The current state of abortion law and practice in Northern Ireland

This paper reviews current abortion law and practice in Northern Ireland (NI). It explores the origins of NI's abortion law and its complexity in relation to current practice. it reviews issues relating to women seeking terminations in NI and Great Britain and reviews attempts by the Family Planning Association NI to require the Department of Health and Social Services and Public Safety NI to provide guidance for health professionals engaged in this practice. The paper also discusses some of the issues surrounding abortion in NI and seeks to explain why this subject is causing controversy and debate, especially following a judicial review in February and Marie Stopes opening a termination service in Belfast.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Novel Recombinant Subunit Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine (BBG2Na) in Healthy Young Adults

A novel recombinant respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) subunit vaccine, designated BBG2Na, was administered to 108 healthy adults randomly assigned to receive 10, 100, or 300 μg of BBG2Na in aluminum phosphate or saline placebo. Each subject received 1, 2, or 3 intramuscular injections of the assigned dose at monthly intervals. Local and systemic reactions were mild, and no evidence of harmful properties of BBG2Na was reported. The highest ELISA and virus-neutralizing (VN) antibody responses were evident in the 100- and 300-μg groups; second or third injections provided no significant boosts against RSV-derived antigens. BBG2Na induced ⩾2-fold and ⩾4-fold increases in G2Na-specific ELISA units in up to 100% and 57% of subjects, respectively; corresponding RSV-A–specific responses were 89% and 67%. Furthermore, up to 71% of subjects had ⩾2-fold VN titer increases. Antibody responses to 2 murine lung protective epitopes were also highly boosted after vaccination. Therefore, BBG2Na is safe, well tolerated, and highly immunogenic in RSV-seropositive adults

Public awareness and views on unlicensed use of medicines in children.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT center dot There is increasing concern about the use of those medicines in children which have not been fully studied and licensed for childhood use. Such use is not uncommon, due in large part to a lack of availability of fully licensed products and formulations that are suitable for children. center dot There is little published information on the views of the public on this important area of paediatric care. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS center dot A survey of 1000 members of the public in Northern Ireland indicated that such use of medicines in children is not well known. center dot However, when informed about this practice, the majority believed that it would compromise safety and increase the likelihood of adverse effects. They also believed that parents/guardians should be told if their child was prescribed a medicine that had not been fully tested in children. center dot Participants in the survey indicated that they would be reluctant to involve their child in a clinical trial to help with the licensing process unless the child was suffering from a life-threatening illness. To explore awareness and views of the general public on unlicensed use of medicines in children and on the participation of children in clinical trials. Members of the public completed a questionnaire survey administered by face-to-face interview in public areas in N. Ireland. The main outcome measures were the views on unlicensed use of medicines in children and on clinical trials in children. One thousand participants (59.2% female) took part; 610 were parents. Most participants (86%) had no previous knowledge about unlicensed use of medicines in children. Being a parent did not influence this nor did being a parent of a child who suffered from a health problem (P > 0.05). Most participants (92%) felt that parents should be told about unlicensed use of medicines, with the doctor most frequently selected as the person who should inform parents. At the outset, only 1.8% of participants felt that the use of medicines in children was unsafe. However, having been informed about unlicensed use of medicines, this proportion increased dramatically (62.4%; P <0.001). Views on whether participants would enter a child of their own into a clinical trial varied according to the health status of the child (P <0.05) i.e. a child in good health (3.9%) vs a child with a life-threatening condition (41.9%). There is limited public knowledge of unlicensed use of medicines in children and a general reluctance to involve children in clinical trials unless the child to be involved has a life-threatening condition.

Public Administration, Science and Risk Assessment: A Case Study of the U.K. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Crisis

The bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) outbreak in the United Kingdom is regarded as one of the worst public policy crises the British government has experienced during the postwar era. In material terms, it has led to the slaughter of 3.3 million cattle and estimated economic losses of £3.7 billion. In administrative terms, the crisis brought about the dissolution of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. This article examines the istitutional context in which decisions about the scientific evidence on BSE were made. The authors argue that a centralized system in which government agencies control science for government is inherently vulnerable to alliances of experts and interest groups that undermine the credible assessment of public health and safety risks. Specific societal conditions may encourage risk-opportunistic behavior among policy makers that is conducive to delays and inaction until such time as the evidence of a health risk becomes overwhelming.

Arsenic behaviour from groundwater and soil to crops:impacts on agriculture and food safety

High levels of As in groundwater commonly found in Bangladesh and other parts of Asia not only pose a risk via drinking water consumption but also a risk in agricultural sustainability and food safety. This review attempts to provide an overview of current knowledge and gaps related to the assessment and management of these risks, including the behaviour of As in the soil-plant system, uptake, phytotoxicity, As speciation in foods, dietary habits, and human health risks. Special emphasis has been given to the situation in Bangladesh, where groundwater via shallow tube wells is the most important source of irrigation water in the dry season. Within the soil-plant system, there is a distinct difference in behaviour of As under flooded conditions, where arsenite (AsIII) predominates, and under nonflooded conditions, where arsenate (AsV) predominates. The former is regarded as most toxic to humans and plants. Limited data indicate that As-contaminated irrigation water can result in a slow buildup of As in the topsoil. In some cases the buildup is reflected by the As levels in crops, in others not. It is not yet possible to predict As uptake and toxicity in plants based on soil parameters. It is unknown under what conditions and in what time frame As is building up in the soil. Representative phytotoxicity data necessary to evaluate current and future soil concentrations are not yet available. Although there are no indications that crop production is currently inhibited by As, long-term risks are clearly present. Therefore, with concurrent assessments of the risks, management options to further prevent As accumulation in the topsoil should already have been explored. With regard to human health, data on As speciation in foods in combination with food consumption data are needed to assess dietary exposure, and these data should include spatial and seasonal variability. It is important to control confounding factors in assessing the risks. In a country where malnutrition is prevalent, levels of inorganic As in foods should be balanced against the nutritional value of the foods. Regarding agriculture, As is only one of the many factors that may pose a risk to the sustainability of crop production. Other risk factors such as nutrient depletion and loss of organic matter also must be taken into account to set priorities in terms of research, management, and overall strategy.

Surgical checklist for cataract surgery:progress with the initiative by the Royal College of Ophthalmologists to improve patient safety

PurposeThe World Health Organisation (WHO) identified patient safety in surgery as an important public health matter and advised the adoption of a universal peri-operative surgical checklist. An adapted version of the WHO checklist has been mandatory in the National Health Service since 2010. Wrong intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is a particular safety concern in ophthalmology. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists launched a bespoke checklist for cataract surgery in 2010 to reduce the likelihood of preventable errors. We sought to ascertain the use of checklists in cataract surgery in 2012.Patients and methodsA survey of members of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists seeking views on the use of checklists in cataract surgery. Four hundred and sixty-nine completed responses were received (18% response rate).ResultsRespondents worked in England (75%), Scotland (11%), Wales (5%), Northern Ireland (2%), the Republic of Ireland (1%), and overseas (6%). Ninety-four per cent of respondents support the use of a checklist for cataract surgery and 85% say that they always use a checklist before cataract surgery. Sixty-seven per cent of cataract surgeons stated they undertake a pre-operative team brief. Thirty-six per cent use a cataract surgery checklist developed locally, 18% use the college's bespoke cataract surgery checklist, 39% use a generic surgical checklist, and 4% reported that they do not use a checklist.ConclusionNinety-three per cent of cataract surgeons responding to the questionnaire report using a surgical checklist and 67% use a team brief. However, only 54% use a checklist, which addresses the selection of the correct intraocular implant. We recommend wider adoption of checklists, which address risks relevant to cataract surgery, in particular the possibility of selection of an incorrect IOL.Eye advance online publication, 24 May 2013; doi:10.1038/eye.2013.101.

A review of the global pesticide legislation and the scale of challenge in reaching the global harmonization of food safety standards

Pesticide use is important in agriculture to protect crops and improve productivity. However, they have the potential to cause adverse human health or environmental effects, dependent on exposure levels. This review examines existing pesticide legislation worldwide, focusing on the level of harmonisation, and impacts of differing legislation on food safety and trade. Pesticide legislation varies greatly worldwide as countries have different requirements guidelines and legal limits for plant protection. Developed nations have more stringent regulations than developing countries, which lack the resources and expertise to adequately implement and enforce legislation. Global differences in pesticide legislation act as a technical barrier to trade. International parties such as the European Union (EU), Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have attempted to harmonise pesticide legislation by providing maximum residue limits (MRLs), but globally these limits remain variable. Globally harmonised pesticide standards would serve to increase productivity, profits and trade, and enhance the ability to protect public health and the environment.