Hand hygiene and coughing into sleeves are not sufficient measures against viruses such as the coronavirus, which are spread by aerosol particles suspended in the air, the Aalto University writes in a press release.

For this reason, researchers at Aalto University and the University of Eastern Finland are studying how various solutions, such as more effective air diffusion and air-cleaning devices, protective masks, and ultraviolet light, might reduce infection risk. The two-year research project is funded by the Finnish Work Environment Fund.

Effective solutions

“We are looking for solutions that can be implemented easily and for detailed information on their effectiveness in reducing the risk of airborne infection”, explains Aalto University Professor Risto Kosonen, the head of the project.

The researchers conduct measurements in the laboratory by using threefold methods: aerosol particles made of paraffin, the MS2 virus, which is harmless for humans, and a gas containing a tracer. With the tracer gas, researchers also study how air diffusion and sources of heat gain affect the performance of ventilation.

Unique measurements

To ensure that the indoor air flows and measurements for aerosols and viruses are as accurate as possible, the researchers are using a special coughing machine as well as a human-sized breathing thermal manikin.

The coughing machine models the spread of aerosols through breathing and coughing. In addition, a simulated face with the upper body part of a heated dummy has been integrated for the coughing machine, and a mask can be put on it. The thermal manikin is the size and shape of a human. External “lungs” have been connected to the manikin, which helps it inhale and exhale with the desired cycle and force through the mouth or nose. A mask can also be placed on the manikin. The manikin also has 25 body parts with adjustable temperatures.

“We breathe air that rises from the heat of our own bodies. For that reason, it is important that the manikin should also be warm to allow us to reliably measure the content of the air that it inhales”, Kosonen says. 

You can read the full press release here.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

The city of Eugene is suffering from the same chronic inaction on climate change as the global community, referred to by the United Nations Environment Program as an adaptation gap: “the difference between actually implemented adaptation and a societally set goal.”  

In just a few weeks, Eugene City Council has an opportunity to shift that trajectory and finally execute its Climate Action Plan by adopting an ordinance that will help the city electrify our energy sector — a key step in becoming more resilient in the face of climate change. 

Beginning in 2020, community members, climate and tenant’s rights advocates brought forward a plan for Eugene to move our community away from its reliance on fossil fuels. The first essential step is to ensure future construction is all-electric, the next is to develop a just transition plan for existing buildings. 

The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report is profoundly dire, with the U.N. Secretary-General stating this week, “we are sleepwalking to climate catastrophe.” Understanding the dire consequences of inaction to address climate change is also impacting people’s mental health. A recent study by The Lancet found young people are overwhelmingly experiencing climate anxiety, compounded by government inaction. 

Eugene residents who testified before the City Council urging the passage of the building electrification ordinance raised myriad valid points, each enough to justify adopting it: gas stoves pose a risk to the elderly and otherwise forgetful who may unintentionally leave burners on; indoor air pollution caused by gas appliances increase risk of asthma by up to 42%; the roughly 50% of Eugene residents who rent have no control over the energy source used by appliances in their homes; fracked gas is a potent, dangerous greenhouse gas, and more. 

Like so many aspects of the climate crisis, the health impacts of residential gas use is an environmental justice issue. The Oregon Health Authority concluded in 2014 and reiterated in 2018,“Low-income and minority populations in Oregon have existing environmental exposures and burdens of disease that place them at higher risk.” Noting, “[t]hese groups are more susceptible to climate-related health effects and have fewer resources to plan for, and recover from, climate impacts.” 

In addition to being the clear public health choice, electrification is less expensive, more efficient and better for our climate. The for-profit gas utility Northwest Natural is seeking approval from the Oregon Public Utility Commission for a rate increase that would result in an average 11.8% rise in residential ratepayer bills. Moreover, homes primarily heated by gas are not eligible for EWEB subsidies and zero-interest loans to make homes more energy-efficient. 

It’s time to ensure that we are building a livable future. Literally. New construction must be built in a manner that will not require retrofitting in just a few years to function with a decarbonized grid. Whether you are motivated by improving indoor air quality, addressing social justice inequities, reducing our dependence on energy sources that fuel global conflicts and complicate their resolution, cutting costs to renters and homeowners, or confronting climate impacts and their associated anxiety with action and hope, supporting a fossil-free Eugene is the clear path forward. 

Born, raised and educated in Oregon, Bethany Cotton is an environmental attorney and the conservation director for Cascadia Wildlands, cascwild.org. 

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

A new type of ultraviolet light that is safe for people took less than 5 minutes to reduce the level of indoor airborne microbes by more than 98%, a joint study by scientists at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and the U.K. has found. Even as microbes continued to be sprayed into the room, the level remained very low as long as the lights were on.

The study suggests that far-UVC light from lamps installed in the ceiling could be a highly effective passive technology for reducing person-to-person transmission of airborne-mediated diseases such as COVID and influenza indoors—and lowering the risk of the next pandemic.  

“Far-UVC rapidly reduces the amount of active microbes in the indoor air to almost zero,  making indoor air essentially as safe as outdoor air,” says David Brenner, Ph.D., director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and co-author of the study. “Using this technology in locations where people gather together indoors could prevent the next potential pandemic.”  

The study was published March 23 in the journal Scientific Reports, a Nature journal. 

“Far-UVC light is simple to install, it’s inexpensive, it doesn’t need people to change their behavior, and evidence from multiple studies suggests it may be a safe way to prevent the transmission of any virus, including the COVID virus and its variants, as well as influenza and also any potential future pandemic viruses,” Brenner says. 

What is Far-UVC light? 

Disinfecting indoor air with far-UVC light is a new approach to safely and efficiently destroy airborne viruses in occupied spaces, including the viruses that cause COVID and influenza. 

Scientists have known for decades that a type of ultraviolet light known as UVC light rapidly kills microbes, including bacteria and viruses. But this conventional germicidal UVC light cannot be used directly to destroy airborne viruses in occupied indoor spaces because it is a potential health hazard to the skin and eyes.  

About a decade ago, Columbia University scientists proposed that a different type of UVC light, known as far-UVC light, would be just as efficient at destroying bacteria and viruses, but without the safety concerns of conventional germicidal UVC.  

Far-UVC light has a shorter wavelength than conventional germicidal UVC, so it can’t penetrate into living human skin cells or eye cells. But it is equally efficient at killing bacteria and viruses—which are much smaller than human cells.  

In the past decade, many studies around the world have shown that far-UVC is both efficient at destroying airborne bacteria and viruses without causing damage to living tissue.  But until now these studies had only been conducted in small experimental chambers, not in full-sized rooms mimicking real-world conditions. 

New study shows far-UVC is highly effective in real room environment 

In the current study, scientists at the University of St. Andrews, University of Dundee, University of Leeds, and Columbia University tested the efficacy of far-UVC in a large room-sized chamber with the same ventilation rate as a typical home or office (about three air changes per hour).  

During the experiment, a sprayer continuously emitted an aerosol mist of S. aureus bacteria into the room. (This microbe was chosen because it is slightly less sensitive to far-UVC than coronaviruses, providing the researchers with an appropriately conservative model.) When the concentration of microbes in the room stabilized, the researchers turned on commercially available overhead far-UVC lamps.

The lamps inactivated more than 98% of the airborne microbes in just 5 minutes. The low level of viable microbes was maintained over time, even though microbes continued to be sprayed into the room. 

The efficacy of different approaches to reducing indoor virus levels is usually measured in terms of equivalent air changes per hour. In this study, far-UVC produced the equivalent of 184 equivalent air exchanges per hour. This far exceeds any other approach to disinfecting occupied indoor spaces, where 5 to 20 equivalent air changes per hour is the best that can be achieved practically.  

“Our trials produced spectacular results, far exceeding what is possible with ventilation alone,” says Kenneth Wood, PhD, lecturer in the School of Physics and Astronomy at the University of St. Andrews and senior author of the study. “In terms of preventing airborne disease transmission, far-UVC lights could make indoor places as safe as being outside on the golf course on a breezy day at St Andrews.” 

Far-UVC light is variant-proof 

“Previous studies have shown that far-UVC light can kill the COVID virus, other human coronaviruses, influenza, and drug-resistant bacteria,” Brenner says.  

“What’s particularly attractive about far-UVC technology as a practical method of preventing indoor disease transmission is that it will be equally good at inactivating all future COVID variants, as well as new infectious viruses that have yet to emerge, while retaining efficacy against ‘old fashioned’ viruses like influenza and measles.” 

Finally, because of the way ultraviolet light kills microbes, viruses and bacteria cannot develop resistance as they do with vaccines and drug treatments. 

More information 

The study, titled “Far-UVC (222 nm) efficiently inactivates an airborne pathogen in a room-sized chamber,” was published in Scientific Reports on March 23.  

The authors are Ewan Eadie (Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, Scotland), Waseem Hiwar (University of Leeds, England), Louise Fletcher (University of Leeds), Emma Tidswell (University of Leeds), Paul O’Mahoney (University of Dundee), Manuela Buonanno (Columbia University), David Welch (Columbia University), Catherine Adamson (St. Andrews University, Scotland), David Brenner (Columbia University), Catherine Noakes (University of Leeds), and Kenneth Woods (University of St. Andrews). 

The study was supported by grants from the UK Health Security Agency. 

David J. Brenner and co-inventors have been granted a US patent, titled ‘Apparatus, method and system for selectively affecting and/or killing a virus’ (US1078019B2). Columbia University has licensed aspects of filtered UV light technology to USHIO Inc. Other disclosures are noted in the paper. 

Far-UVC Light May Be Safe for Indoor Use

A new study from David Brenner’s lab at Columbia University’s Center for Radiological Research found that far-UVC light does not cause damage in a 3-dimensional model of human skin. In another study from Brenner’s team, hairless mice exposed to far-UVC light for 8 hours a day over 15 months had no signs of skin damage. The findings suggest that far-UVC light may be safe for use in occupied indoor settings.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Across the country, the natural gas industry is playing a pivotal role in achieving our clean energy goals today, and is committed to making further progress. The industry is investing $95 million every day on energy efficiency and upgrades to infrastructure that will continue to unlock innovative solutions to meet our environmental goals. These investments have been key to the progress we have achieved thus far, with carbon dioxide emissions hitting 30-year lows. Without question, natural gas, natural gas utilities and our delivery infrastructure are essential to meeting our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. But as we continue this work towards this cleaner energy future with our customers and communities, some are focused on promoting misleading information that distracts from the greater task at hand: protecting our environment while continuing to deliver affordable and reliable energy to the millions of Americans who need it every day.

In recent months, we have seen biased media coverage based on limited research assert that natural gas stoves are both bad for the health and detrimental to the environment. Reports that draw conclusions from their own bias rather than from the scientific community to lure readers in are dangerously misleading and irresponsible. An example of this is a Stanford University study written with an organization called Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers (PSE) for Healthy Energy that recently made headlines, claiming that natural gas stoves in kitchens are an outsized contributor to climate change and poor public health. While the headlines are alarming, a look at key details from the study tell a very different story.  

Concerns with this study include sample size, quality of the testing environment and the elimination of ventilation. First, researchers only studied 53 stoves in California homes. Roughly half of the emissions measured in this small sample came from only five of the 53 stoves, which they then used as a model to predict emissions from the 40 million U.S. residences with natural gas stoves, even though the study included discontinued stove models with inefficient pilot lights that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) prohibited the sale of in 2009. Second, researchers wrapped kitchens in plastic sheeting, using sandbags and painter’s tape to seal off any form of ventilation, steps that don’t accurately simulate a realistic environment that uses range exhaust hoods that would normally be used while cooking, and is not representative of actual exposure conditions for measuring indoor air quality or respiratory matters.  And finally, the study did not include any emissions from the cooking process itself. Cooking that includes forms of high-temperature cooking is the chief source of concern for indoor air quality for various pollutants such as particulate matter and volatile organic compounds. Ventilation is key for this very reason.

There are no documented risks to respiratory health from natural gas stoves from the regulatory and advisory agencies and organizations responsible for protecting residential consumer health and safety. The Federal Interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality, which is comprised of two dozen federal agencies led by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), routinely addresses indoor air quality issues of public importance and they have not identified natural gas cooking emissions as an issue concerning asthma or respiratory illness. Furthermore, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and EPA do not present gas ranges as a significant contributor to adverse air quality or health hazard in their technical or public information literature, guidance, or requirements. And a statistically sound study has confirmed that same point. “Cooking Fuels and Prevalence of Asthma: A Global Analysis of Phase Three of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC),” which analyzed 512,707 primary and secondary school children from 108 centers in 47 countries, concluded that there is “no evidence of an association between the use of gas as a cooking fuel and either asthma symptoms or asthma diagnosis.”

While some reports may vilify natural gas, residential natural gas accounts for only four percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and natural gas distribution system emissions have declined 69 percent since 1990. Furthermore, residential natural gas use for cooking produces less than 0.2 percent of total annual greenhouse gas emissions – far from being  number one on the target list for meaningful paths to emissions reduction. The industry is committed to advancing the environmental benefits of natural gas even further by investing in modernizing our systems a helping customers shrink their own carbon footprints through energy efficiency improvements. 

There is no question that climate change is the defining challenge of our time, but we cannot fall victim to inflammatory headlines and misleading research that prey on emotion over fact. Americans love natural gas and the affordable, reliable and clean benefits it delivers for families and businesses. A commitment to safety is at the core of what the industry does, and we will continue to innovate and advance efforts to help ensure the safe delivery of cleaner and more affordable energy to the Americans who rely on it every day. 

To work towards a clean energy future in earnest, we must all come to the table and focus on providing solutions, driving innovation, promoting statically sound research and basing public policy decisions on science. The natural gas industry is driving solutions today and we have 

 

The Editors at RealClearEnergy. 

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released new guidance on best practices to improve indoor air quality (IAQ) as part of the administration’s overall pandemic response plan for combating COVID-19.

Called the “Clean Air in Buildings Challenge,” the guidance advises, “[b]uilding owners and operators should engage experts, facilities managers, and others who are skilled, trained, and/or certified in HVAC work to develop and implement plans to improve IAQ and manage air flows.”

Recommended Best Practices

The guidance outlines the steps building owners and operators should take:

1. Create an action plan for clean indoor air in buildings that assesses indoor air quality, plans for upgrades and improvements, and includes HVAC inspections and maintenance. This involves first determining how clean outdoor air is brought into the building and distributed to all occupied spaces and understanding and documenting how the building’s HVAC systems work. The guidance recommends working with an HVAC expert to assess and inspect systems for ventilation, filtration, and air cleaning. The assessment should determine whether carbon dioxide monitors are needed, determine how much clean air (outdoor air + filtered HVAC recirculation air) is needed, measure air delivery for each room or space, and determine whether particular spaces need a different direction of air flow. Building owners or operators should have an HVAC expert verify the system is working properly through testing and create a preventive maintenance schedule, including filter replacements and upgrades or improvements as needed.

2. Optimize fresh air ventilation by bringing in and circulating clean outdoor air indoors. Ensure outdoor air is acceptably clean or is adequately filtered as it is brought into the building, run HVAC systems during all hours when the building is occupied and even for an hour or two after the building when the building is unoccupied to circulate fresh air, ensure exhaust fans in bathrooms are functioning and running when the building is occupied, increase the volume of clean, outdoor air at times of higher risk (e.g., at times of elevated risk of COVID-19), adjust HVAC settings while considering thermal comfort, humidity, outdoor air quality, and energy use, and, as much as possible, enable cross ventilation by opening windows and doors at opposite sides of the room or building. 

3. Enhance air filtration and cleaning using the central HVAC system and in-room air cleaning devices by installing MERV-13 air filters or the highest rated MERV filters the HVAC system can accommodate. Use portable air cleaners and consider using an upper room Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation system.

4. Communicate with building occupants to increase awareness about IAQ, commitment to improving IAQ, and solicit feedback and suggestions from building tenants.

According to the EPA, implementing these measures can reduce the risk of exposure to particles, aerosols, and other contaminants and improve the health of building occupants.

OSHA

Throughout the pandemic, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has provided guidance for mitigating COVID-19 in the workplace, which has included assessing, improving, and regularly maintaining HVAC systems. OSHA last updated its guidance on August 13, 2021.The OSHA website now states that the guidance will be updated soon.

In what is known in the safety world as the hierarchy of controls for managing safety and health hazards, engineering controls (such as ventilation systems) are the next best mitigation strategy if elimination or substitution of the hazard cannot be achieved.

The new EPA guidance is couched as a strategy for combatting COVID-19 and focuses on an engineering control that should exist in every building. It is not yet known how OSHA will view the EPA guidance. Given the importance of engineering controls to mitigating workplace safety and health hazards, OSHA may seek to rely on the EPA guidance for “industry knowledge” to support a violation under Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) 5(a)(1) general duty clause for any employer that is not attempting to mitigate COVID-19 by at least assessing its HVAC system. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the agency’s COVID-19 Vaccine-or-Test Emergency Temporary Standard and, in doing so, stated that, for most industries, COVID-19 is not an occupational hazard. As an agency whose mission is to help ensure the safety and health of workers, it is unsurprising that OSHA views that decision narrowly and does not read it to restrict its authority to enforce alleged COVID-19 violations under the general duty clause of the OSH Act.

Employers will have to watch closely for new and updated guidance from OSHA to align with other federal agency guidance on COVID-19 (such as from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and EPA).

If you have any workplace safety and health questions or need assistance with any other OSHA matters, please reach out to the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work or any member of our Workplace Safety and Health Practice Group.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

MILWAUKEE (CBS 58) — With spring comes budding flowers, trees and, unfortunately for people who suffer from allergies, it also brings pollen. 

Experts say the sneezing and itching may be starting earlier for some people. Although the pollen isn’t coming from trees here in SE Wisconsin yet, warm temperatures and winds have carried pollen and other allergens to Wisconsin already. 

Gary Steven is an allergist at Allergy Asthma & Sinus Center. Steven says he’s already tracked some tree and grass pollen in the air. 

Allergy season could begin here in Wisconsin as early as this weekend. That’s when allergy sufferers will really start to notice those symptoms, especially when they’re outside. 

“Allergies are additive, so the more things you’re allergic to the worse your symptoms are going to be,” said Steven. 

Steven says data shows the maximum pollen count is up 133 percent over the last 25 years. 

The reason is because warmer temperatures are causing trees to produce more pollen and for a longer time. 

“We’ve seen this in our own area. I’ve been sampling pollen since 1995, and over the last 25 years we’ve seen the tree pollen season extending by 17 days. it’s about 27percent longer than it was at the turn of the century,” said Steven.

The rising pollen count means it’s more important than ever to get yourself treated if you think you have allergies. 

According to the CDC, extreme rainfall and rising temperatures can also contribute to indoor air quality problems and stir up allergens inside.

19.2 million people were diagnosed with Hay Fever over the last 12 months, that’s an allergic reaction to pollen and more than 

With longer seasons and more pollen in the air, the CDC says more people are at risk. 

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released new guidance on best practices to improve indoor air quality (IAQ) as part of the administration’s overall pandemic response plan for combating COVID-19.

Called the “Clean Air in Buildings Challenge,” the guidance advises, “[b]uilding owners and operators should engage experts, facilities managers, and others who are skilled, trained, and/or certified in HVAC work to develop and implement plans to improve IAQ and manage air flows.”

Recommended Best Practices

The guidance outlines the steps building owners and operators should take:

1. Create an action plan for clean indoor air in buildings that assesses indoor air quality, plans for upgrades and improvements, and includes HVAC inspections and maintenance. This involves first determining how clean outdoor air is brought into the building and distributed to all occupied spaces and understanding and documenting how the building’s HVAC systems work. The guidance recommends working with an HVAC expert to assess and inspect systems for ventilation, filtration, and air cleaning. The assessment should determine whether carbon dioxide monitors are needed, determine how much clean air (outdoor air + filtered HVAC recirculation air) is needed, measure air delivery for each room or space, and determine whether particular spaces need a different direction of air flow. Building owners or operators should have an HVAC expert verify the system is working properly through testing and create a preventive maintenance schedule, including filter replacements and upgrades or improvements as needed.

2. Optimize fresh air ventilation by bringing in and circulating clean outdoor air indoors. Ensure outdoor air is acceptably clean or is adequately filtered as it is brought into the building, run HVAC systems during all hours when the building is occupied and even for an hour or two after the building when the building is unoccupied to circulate fresh air, ensure exhaust fans in bathrooms are functioning and running when the building is occupied, increase the volume of clean, outdoor air at times of higher risk (e.g., at times of elevated risk of COVID-19), adjust HVAC settings while considering thermal comfort, humidity, outdoor air quality, and energy use, and, as much as possible, enable cross ventilation by opening windows and doors at opposite sides of the room or building. 

3. Enhance air filtration and cleaning using the central HVAC system and in-room air cleaning devices by installing MERV-13 air filters or the highest rated MERV filters the HVAC system can accommodate. Use portable air cleaners and consider using an upper room Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation system.

4. Communicate with building occupants to increase awareness about IAQ, commitment to improving IAQ, and solicit feedback and suggestions from building tenants.

According to the EPA, implementing these measures can reduce the risk of exposure to particles, aerosols, and other contaminants and improve the health of building occupants.

OSHA

Throughout the pandemic, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has provided guidance for mitigating COVID-19 in the workplace, which has included assessing, improving, and regularly maintaining HVAC systems. OSHA last updated its guidance on August 13, 2021.The OSHA website now states that the guidance will be updated soon.

In what is known in the safety world as the hierarchy of controls for managing safety and health hazards, engineering controls (such as ventilation systems) are the next best mitigation strategy if elimination or substitution of the hazard cannot be achieved.

The new EPA guidance is couched as a strategy for combatting COVID-19 and focuses on an engineering control that should exist in every building. It is not yet known how OSHA will view the EPA guidance. Given the importance of engineering controls to mitigating workplace safety and health hazards, OSHA may seek to rely on the EPA guidance for “industry knowledge” to support a violation under Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) 5(a)(1) general duty clause for any employer that is not attempting to mitigate COVID-19 by at least assessing its HVAC system. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the agency’s COVID-19 Vaccine-or-Test Emergency Temporary Standard and, in doing so, stated that, for most industries, COVID-19 is not an occupational hazard. As an agency whose mission is to help ensure the safety and health of workers, it is unsurprising that OSHA views that decision narrowly and does not read it to restrict its authority to enforce alleged COVID-19 violations under the general duty clause of the OSH Act.

Employers will have to watch closely for new and updated guidance from OSHA to align with other federal agency guidance on COVID-19 (such as from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and EPA).

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Toyochem Co., Ltd., the polymers and coatings arm of Japan’s Toyo Ink Group, launched a new low-odor, low-VOC acrylic pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA), the Oribain EXK 21-046, for use in enclosed spaces such as vehicles and building interiors. EXK 21-046 PSAs not only demonstrate good bonds to metals, plastics, textiles and other substrates, but they are also are capable of reducing total volatile organic compounds (T-VOC), or the indoor air concentration of a mixture of multiple VOCs, to levels less than one-tenth of that of conventional products.

The new low-VOC acrylic PSAs also effectively reduce odor levels, resulting in the increased health and comfort of indoor occupants.

The demand for low-impact interior materials has become a global trend as VOC emission regulations tighten worldwide due to growing public and industry awareness of the importance of indoor air quality. VOCs are suspected to be one of the major causes of sick building syndrome and sensory irritation, so building interior materials made from low VOC-emitting materials are being used where possible.

In addition, the rise in electric vehicles and automated driving technology is expected to drive the demand for low-odor, low-VOC materials used in automobile interiors.

While our conventional PSAs clear the indoor VOC concentration guidelines set by the Japanese government, the newly developed EXK 21-046 system were able to dramatically reduce trace amounts of T-VOCs that remain in standard-type products and to improve air quality.

Toyochem research teams achieved this by developing a material that is not easily retained in the adhesive system and by applying our original polymerization and compounding technologies to better control viscoelasticity of the adhesive material. This results in a substantial reduction in T-VOC concentrations and lower odor intensity without compromising adhesive performance—a feat that had once been difficult to achieve.

—Nao Nakamura, general manager of Toyochem’s adhesives divisio

The EXK 21-046 PSA achieves T-VOC emissions rates of 18 µgC/g, substantially down from 310 µgC/g registered by Toyochem’s conventional PSAs. Moreover, the new PSA system realizes a 3.5 grade (clearly noticeable, but still not objectionable) on a 6-grade odor intensity scale, a reduction of 1.5 points from the typical 5 grade (very objectionable) recorded by the company’s standard-type products.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

MARSHALL — It’s been a year of changes for the former swimming pool facility at Marshall Middle School.

While not all the renovations are complete, a major part of the project — filling in the old pool — is finished.

“It’s falling into place nicely,” said Dion Caron, business services director at Marshall Public Schools.

The end goal for the old pool area will be to convert it into a home for both Marshall Public Schools and Marshall Community Services’ gymnastics programs, Caron said.

“We feel like it’s going to grow the program,” he said.

Last year, MPS started work to fill in the old pool and put a new concrete floor, new lighting and a new HVAC system in the room. New wall surfaces have been put in over the old tile on the walls. The pool facility already got a new roof a couple of years ago.

New paint and windows are planned to be installed this spring.

Caron said the large windows in the pool area are in their original frames from the 1960s, and are single-pane. They’ll be replaced with updated and better insulated windows.

Turning the former pool into a gymnastics facility will be a much better fit for holding competitions, Caron said. The district’s gymnastics equipment is currently in a smaller space at Marshall High School.

“Every time we have a meet, we need to move it” into the MHS gymnasium, Caron said. At the middle school location, that extra work won’t be necessary.

Caron said the pool renovation has an estimated cost of roughly $750,000.

“A majority of that is for the HVAC system being added to the pool area, which is being funded through a general obligation facility maintenance bond,” Caron said.

The bond covers indoor air quality projects at both MMS and Park Side Elementary.

The roofing portion of the pool renovations would be a larger portion of the total cost, Caron said. The roof portion of the project was funding through a four-year facility maintenance bond, which also funded re-roofing projects at MMS and Park Side.

“There was no tax impact to residential or commercial property and ag land owners actually saw a small decrease as it relates to this bond,” Caron said.

Other parts of the pool renovation costs, like filling in the pool, installing drywall and updating the windows, will be covered by long-term facilities maintenance funds, Caron said.

The swimming pool, which was original to the school building, hadn’t been used for around 17 years. As enrollment grew at MPS in recent years, the school district put forward ideas to renovate the space for other purposes. A proposal to turn the old pool area into a multipurpose room was part of a failed 2017 building referendum.

Caron said there’s still a need for space at MMS, but with the completion of building additions at Park Side, it’s not necessarily classroom space that’s in short supply. When the Early Childhood department moved to Park Side, it freed up a few existing rooms at the middle school.

“Where we’re running out of space is physical education and recess,” Caron said. The renovated pool area could be used during the day for PE classes or possibly indoor recess, he said.

Today’s breaking news and more in your inbox

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Many people, including patients with diabetes and their health care providers, strongly adhere to ideas and accepted truths about diabetes and diabetic retinopathy (DR) that are not entirely based in scientific fact. By definition, truisms are statements so obviously true or self-evident that they deserve little attention, serve as a rhetorical device, eg, if the sun has not risen, it must be night and daylight will return.

Their truth, however, depends on specific factual assumptions, eg, the sun has not vanished forever by cosmological or supernatural means, observers are not wearing a blackout cloak and otherwise have the capacity to detect the sun’s rising, etc.

In philosophy, truisms refer to factual statements that the overwhelming majority of humans believe to be true and do not require fidelity with reality.1 Precisely for this reason, truisms may serve as instruments of both power and deception.

Here, I will attempt to convincingly dispense with at least some of this diabetes flapdoodle.

Related: RGX-314 clinical program: second pivotal trial to begin

UNTRUISM #1: Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a lifestyle disease attributable to poor patient choices.

We know that excess consumption of highly refined carbohydrates and processed fats contributes to abdominal obesity that drives insulin resistance underlying T2DM.2 However, there are a myriad of other nonlifestyle factors that are causally linked to T2DM, including:

• genetic influences (eg, alteration of mitochondrial DNA in mothers with diabetes that modulates transmission to offspring)3;
• particulate air pollution causing complement system activation, infl ammation, and insulin resistance, leading to T2DM, rates of which are significantly higher in residential proximity to traffic density4,5;
• increased ambient indoor air temperatures (causally linked to T2DM)6;
• communities and workplaces that are engineered to reduce the need for walking/ standing/movement7;
• hypothalamic insulin resistance that drives insatiable hunger despite the stomach being full8,9;
• widespread environmental contamination with obesogenic, endocrine-disrupting contaminants like pesticides, and small-particle plastics that leach into food and water supplies10;
• high prevalence of material inequality and food insecurity in even the wealthiest nations (a predicament 80% more common in diabetes and 240% more common in those with DR)11 that fuels consumption of low-cost, high-sugar/ high-calorie foods with low nutrient density as well as production of stress hormones causally linked to T2DM12;
• increased light exposure prior to sleep—from both indoor LED screen use and outside sources—that negatively affects sleep quality and insulin sensitivity13; and excess antibiotic use reducing intestinal microbiome diversity that modulates insulin sensitivity, thereby increasing diabetes risk.14

Nearly half of American adults have diabetes or prediabetes.15 It’s time to recognize that the world we have created promotes development of both disorders, irrespective of “personal choice” (see Figure 1).

Related: Open your eyes: diabetes of the eye

UNTRUISM #2: Diabetes is like pregnancy—you either have it or you don’t.

This is patent baloney and inconsistent with the gradual pathogenesis of many diseases. There is a long, continuous dysglycemic road on the way to developing diabetes. Insulin response in those with normal blood glucose who subsequently develop T2DM is elevated years before meeting diagnostic thresholds.16

Glucose thresholds for diagnosing diabetes are, in fact, somewhat arbitrary and rates of cardiovascular and microvascular complications (ie, retinopathy) are signifi cantly higher in people with prediabetes having glucose levels that fall below these thresholds.17

Remission of T2DM with bariatric surgery and fasting regimes also vitiates against the view that diabetes is all or nothing. A prominent prediabetes researcher presenting at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meeting 2021 recently quipped that “prediabetes, simply, is an early stage of diabetes.”18 Patients can, in fact, have a “touch” of diabetes just like they can have preperimetric glaucoma or high-risk macular drusen with good visual acuity.

Related: Optic disk swelling in an asymptomatic patient with diabetes

UNTRUISM #3: Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measures patients’ average blood glucose levels.

This one is half true. It has been shown that patients with the same HbA1c values may have significantly dissimilar mean blood glucose levels when assessed by validated continuous glucose monitoring systems. For example, a patient with an HBA1c level of 9% may have a better mean glucose than a patient with an HBA1c of 7%.19 High HbA1c is defi nitely a risk factor for development of microvascular complications and is related to mean glucose levels, but it is not the gold standard we once believed it to be.

UNTRUISM #4: A patient’s current HbA1c reflects their risk for DR incidence and progression.

HbA1c is merely a snapshot—a less-than-perfect one, given No. 3 above—of glycemic status over a 60- to 90-day period. Multiple randomized clinical trials have shown that long-term glycemic control, especially in the fi rst 10 years, has more impact on the development of DR than current control.20

This phenomenon, called metabolic memory (see “Mitigate diabetic retinopathy with early improved glucose control” in the January 2022 issue of Optometry Times) means eye doctors should review patients’ lifetime history of metabolic control, including asking, “What was your A1c test result when you were fi rst diagnosed with diabetes and what has it been since then?”

Ideally, patients will also have access to their glucose time-in-range (TIR; percentage of time glucose values range between 70 and 180 mg/dl) and time-above-range (TAR) via CGMS, values that predict diabetic retinopathy independently of HbA1c.21

Related: Central serous retinopathy is not a benign disease

UNTRUISM #5: Eye doctors should base decisions to refer and treat vision threatening DR (severe NPDR, PDR and DME) on patients’ current HbA1c because patients with excellent control are unlikely to progress or experience vision loss.

Posthoc analysis of the PANORAMA trial (NCT02718326), which randomized patients with moderately severe or severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) without diabetic macular edema (DME) to either observation (usual care) or injections of aflibercept for 100 weeks, showed that patients with “good” glycemic control at study entrance were slightly more likely to progress to proliferative disease or DME than were patients with worse glucose control.22

Multiple patients who progressed to NPDR/ DME in this trial had HbA1c levels < 6.5% at study entrance. The same lack of protection was also found with respect to diabetes duration and body mass index (ie, neither low/ high BMI nor shorter/longer duration of diabetes protected against development of PDR/ DME in this cohort. This may be a reflection of long-term glucose levels (metabolic memory), the inadequacies of A1c, and/or other factors that have yet to be determined. This means that any patient with more than moderate NPDR should be considered for anti-VEGF therapy. The horse is already out of the barn.

These are a few of the most important fallacies that pervade our diabetes consciousness. Others include the following:

• Clinical examination by retina specialists accurately stages DR severity in all cases.
• Only obese patients develop T2DM.
• All patients with long-term diabetes will ultimately develop sight-threatening DR.Patients who experience diabetes-related vision loss have only themselves to blame.
• Dilated retinal exams are no longer important with the use of ultrawide-fi eld retinal imaging.
• ODs are in no position to critically evaluate the overall diabetes treatment plan.

All of these, like what precedes them, are partial or total nonsense, baloney, balderdash, malarkey, moonshine, and flapdoodle. Don’t be duped. Tell a friend.

More by Dr. Chous: Mitigate diabetic retinopathy with early improved glucose control

References

1. Oxford English Dictionary. Truisms. Accessed January 19, 2022. https:// www.oed.com/

2. McEvoy CT, Cardwell CR, Woodside JV, Young IS, Hunter SJ, McKinley

MC. A posteriori dietary patterns are related to risk of type 2 diabetes: findings from a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014;114(11):1759-75.e4. doi:10.1016/j.jand.2014.05.001

3. Zheng, LD, Linarelli LE, Liu L, et al. Insulin resistance is associated with epigenetic and genetic regulation of mitochondrial DNA in obese humans. Clin Epigenetics. 2015;7(1)60. doi:10.1186/s13148-015-0093-1

4. Yang M, Cheng H, Shen C, et al. Effects of long-term exposure to air pollution on the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2020;27(1):798-811. doi:10.1007/ s11356-019-06824-1

5. Zhao Z, Lin F, Wang B, Cao Y, Hou X, Wang Y. Residential proximity to major roadways and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;14(1):3. doi:10.3390/ijerph14010003

6. Speakman J, Heidari-Bakavoli S. Type 2 diabetes, but not obesity, prevalence is positively associated with ambient temperature. Sci Rep. 2016;6:30409. doi:10.1038/srep30409

7. Hamilton MT, Hamilton DG, Zderic TW. Sedentary behavior as a mediator of type 2 diabetes. Med Sport Sci. 2014;60:11-26. doi:10.1159/000357332

8. Kullmann S, Valenta V, Wagner R, et al. Brain insulin sensitivity is linked to adiposity and body fat distribution. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):1841. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15686-y

9. Isganaitis E, Lustig RH. Fast food, central nervous system insulin resistance, and obesity. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2005;25(12):2451- 2462. doi:10.1161/01.ATV.0000186208.06964.91

10. Kumar M, Sarma DK, Shubham S, et al. Environmental endocrinedisrupting chemical exposure: role in non-communicable diseases. Front Public Health. 2020;8:553850. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.553850

11. Kirby JB, Bernard D, Liang L. The prevalence of food insecurity is highest among Americans for whom diet Is most critical to health. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(6):e131-e132. doi:10.2337/dc20-3116

12. Berm dez-Mill n A, Wagner JA, Feinn RS, et al. Inflammation and stress biomarkers mediate the association between household food insecurity and insulin resistance among Latinos with type 2 diabetes. J Nutr. 2019;149(6):982-988. doi:10.1093/jn/nxz021

13. Nagai N, Ayaki M, Yanagawa T, et al. Suppression of blue light at night ameliorates metabolic abnormalities by controlling circadian rhythms. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2019;60(12):3786-3793. doi:10.1167/iovs.19- 27195

14. Yuan J, Hu YJ, Zheng J, et al. Long-term use of antibiotics and risk of type 2 diabetes in women: a prospective cohort study. Int J Epidemiol. 202049(5):1572-1581. doi:10.1093/ije/dyaa122

15. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report 2020. Reviewed August 28, 2020. Accessed January 19, 2022. www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/index.html

16. Sagesaka H, Sato Y, Someya Y, et al. Type 2 diabetes: when does it start? J Endocr Soc. 2018;2(5):476-484. doi:10.1210/js.2018-00071

17. Baranowska-Jurkun A, Matuszewski W, Bandurska-Stankiewicz E. Chronic microvascular complications in prediabetic states-an overview. J Clin Med. 2020 Oct;9(10):3289. doi:10.3390/jcm9103289

18. Sehauser C. Prediabetes: Does It Really Matter? Paper presented at the EASD Prediabetes Symposium; September 30, 2021.

19. Beck RW, Connor CG, Mullen DM, Wesley DM, Bergenstal RM. The fallacy of average: how using HbA1c alone to assess glycemic control can be misleading. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(8):994-999. doi: 10.2337/dc17- 0636

20. Zhang L, Chen B, Tang L. Metabolic memory: mechanisms and implications for diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;96(3):286-293. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2011.12.006

21. Gabbay MAL, Rodacki M, Calliari LE, et al. Time in range: a new parameter to evaluate blood glucose control in patients with diabetes. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2020;12:22. doi:10.1186/s13098-020-00529-z

22. Brown DM, Wykoff CC, Boyer D, et al. Evaluation of intravitreal aflibercept for the treatment of severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy: results from the PANORAMA randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021;139(9):946-955. doi:10.1001/ jamaophthalmol.2021.2809

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here