is operated by the Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) LLC. What makes LLNL unique from a majority of organizations with over 6,000 employees is its primary R&D focus, rather than a traditional production or manufacturing working environment. Most large-scale enterprises worldwide with ORM models within occupational health and safety management systems (OHSMS) are focused on a finite number of uniform activities.LLNL's R&D focus breaks away from traditional systems by consistently performing unique work. Therefore, the creation of new and potentially hazardous operations and related occupational exposures is standard. Perhaps an expected outcome of this large-scale R&D work is a pervasive regulatory oversight.Though based in California, the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) does not oversee LLNL's activities. Instead, Federal OSHA (FedOSHA) has jurisdiction. In addition, as LLNL is run by LLNS for the DOE, additional contractual requirements are in place to ensure workers performing the tasks that benefit national R&D are well protected. For industrial hygiene (IH), the contract requires the lowest established occupational exposure limit (OEL) for a given chemical, physical, or biological exposure. Therefore, the ACGIH ® Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) often meet this specification and therefore