Differentiated normalization and drug transitions among rural youth in Ireland.

Prevalence surveys in Ireland indicate an increased trend of youth drug use with rural areas reporting comparable drug availability and prevalence of use in urban settings (Currie, C., Nic Gabhainn, S., Godeau, E., Roberts, C., Smith, R., & Currie, D. (Eds.). (2008). Inequalities in young people's health: HBSC international report from the 2005/2006 survey. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe). Few studies have explored the contexts and meaning of drug use on rural youth transitions in terms of increased drug prevalence, recent influx of rural drug activity, normative tolerance of recreational drug consumption and fragmentation of traditional rural communities. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 220 young people (15–17 years), and 78 service providers in a rural area of Ireland, in order to yield contextualized narratives of their experiences of drug use and achieve a wider exploration of processes, drug transitions and realities of rural youth. The thematic analysis of the research described varied pathways, attitudes and typologies of rural youth drug use, ranging from abstinent, recreational and moderated to maturing out. The research suggests support for a ‘differentiated’ normalization theory (Shildrick, T. (2002). Young people, illicit drug use and the question of normalisation theory. Journal of Youth Studies, 5, 35–48) in terms of consumerist and normative rural youth drug use transitions in their negotiation of risk within integrating rural and urban dichotomies. In conclusion, it is recommended that drug education programmes need to situate localized rural drug taking behaviours within a wider understanding of rural community life.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

Energy drinks in Ireland - a review

Energy drinks have risen in popularity in recent years and are now sold in over 165 countries worldwide. On the island of Ireland, energy drinks advertising accounted for 20% of the total soft drinks market advertising in 2014. In the United States, sales increased by 60% between 2008 and 2012, and in 2006, a staggering 500 new brands of energy drinks were released worldwide. In the UK, the energy drinks market is worth £491 million and is growing by 7% year on year. This report has found an eightfold increase in the number of energy drinks available in 2015 compared to 2002. While no standard definition of an energy drink is used in the scientific literature, it is commonly understood to be a non-alcoholic drink that contains caffeine (usually its main ingredient), taurine, vitamins and sometimes a combination of other ingredients (such as guarana and ginseng, among others), and it is marketed for its perceived or actual benefits as a stimulant, for improving performance and for increasing energy. As this report will highlight, there is some confusion amongst the public as to what the term "energy drink" means, as some soft and sports drinks, while containing little or no caffeine, use the term ‘energy’ in the product label, for example, Lucozade. Both the scientific community and the public have raised health concerns about the caffeine and calorie intakes associated with energy drinks and the use of these drinks as a mixer with alcohol. These concerns are disputed by the energy drinks industry.

IPH response to Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Consultation - National Energy Retrofit Programme

In 2011, the National Energy Retrofit Programme will build upon existing energy saving programmes in both the domestic and non-domestic sectors.  This consultation focused on key design considerations.  IPH agree with the commitment to deliver a National Energy Retrofit Programme as a sustainable means of securing energy savings and reducing energy poverty and the nations carbon footprint.  The IPH response highlighted the significant benefit to health and would support the use of Health Impact Assessment

Warm Front, Better Health: Health Impact Evaluation of the Warm Front Scheme

About 4 million households in the UK cannot adequately heat their homes in winter due to low income and poor quality housing, the two main causes of fuel poverty. The primary impact of fuel poverty is cold homes in winter which can lead to various health problems and even death among the vulnerable young and the elderly population. The government launched the Warm Front scheme in 2000 to tackle fuel poverty among the vulnerable households in England by providing energy efficiency measures in the forms insulation and modern heating system(??). By 2004, about 770,000 households had benefited from the Warm Front scheme and a total of 2 million households are still expected to benefit by 2010. Since 2001, the Bartlett has been investigating with London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and Sheffield Hallam University, the health and the environmental impact of the Warm Front scheme. This investigative study is the most detailed to date on fuel poor dwellings based on detailed surveys of household and dwelling data, fuel consumption record and monitored temperature and relative humidity from 3,100 dwellings before and after the energy efficiency measures. The Warm Front investigation was expected to continue until the end of 2007. The findings from the investigation indicated that the Warm Front scheme was likely to have benefits in terms of improved thermal comfort and well-being as a result of mean temperature rise of 1.6C in the living room and 2.8C in the bedroom. Warm Front also lead to a decrease in indoor relative humidity mainly from the increased temperature since there appeared to be little impact on vapour pressure from changes in air tightness. Pressure test results indicated that the effects of air tightness measures such as draught stripping and cavity wall insulation were offset by the installation of a central heating system, particularly when the pipe work feeding radiators was installed below timber floors.