Bisphenol A-an Overview on its Effect on Health and Environment

Bisphenol A (BPA) is an organic material used to produce polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins that are further used to make different plastic bottles and containers for packaging, storage, and food consumption. The possible leaching of BPA from the packaged food products can cause its migration to humans through the consumption of such foods. BPA is commonly known as primary endocrine disruptors that can mimic estrogen hormone action, thereby disrupting the normal estrogenic endocrine function. We have searched the relevant articles in PubMed and Google scholar to write this review and selected the appropriate articles to prepare the manuscript. There are reports on the adverse health effect of BPA on human health as well as in our environment. The routes of exposure of BPA in humans, plants, and aquatic animals were described. The effect on immune response, reproduction in animals and plants as well as neurotoxicity was elaborately discussed. In this review, we have discussed the use of BPA in dairy products and how it affects health and the environment.

A Public Health Case for the Abolition of the Death Penalty

This chapter argues that the collateral consequences of the death penalty have implications for human rights. The authors base their argument on the fact that trauma is a public health issue, and the death penalty is a trauma-organized system that gives rise to many secondary victims. A primary goal of public health is to intervene on a vector (i.e., the death penalty) that causes a health effect (i.e., trauma-related symptoms) in such a way that the identified vector is prevented or controlled and the adverse health effect is diminished or nullified. In terms of collateral consequences, this chapter addresses secondary victims, beginning with family members of the defendant and victim, members of the execution team, witnesses of the execution, and capital jurors. This chapter concludes with an exploration of U.S. and international laws that, if considered through a public health lens, lend additional support for death penalty abolition.

Methodology for calculating adverse health effects in Latvia

Calculating the value of life and adverse health effect is necessary for developing public policyin providing compensation to families of victims of fatal accidents; it is also needed to create reasonablesafety measures for the public, and enable the functioning of life insurance and healthcare systems. Nomethods for assessing the value of life of a person have so far been developed in Latvia. The study wascarried out to determine how much an average person’s life costs in the event of an accident associatedwith the early death of a person, as well as the possible inpatient medical care for the victim in Latvia andsee the general adverse health effect calculation methods. The methods for estimating the value of life ofan average person are very different, that is why authors make a comparison of the estimated value of lifeand the cost of medical treatment.

Health Education; The Comparison Between With Leaflet and Video Using Local Language In Improving Teenager’s Knowledge of Adverse Health Effect of Smoking

Smoking is a usual activity that we always find in our society, although most of the people know the danger of it, the habit of smoking still can be found in a big amount in our society, especially in the teenage area, whose stand in the biggest amount of smoker in Indonesia in this present. Health education changes attitude of young generation through knowledge, which is influence by several elements, such as delivered information, manner or props used, and language. The purpose of this research was to identify the comparison of leaflets and videos using local language to improve knowledge of the adverse health effects of smoking in the teenager. This research used the Quasi Experiment design with Pretest and Posttest Two Group of 120 respondents. The questionnaire used to examine the knowledge of respondents. The result using the Wilcoxon test showed that leaflet and video with local language are equally effective to increase knowledge of respondents of the health effects of smoking(p= -0.000), mean score after intervention by using the local language leaflet is 1.98, and mean score by using local language video is 2.32. So, local video is more effective to improve the knowledge of teenagers about the danger of smoking than the use of local language leaflets.