暂无摘要。

The list of occupational diseases reflecting the latest advances in the identification and recognition of occupational diseases, and providing guidance on the protection of workers\' health rights and interests and the prevention, recording, notification and compensation of related occupational diseases. Diagnostic criteria for occupational diseases are an important basis for making diagnoses attributable to occupational diseases, and provide a theoretical basis for health monitoring of occupational groups and occupational hygiene supervision. This thesis starts with the definition of the occupational disease elaborates in detail the development history of list of occupational diseases in International Labour Organization (ILO) , compares the list of occupational diseases in China (2013 version) with the list of occupational diseases in international (2010 version) , and then introduces in detail the latest diagnostic standards of the major occupational diseases. And finally, it puts forward relevant suggestions on the list and diagnostic level of China\'s occupational diseases, so as to provide certain insights for the further improvement of the list and diagnostic standards of occupational diseases.
职业病目录可反映职业病鉴别和认定方面的最新进展，对保障劳动者健康权益，预防、记录、通报及补偿相关职业病起到指导作用。职业病诊断标准是职业病归因诊断的重要依据，为职业人群健康监护及职业卫生监督提供了理论基础。本文从职业病定义入手，阐述国际劳工组织（ILO）职业病目录发展历程，将现行我国职业病目录（2013版）与国际职业病目录（2010版）进行比较，对以尘肺病为例主要职业病的最新诊断标准进行了详细介绍，对我国职业病目录以及诊断相关标准提出了相关建议，以便为职业病目录以及诊断标准的进一步完善提供资料。.

The article presents a novel normative model of shared responsibility for remedying unjust labor conditions and protecting workers\' rights in global supply chains. While existing literature on labor governance in the globalized economy tends to focus on empirical and conceptual investigations, the article contributes to the emerging scholarship by proposing moral justifications for labor governance schemes that go beyond voluntary private regulations and include public enforcement mechanisms. Drawing on normative theories of justice and on empirical-legal research, our Labor Model of Shared Responsibility introduces three main claims: First, that responsibility for protecting and promoting labor standards in global supply chains should be shared by all private and institutional actors involved (whether directly or indirectly) in the production and distribution processes. Second, we offer a normative model for allocating responsibility among the various actors, based on five principles: connectedness, contribution, benefit, capacity, and power. Last, we demonstrate how the normative model could be implemented through various national and international institutional mechanisms.

UNASSIGNED: Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs) are one of the most common occupational diseases responsible for work restriction and absenteeism. The purpose of the study was to compare the prevalence of MSDs between ready-made garment (RMG) factories that are compliant versus non-compliant with International Labor Organization (ILO) based Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) standards, and to identify other factors associated with a higher prevalence of MSDs.
UNASSIGNED: A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted among 410 randomly selected female workers (age: >18 years; ≥1 year of work experience) from 12 randomly selected RMG factories in the Dhaka district of Bangladesh from February to December 2019. Factories were stratified as OSH compliant or non-compliant. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire consist of socio-demographic, work-related factors, and Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) for MSD assessment. Robust Poisson regression was used to investigate the association of MSDs with OSH compliance, socio-demographic and other work-related factors.
UNASSIGNED: Respondents\' mean age was 26.9 ± 5.9 years. A total of 235 (57%) of the workers reported musculoskeletal pain in at least one body part during the last month. Among the nine reported MSDs, the prevalence of lower back pain was highest (41%) followed by pain in the knees (33%). Multivariable analysis showed lower prevalence of any MSD among workers in OSH compliant factories [aPR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.31-0.58], and workers with regular working hours (8 hrs/day) [aPR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00]. The risk of developing any MSD was significantly higher for age group 25-30 years [aPR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.01-1.33] and age group ≥31 years [aPR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.04-1.1.39].
UNASSIGNED: The study found a high burden of musculoskeletal disorders among female RMG workers, especially those in non-OSH compliant factories that work long hours. Enforcement of minimum ILO-based OSH standards and introduction of low-cost interventions to improve working conditions in non-compliant factories would help sustain the pace of development in this sector in Bangladesh, and ensure the health of the women who work there.

Worldwide, 230,000+ people die annually from asbestos-related diseases (ARDs). The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that countries develop a National Asbestos Profile (NAP) to eliminate ARDs. For 195 countries, we assessed the global status of NAPs (A: bona fide NAP, B: proxy NAP, C: relevant published information, D: no relevant information) by national income (HI: high, UMI: upper-middle, LMI: lower-middle, LI: low), asbestos bans (banned, no-ban) and public data availability. Fourteen (7% of 195) countries were category A (having a bona fide NAP), while 98, 51 and 32 countries were categories B, C and D, respectively. Of the 14 category-A countries, 8, 3 and 3 were LMI, UMI and HI, respectively. Development of a bona fide NAP showed no gradient by national income. The proportions of countries having a bona fide NAP were similar between asbestos-banned and no-ban countries. Public databases useful for developing NAPs contained data for most countries. Irrespective of the status of national income or asbestos ban, most countries have not developed a NAP despite having the potential. The global status of NAP is suboptimal. Country-level data on asbestos and ARDs in public databases can be better utilized to develop NAPs for globally eliminating ARDs.

Working hours is a ubiquitous exposure given that most adults are employed, and one that is modifiable via legislative change if not always through individual-level choice. According to a recent report from the World Health Organization (WHO) and International Labour Organization (ILO), there is currently sufficient evidence to conclude that long working hours (i.e., ≥55 h per week) elevate the risk of fatal and non-fatal ischaemic heart disease to a clinically meaningful extent. After assessing the data used by the ILO/WHO, we feel that the expert group has not correctly applied their own framework for assessing the strength of the evidence. In the meta-analysis of observational studies in the report, the association between long working hours and incident heart disease appeared stronger in lower quality cohort studies with a high risk of bias (minimally-adjusted hazard ratio 1.20, 95% CI 1.01-1.41, compared to standard 35-40 weekly hours) than in the superior-quality studies with a lower risk of bias for which the estimate was not significantly different from the null (1.08, 95% CI 0.93-1.25). There was also marked effect modification, such that there was no increase in ischaemic heart disease for those working long hours in high socioeconomic status occupations, a finding also reported in analyses of a recent census-based cohort study which was not included in the report. Our meta-analysis of all these studies confirm that the findings are not consistent but differ between subgroups and that the summary age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio for long working hours in high socioeconomic status occupations does not support excess risk: 0.85, 95% CI 0.63-1.13 (Pinteraction = 0.005, total N = 451,982). For these and other reasons detailed in this commentary, we advance a more cautious interpretation of the existing evidence. The conclusions should be restricted to low socioeconomic status occupations only and more research is still needed to confirm or refute harmfulness and determine clinical relevance.

In this note the authors survey existing international radiation-protection recommendations of the ICRP, the IAEA, and the ILO. After outlining previous work on the ethics of radiation protection and risk assessment/management, the authors review ethical thinking on five key issues related to radiation protection and ethics. They formulate each of these five issues in terms of alternative ethical stances: (1) Equity vs. Efficiency, (2) Health vs. Economics, (3) Individual Rights vs. Societal Benefits, (4) Due Process vs. Necessary Sacrifice, and (5) Stakeholder Consent vs. Management Decisions.