Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a toxic gas that is well-known for its acute health risks in occupational settings, but less is known about effects of chronic and low-level exposures. This critical review investigates toxicological and experimental studies, exposure sources, standards, and epidemiological studies pertaining to chronic exposure to H2S from both natural and anthropogenic sources. H2S releases, while poorly documented, appear to have increased in recent years from oil and gas and possibly other facilities. Chronic exposures below 10 ppm have long been associated with odor aversion, ocular, nasal, respiratory and neurological effects. However, exposure to much lower levels, below 0.03 ppm (30 ppb), has been associated with increased prevalence of neurological effects, and increments below 0.001 ppm (1 ppb) in H2S concentrations have been associated with ocular, nasal, and respiratory effects. Many of the studies in the epidemiological literature are limited by exposure measurement error, co-pollutant exposures and potential confounding, small sample size, and concerns of representativeness, and studies have yet to consider vulnerable populations. Long-term community-based studies are needed to confirm the low concentration findings and to refine exposure guidelines. Revised guidelines that incorporate both short- and long-term limits are needed to protect communities, especially sensitive populations living near H2S sources.

In a series of three companion papers published in this Journal, we identify and validate the available thermal stress indicators (TSIs). In this third paper, we conducted field experiments across nine countries to evaluate the efficacy of 61 meteorology-based TSIs for assessing the physiological strain experienced by individuals working in the heat. We monitored 372 experi-enced and acclimatized workers during 893 full work shifts. We continuously assessed core body temperature, mean skin temperature, and heart rate data together with pre/post urine specific gravity and color. The TSIs were evaluated against 17 published criteria covering physiological parameters, practicality, cost effectiveness, and health guidance issues. Simple meteorological parameters explained only a fraction of the variance in physiological heat strain (R2 = 0.016 to 0.427; p < 0.001), reflecting the importance of adopting more sophisticated TSIs. Nearly all TSIs correlated with mean skin temperature (98%), mean body temperature (97%), and heart rate (92%), while 66% of TSIs correlated with the magnitude of dehydration and 59% correlated with core body temperature (r = 0.031 to 0.602; p < 0.05). When evaluated against the 17 published criteria, the TSIs scored from 4.7 to 55.4% (max score = 100%). The indoor (55.4%) and outdoor (55.1%) Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature and the Universal Thermal Climate Index (51.7%) scored higher compared to other TSIs (4.7 to 42.0%). Therefore, these three TSIs have the highest potential to assess the physiological strain experienced by individuals working in the heat.

UNASSIGNED: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) began in 2019 with several unknown factors. The World Health Organization (WHO) subsequently developed COVID-19 occupational safety and health (OSH) guidelines to reduce occupational COVID-19 transmission. Many countries also developed their own COVID-19 OSH guidelines, but whether these guidelines included WHO\'s guidelines and whether including WHO\'s guidelines in countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines reduced COVID-19 transmission is unknown.
UNASSIGNED: The objectives of our study were to (1) compare the COVID-19 OSH guidelines of several countries to WHO\'s OSH guidelines, (2) estimate associations between characteristics of countries and their OSH guidelines and the number of WHO\'s OSH guidelines included in countries\' OSH guidelines, and (3) estimate associations between WHO\'s OSH guidelines included in countries\' OSH guidelines and COVID-19 risk, death risk, and case-fatality proportion.
UNASSIGNED: This study represents international, ecological research of 36 countries from all six world health regions. Countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines were compared with WHO\'s OSH guidelines. Linear regression models adjusted for potential confounders were used to estimate associations of interest.
UNASSIGNED: The median number of WHO\'s 15 COVID-19 OSH guidelines included in countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines was eight. Countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines focused on workers included significantly more of WHO\'s COVID-19 OSH guidelines than countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines focused on general populations. Including \"provide personal protective equipment for workers\" and \"create workplace policy for wearing personal protective equipment\" in countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines were significantly related to decreased COVID-19 risk, death risk, and/or case-fatality proportion.
UNASSIGNED: Countries\' COVID-19 OSH guidelines should include WHO\'s guidelines, focus on workers, and include \"provide personal protective equipment for workers\" and \"create workplace policy for wearing personal protective equipment.\"

The purpose of this consensus document was to develop feasible, evidence-based occupational heat safety recommendations to protect the US workers that experience heat stress. Heat safety recommendations were created to protect worker health and to avoid productivity losses associated with occupational heat stress. Recommendations were tailored to be utilized by safety managers, industrial hygienists, and the employers who bear responsibility for implementing heat safety plans. An interdisciplinary roundtable comprised of 51 experts was assembled to create a narrative review summarizing current data and gaps in knowledge within eight heat safety topics: (a) heat hygiene, (b) hydration, (c) heat acclimatization, (d) environmental monitoring, (e) physiological monitoring, (f) body cooling, (g) textiles and personal protective gear, and (h) emergency action plan implementation. The consensus-based recommendations for each topic were created using the Delphi method and evaluated based on scientific evidence, feasibility, and clarity. The current document presents 40 occupational heat safety recommendations across all eight topics. Establishing these recommendations will help organizations and employers create effective heat safety plans for their workplaces, address factors that limit the implementation of heat safety best-practices and protect worker health and productivity.

This is an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis, first published in 2007. It was produced by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, using accredited methods. Allergic rhinitis is common and affects 10-15% of children and 26% of adults in the UK, it affects quality of life, school and work attendance, and is a risk factor for development of asthma. Allergic rhinitis is diagnosed by history and examination, supported by specific allergy tests. Topical nasal corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for moderate to severe disease. Combination therapy with intranasal corticosteroid plus intranasal antihistamine is more effective than either alone and provides second line treatment for those with rhinitis poorly controlled on monotherapy. Immunotherapy is highly effective when the specific allergen is the responsible driver for the symptoms. Treatment of rhinitis is associated with benefits for asthma. Non-allergic rhinitis also is a risk factor for the development of asthma and may be eosinophilic and steroid-responsive or neurogenic and non- inflammatory. Non-allergic rhinitis may be a presenting complaint for systemic disorders such as granulomatous or eosinophilic polyangiitis, and sarcoidoisis. Infective rhinitis can be caused by viruses, and less commonly by bacteria, fungi and protozoa.

Professional and domestic cleaning is associated with work-related asthma (WRA). This position paper reviews the literature linking exposure to cleaning products and the risk of asthma and focuses on prevention. Increased risk of asthma has been shown in many epidemiological and surveillance studies, and several case reports describe the relationship between exposure to one or more cleaning agents and WRA. Cleaning sprays, bleach, ammonia, disinfectants, mixing products, and specific job tasks have been identified as specific causes and/or triggers of asthma. Because research conclusions and policy suggestions have remained unheeded by manufactures, vendors, and commercial cleaning companies, it is time for a multifaceted intervention. Possible preventive measures encompass the following: substitution of cleaning sprays, bleach, and ammonia; minimizing the use of disinfectants; avoidance of mixing products; use of respiratory protective devices; and worker education. Moreover, we suggest the education of unions, consumer, and public interest groups to encourage safer products. In addition, information activities for the general population with the purpose of improving the knowledge of professional and domestic cleaners regarding risks and available preventive measures and to promote strict collaboration between scientific communities and safety and health agencies are urgently needed.