ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: It has been proposed that pilots face a perceived barrier to seeking medical care due to what a change in health status might mean to their status as a pilot. While this is often common knowledge to pilots and some physicians, this phenomenon has limited research or characterization in the medical literature. In this commentary, we propose a definition for the barrier pilots face in seeking healthcare in hopes of focusing future research efforts.Hoffman W, Bjerke E, Tvaryanas A. Breaking the pilot healthcare barrier. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2022; 93(8):649-650.
Subject(s)
Aerospace Medicine , Pilots , Delivery of Health Care , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is an increasing awareness of the multiple potential pathways leading to human health risks from hydraulic fracturing. Setback distances are a legislative method to mitigate potential risks. OBJECTIVES: We attempted to determine whether legal setback distances between well-pad sites and the public are adequate in three shale plays. METHODS: We reviewed geography, current statutes and regulations, evacuations, thermal modeling, air pollution studies, and vapor cloud modeling within the Marcellus, Barnett, and Niobrara Shale Plays. DISCUSSION: The evidence suggests that presently utilized setbacks may leave the public vulnerable to explosions, radiant heat, toxic gas clouds, and air pollution from hydraulic fracturing activities. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that setbacks may not be sufficient to reduce potential threats to human health in areas where hydraulic fracturing occurs. It is more likely that a combination of reasonable setbacks with controls for other sources of pollution associated with the process will be required. CITATION: Haley M, McCawley M, Epstein AC, Arrington B, Bjerke EF. 2016. Adequacy of current state setbacks for directional high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the Marcellus, Barnett, and Niobrara Shale Plays. Environ Health Perspect 124:1323-1333; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510547.
Subject(s)
Air Pollution , Hydraulic Fracking/legislation & jurisprudence , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Air Pollution/adverse effects , Air Pollution/analysis , Colorado , Environmental Monitoring , Humans , Models, Theoretical , Pennsylvania , TexasABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study explored if and to what extent the laws of U.S. states mirrored the U.S. federal laws for responding to nuclear-radiological emergencies (NREs). METHODS: Emergency laws from a 12-state sample and the federal government were retrieved and translated into numeric codes representing acting agents, their partner agents, and the purposes of activity in terms of preparedness, response, and recovery. We used network analysis to explore the relationships among agents in terms of legally directed NRE activities. RESULTS: States' legal networks for NREs appear as not highly inclusive, involving an average of 28% of agents among those specified in the federal laws. Certain agents are highly central in NRE networks, so that their capacity and effectiveness might strongly influence an NRE response. CONCLUSIONS: State-level lawmakers and planners might consider whether or not greater inclusion of agents, modeled on the federal government laws, would enhance their NRE laws and if more agents should be engaged in planning and policy-making for NRE incidents. Further research should explore if and to what extent legislated NRE directives impose constraints on practical response activities including emergency planning.