Biocidal products: Opportunities in risk assessment, management, and communication.

In the coronavirus disease 2019 era, biocidal products are increasingly used for controlling harmful organisms, including microorganisms. However, assuring safety against adverse health effects is a critical issue from a public health standpoint. This study aimed to provide an overview of key aspects of risk assessment, management, and communication that ensure the safety of biocidal active ingredients and products. The inherent characteristics of biocidal products make them effective against pests and pathogens; however, they also possess potential toxicities. Therefore, public awareness regarding both the beneficial and potential adverse effects of biocidal products needs to be increased. Biocidal active ingredients and products are regulated under specific laws: the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act for the United States; the European Union (EU) Biocidal Products Regulation for the EU; and the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocide Safety Management Act for the Republic of Korea. Risk management also needs to consider the evidence of enhanced sensitivity to toxicities in individuals with chronic diseases, given the increased prevalence of these conditions in the population. This is particularly important for post-marketing safety assessments of biocidal products. Risk communication conveys information, including potential risks and risk-reduction measures, aimed at managing or controlling health or environmental risks. Taken together, the collaborative effort of stakeholders in risk assessment, management, and communication strategies is critical to ensuring the safety of biocidal products sold in the market as these strategies are constantly evolving.

People's perceptions of, willingness-to-take preventive remedies and their willingness-to-vaccinate during times of heightened health threats.

Pandemics, such as the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, represents a health threat to humans worldwide. During times of heightened health risks, the public's perceptions, and acceptance of evidence-based preventive measures, such as vaccines, is of high relevance. Moreover, people might seek other preventive remedies to protect themselves from getting infected (e.g., herbal remedies, nutritional supplements). A recent study on consumers' preference for naturalness showed that people put more weight on perceived naturalness of a preventive remedy compared to a curative one. This result was attributed to the increased focus on perceived effectiveness as opposed to perceived risk. This raises the question whether the current pandemic would shift people's perceptions from prevention to curing and thus, exhibit a preference for synthetic remedies because they are seen as more effective. The present online experiment (conducted in April 2021) investigated people's perceptions of vaccines and remedies within the context of the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. A 2x2 between-subject design with type of remedy (natural vs. synthetic) and salience of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (high vs. low) was conducted in Switzerland in spring 2021 (N = 452). The data did not provide evidence of a curative mindset for preventive remedies, as the participants exhibited a clear preference for the natural remedy compared to the synthetic remedy. Our study stresses the importance of understanding people's mindsets on how to protect themselves from infection with a virus during an ongoing pandemic to tackle misinformation and vaccine hesitancy.

Worldviews, trust, and risk perceptions shape public acceptance of COVID-19 public health measures.

Because of the outbreak of COVID-19, most countries have implemented measures aimed at reducing the number of infected people. However, these measures only work if they are generally accepted by the public. We conducted a two-wave longitudinal survey in Switzerland (n = 1,223) to study the factors that would influence perceived risks and the acceptance of the measures. Our findings showed that people with individualistic worldviews, high general interpersonal trust, low social trust, a low level of perceived risks, and the conviction that risks other than health risks were neglected had less acceptance of the implemented measures compared with people who held the opposite views on the mentioned variables. The number of infected people declined between survey waves 1 and 2. This desired effect not only reduced people's perceived risks but also decreased their social trust and increased the conviction that other risks were neglected. Finally, the acceptance of the measures declined. Our data also support the idea that reduced risk perceptions and a decline in social trust are important drivers for the reduction in the acceptance of the measures in survey wave 2. Our results suggest that as soon as the measures attain success or the public is tired of the implemented restrictions, public acceptance declines, and it seems difficult to prolong the measures as may be desirable from an epidemiological standpoint. The importance of worldviews and trust for public acceptance of the measures further suggests the necessity of a political discussion about the implemented measures.

Reactions of older Swiss adults to the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal survey on the acceptance of and adherence to public health measures.

RATIONALE: An important public health strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic was the protection of people at risk of severe progressions of an infection; namely, older people and people with pre-existing conditions. OBJECTIVE: To improve public health communication, it is vital to understand, which sociodemographic and psychological factors drive older people's acceptance of and compliance with public health measures. METHOD: This goal was pursued in this three-wave longitudinal online study with older adults, collected between March and June during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 (N = 327; first and second wave during the national lockdown; third wave: after the lifting of most lockdown measures). RESULTS: The results show that overall acceptance of and adherence to the public health measures were high among older adults and even more so for people with pre-existing conditions (e.g., cancer, type II diabetes). However, some infringements of the measures were observed, and the longitudinal analyses suggest that increases in social trust positively influenced acceptance of measures over time, while trivialising beliefs and health fears impacted older adults' compliance with protective measures over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers insights into the behavioural responses of older adults to an ongoing threat and the associated uncertainty that is part of public communication about the pandemic and protective measures.

The Impact of Trust and Risk Perception on the Acceptance of Measures to Reduce COVID-19 Cases.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 has had a large impact on the lives of many people worldwide. At the peak of confirmed COVID-19 cases during the first wave in Switzerland (March-April 2020), we conducted a survey in the German-speaking part of the country (N = 1,585). The results suggest that the implemented measures are accepted. The survey participants are more concerned that other family members could catch the virus compared with themselves, and they are worried about its economic impact. The results suggest that how trust is measured is crucial because general trust and social trust have opposite effects on the participants' risk perceptions. People with high general trust perceive less risks associated with COVID-19 compared with people who have low general trust, and people with high social trust perceive more risks compared with people who have low social trust. The results further indicate that perceived risks are important drivers for the acceptance of the government's implemented measures to control COVID-19 and for more precautionary behavior (i.e., contact with fewer people and more hygienic behavior). Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.