In recent years, algorithmic management (ALMA) systems have spread rapidly from platform work to more traditional sectors such as logistics, retail, and healthcare (1, 2). Defined as “the use of complex digital systems or AI [artificial intelligence] to manage workers” (3) and encompassing the semi- and fully automated execution of managerial functions such as scheduling, goal setting, and performance evaluation (4), ALMA is profoundly reshaping how work is organized and monitored. Building on recent discussions in this journal on digitalization and occupational health (eg, 5), this editorial examines how ALMA is transforming working conditions and power dynamics and considers its implications for workers’ health and well-being in changing work environments. A review of the literature up to 2022 (6) synthesized emerging evidence on how ALMA affects job quality and worker health in platform work, highlighting psychosocial risks such as intensified workload, irregular and unpredictable working hours with unpaid waiting times, reduced decision authority, and social isolation. In other words, ALMA can recalibrate the balance between job demands and resources in ways that heighten psychosocial risks. Examined in the light of established models of psychosocial risk (7) – such as the Job Demands–Resources model (8, 9), the Job Demand–Control–Support model (10,11), and the Effort–Reward Imbalance model (12,13) – these prior findings suggest that ALMA can create conditions that trigger classic risk pathways in which job demands exceed available resources, leading to stress, burnout, and related health outcomes. However, ALMA is not inherently detrimental. A growing body of research emphasizes that ALMA is not just a technical system, but a socio-technical process shaped by organizational contexts and human decisions (1, 4, 14). Thus, ALMA`s implications for work and workers depend not only on technical features but also, for instance, how and for what purpose the systems are used. When designed with transparency, fairness, and the opportunity for human influence over the system (4), the harmful effects of ALMA might be mitigated. Some researchers have even underscored the dual effect of ALMA, noting that algorithmic systems can both constrain and enable autonomy and value to workers depending on their design (15). However, evidence for positive outcomes remains limited and largely theoretical (4). While some studies have pointed to potential benefits for workers, such as increased flexibility in deciding working hours, these are often accompanied by new forms of control (16). This editorial builds on a structured (non-systematic) literature review conducted within the PEROSH network (3), which followed a systematic search process and was visualized according to PRISMA 2020 reporting principles (17). The review synthesized findings from 39 studies (published 2022–2024) on the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) implications of ALMA, covering both traditional and platform work. While the resulting report itself was not peer-reviewed, it draws exclusively from high-quality empirical sources (33 peer-reviewed scientific studies and 6 grey literature reports) and was developed by a team of researchers across multiple European institutions (3). Based on the review, we argue that ALMA is not merely a digital enhancement of existing managerial practices. Rather, it constitutes a novel form of work organization that shifts managerial decision-making from humans to algorithms, thereby reshaping the psychosocial work environment and redistributing power, control, and responsibility. The following sections summarize the key findings of our review, discuss their implications for policy and practice, and outline research priorities to ensure that ALMA supports rather than undermines workers’ health and well-being. Key findings of the review The ALMA-AI project’s review indicated that the use of ALMA systems frequently leads to excessive job demands while simultaneously reducing key job resources needed to manage those demands. This imbalance shapes working conditions in ways that heighten psychosocial pressures and increase the risk of adverse OSH outcomes. In the ALMA-AI report, these patterns were identified and subsequently structured into both quantitative and qualitative studies, spanning across platform work and traditional workplaces. Intensification of job demands Quantitative analyses conducted in platform work settings consistently show that ALMA systems generate psychosocial – particularly time – pressures that significantly elevate work-related stress levels (eg, 18–21). Time pressure as a job demand was also referred to in qualitative studies that identified excessive workloads as a recurrent feature of ALMA across various platform sectors (eg, 22, 23). In some accounts, workers even described how these heightened demands made them feel “exploited” (24). Similar findings were highlighted in an ILO report, where the intensification of work appeared to be directly linked to the use of monitoring systems (25). Depletion of job resources The review showed that the negative impact of ALMA on OSH is often exacerbated when these systems undermine key job resources; a pattern observed particularly when ALMA is used as a control mechanism. Such effects include reduced autonomy (26) and diminished social support, manifested for instance as limited time to interact with co-workers (25). ALMA often imposes standardized workflows, reducing opportunities for worker discretion (27). The loss of autonomy is especially pronounced when algorithms are perceived as opaque (26) or used to impose strictly timed or closely monitored tasks (28). Some of the reviewed studies also reported that workers frequently feel excluded from decision-making processes surrounding the introduction and use of ALMA systems (eg, 25). Empirical evidence from large-scale surveys In addition to peer-reviewed studies, the review integrated findings from major institutional reports based on large, representative samples. The EU-OSHA report (29) drew on OSH Pulse survey data covering 27 250 workers across the EU. The results suggest that each one-unit increase in ALMA intensity was associated with a 21% rise in psychosocial risks and a 16.5% increase in health issues. Similarly, a Foundation for European Progressive Studies 2023 survey of 5141 workers in Nordic countries (30) found that intensive use of ALMA nearly doubled stress levels compared with workplaces without ALMA. Worker involvement and transparency as mitigation strategies Another key finding of the review was the importance of potential “moderators” that can buffer the negative effects of ALMA. Two strategies appeared: worker involvement and transparency. In terms of worker involvement, collective worker representation has been effective in negotiating limits on algorithmic control, protecting worker privacy, and discretion (31). Participatory approaches, such as co-design and collective bargaining, can help ensure worker influence in the implementation of ALMA, supporting autonomy and trust (30). While not as impactful as direct involvement, transparency also plays a key role in mitigating the negative effects of ALMA. Clearly communicating how algorithms function and how decisions are made can help maintain job satisfaction, motivation, and trust (30). Transparency also further enhances perceptions of fairness, particularly in platform work settings (21). These two strategies are well-established in OSH practice and remain vital as algorithmic systems evolve. Research and methodological implications The findings of the review conducted in the ALMA-AI project underscore that ALMA systems often create an imbalance between job demands and available job resources, contributing significantly to psychosocial risks and negative OSH outcomes. While worker participation and transparency can help mitigate these effects, the novelty and complexity of ALMA call for continuous research, adaptive regulation, and collaboration across stakeholders. Future research should focus on effective strategies to protect OSH under ALMA, with particular attention to moderating factors such as worker participation, transparency, and the broader socio-technical context. Longitudinal studies are particularly needed to assess the long-term effects of ALMA and capture adaptation processes over time. A key methodological challenge concerns the lack of standardized and validated tools for assessing ALMA intensity, functions, and impacts, particularly in traditional workplaces. Existing instruments, such as the Algorithmic Management Questionnaire (AMQ) (32) provide a valuable foundation for measuring ALMA exposure and its OSH implications. However, a universally accepted methodology for internal risk assessment is still lacking. The AMQ requires further validation, translation, and adaptation across countries, sectors, and employment types. Some items developed for platform work, such as those related to compensation or job termination, may be less relevant in traditional organizations, whereas new dimensions, like algorithmic task allocation, may have significant psychosocial relevance. Developing robust and context-sensitive assessment tools capable of capturing the intensity, functions, and uses of ALMA systems and related practices is a fundamental research priority. Such tools would support both scientific understanding and policy development by providing a clearer basis for practice-oriented regulation and workplace risk assessment. Importantly, future studies should account for differences between platform and traditional workplaces, where ALMA systems are embedded within existing managerial structures and practices (1). Continued research is essential to refine and expand measures that safeguard workers’ rights and well-being in increasingly digital workplaces, ensuring that ALMA systems align with principles of health, safety, and fundamental rights such as privacy, equality, and non-discrimination. Policy and practice implications The findings of the ALMA-AI review (3), together with prior research (6), demonstrate that ALMA fundamentally reshapes power relations at work, with control shifting increasingly from workers to employers and platform operators. Of particular concern is the growing risk of psychosocial hazards. These risks often remain obscured, as ALMA systems may be perceived as objective or neutral due to their technical logic. In practice, however, these systems are designed for specific organizational purposes and reflect the values and assumptions of their developers and implementers. Software developers, therefore, represent an additional stakeholder group in OSH, as their design choices may consciously or unconsciously embed management logics. The impact of ALMA on workers ultimately depends on managerial choices and the broader organizational context. In many cases, employers and platform operators prioritize efficiency and profit, leading to intensified control over workers’ tasks and conditions (33, 34). This underscores the need for robust regulatory and organizational safeguards that ensure compliance with OSH standards and the protection of workers’ health and rights. A significant step in this direction has been taken with the adoption and forthcoming implementation of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act. The classification of AI systems used in worker management as “high risk” requires employers to conduct comprehensive assessments and mitigate potential impacts on OSH and fundamental rights. However, legal safeguards alone cannot address the complex organizational and psychosocial dynamics documented in empirical studies (eg, 4). OSH research therefore remains crucial in informing both regulation and workplace practice. From a policy and practice perspective, regulations should mandate OSH risk assessments for ALMA systems, whether or not they include AI. These assessments must safeguard privacy, equality, and non-discrimination, and ensure workers’ right to information and transparency in how such systems operate. Evidence from the ALMA-AI review shows that worker participation and transparency in algorithmic processes are decisive in mitigating negative impacts. Therefore, employers should adopt participatory design and consultation processes when introducing ALMA systems and ensure accountability in algorithmic decision-making. ALMA-related risks should also be incorporated into occupational risk management systems and complemented by training on psychosocial risk prevention. Finally, a coordinated European effort involving OSH institutions, researchers, policymakers, and social partners is essential to monitor and manage the psychosocial risks associated with ALMA. Such cooperation should ensure meaningful human oversight, strengthen transparency, and enhance workers’ capacity to engage in dialogue over system design and implementation. Acknowledgements The ALMA-AI project is a Partnership for European Research in Occupational Safety and Health (PEROSH) project (perosh.eu/project/alma-ai-project-exploring-the-occupational-health-and-safety-impact-of-algorithmic-management-ai-systems). Members of the project include more than those involved in this article. The project includes colleagues from multiple research organizations: Jorge Martín González (INSST, Spain); Marie Jelenko and Thomas Strobach (AUVA, Austria); Joanna Kamińska, Karolina Pawłowska-Cyprysiak and Katarzyna Hildt-Ciupińska (CIOP-PIB, Poland); Teppo Valtonen and Heidi Lahti (FIOH, Finland); Giuliana Buresti and Fabio Boccuni (INAIL, Italy); Benjamin Paty and Virginie Govaere (INRS, France); Jon Zubizarreta, Paula Lara and Denis Losada (INSST, Spain); Therese Kristine Dalsbø (STAMI, Norway); Elsbeth de Korte and Mairi Bowdler (TNO, The Netherlands). References 1. Baiocco S, Fernández-Macías E, Rani U, & Pesole A. The algorithmic management of work and its implications in different contexts. Seville: European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC); 2022. JRC Working Papers Series on Labor, Education and Technology, No. 2022/02. Available from https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC129749 2. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA). Artificial intelligence for worker management: An overview. EU-OSHA; 2022. Available from https://healthy-workplaces.osha.europa.eu/sites/hwc/files/hwc/publication/summary-artificial-inteligence-worker-management_en.pdf 3. Martín González J, Jelenko M, Strobach T, Kamińska J, Pawłowska K, Hildt K, et al. (2025). Algorithmic management and AI-based systems as a new form of work organisation: Psychosocial factors and implications for occupational safety and health. Partnership for European Research in Occupational Safety and Health (PEROSH); 2025. https://doi.org/10.23775/20250616 4. Parent-Rocheleau X, Parker SK. Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs. Hum Resour Manag Rev. 2022;32:100838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100838 5. De Moortel D, Turner MC, Arensman E, Nguyen ABVD, Gonzalez V. Improving health-promoting workplaces through interdisciplinary approaches. The example of WISEWORK-C, a cluster of five work and health projects within Horizon-Europe [editorial]. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2025;51:259–264. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4238 6. Vignola EF, Baron S, Abreu Plasencia E, Hussein M, Cohen N. Workers’ health under algorithmic management: Emerging findings and urgent research questions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20:1239. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021239 7. Boot CR, LaMontagne AD, Madsen IE. Fifty years of research on psychosocial working conditions and health: From promise to practice. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2024;50:395–405. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4180 8. Bakker AB, Demerouti E. The job demands-resources model: State of the art. J Manag Psychol. 2007;22:309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 9. Bakker AB, & Demerouti E. Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. J Occup Health Psychol. 2017;22:273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056 10. Karasek RA. Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Adm Sci Q, 1979;24:285–308. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392498 11. Theorell, T. The Demand Control Support Work Stress Model. In: Theorell T, editor. Handbook of Socioeconomic Determinants of Occupational Health. Cham: Springer; 2022. p 339–353. Handbook Series in Occupational Health Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31438-5_13 12. Siegrist J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. J Occup Health Psychol. 1996;1:27–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.27 13. Siegrist J. The effort–reward imbalance model. In: Cooper CL, Quick JC, editors. The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and practice. John Wiley & Sons; 2017. p 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118993811.ch2 14. Cameron L, Lamers L, Leicht-Deobald U, Lutz C, Meijerink J, Möhlmann M. Algorithmic management: Its implications for information systems research. Commun Assoc Inf Syst, 2023;52:556–574. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05221 15. Meijerink J, Bondarouk T. The duality of algorithmic management: Toward a research agenda on HRM algorithms, autonomy and value creation. Hum Resour Manag Rev. 2023;33:100876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100876 16. Rosenblat A, Stark L. (2016). Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: A case study of Uber’s drivers. Int J Commun. 2016;10:3758–3784. 17. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow, CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 18. Lu Y, Yang MM, Zhu J, Wang Y. Dark side of algorithmic management on platform worker behaviors: A mixed-method study. Hum Resour Manag. 2024;63:477–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22211 19. van Zoonen W, ter Hoeven C, Morgan R. Finding meaning in crowdwork: An analysis of algorithmic management, work characteristics, and meaningfulness. Inf Soc. 2023;39:322–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2023.2243262 20. van Zoonen W, Sivunen AE, Treem JW. Algorithmic management of crowdworkers: Implications for workers’ identity, belonging, and meaningfulness of work. Comput Hum Behav. 2024;152:108089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108089 21. Semujanga B, Parent-Rocheleau X. Time-based stress and procedural justice: Can transparency mitigate the effects of algorithmic compensation in gig work? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024;21:86. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21010086 22. Cañedo M, Allen-Perkins D. Andamiajes y derivas: La mediación algorítmica en la práctica de los riders. EMPIRIA. Revista de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales. 2023;59:103–130. https://doi.org/10.5944/empiria.59.2023.37940 23. Riesgo V. Entre el control y el consentimiento: De Braverman a Burawoy en el capitalismo de plataforma. Trabajar para Uber en España. RES. Revista Española de Sociología. 2023;32:a175. https://doi.org/10.22325/fes/res.2023.175 24. Zhang A, Boltz A, Wang CW, Lee MK. Algorithmic management reimagined for workers and by workers: Centering worker well-being in gig work. In: Barbosa S, Lampe C, Appert C, et al., editors. Proceedings of the 2022 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 2022. p 1–20, no.14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501866 25. Rani U, Pesole A, González I. Algorithmic Management practices in regular workplaces: Case studies in logistics and healthcare. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. JRC136063; 2024. Available from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC136063 26. Möhlmannn M, Alves de Lima Salge C, Marabelli M. Algorithm sensemaking: How platform workers make sense of algorithmic management. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2023;24:35–64. 27. Tuomi A, Jianu B, Roelofsen M, Ascenção MP. Riding against the algorithm: algorithmic management in on-demand food delivery. In: Ferrer-Rosell B, Massimo D, Berezina K, editors. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2023, ENTER 2023 eTourism Conference. Cham: Springer; 2023. p 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25752-0_3 28. Gillis D. Risks and opportunities of AI-based worker management systems in an automotive manufacturing plant in Belgium. Case Study. Bilbao: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work; 2024. 29. Pesole A. Surveillance and monitoring of remote workers: Implications for Occupational Safety and Health. Bilbao: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work; 2023. 30. Jensen M, Oosterwijk G, Nørgaard A. Computer in command: Consequences of algorithmic management for workers. Policy study. Foundation for European Progressive Studies; 2024. 31. Doellgast V, Wagner I, O’Brady S. Negotiating limits on algorithmic management in digitalised services: Cases from Germany and Norway. Transfer. 2023;29:105–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258922114304 32. Parent-Rocheleau X, Parker, SK, Bujold A, Gaudet M-C. Creation of the algorithmic management questionnaire: A six-phase scale development process. Hum Resour Manag. 2024;63:25–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22185 33. Kellogg KC, Valentine MA, Christin A. Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Acad Manag Ann. 2020;14:366–410. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174 34. Rosenblat A, Stark L. Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: A case study of Uber’s drivers. Int J Commun. 2016;10:3758–3784.
The article examines innovative technologies in social work within the employment sector and their significance for effectively addressing unemployment issues in modern conditions. The role of a favorable labor market situation is outlined, which serves as an important element of social security at various levels: individual, organizational, and governmental. Attention is focused on the political and economic challenges impacting the employment sector, particularly due to Russian aggression and military actions in Ukraine. The essence of state employment policy is revealed, defining employment as an activity that ensures the fulfillment of citizens' needs through income generation, and unemployment as a socio-economic phenomenon. It is determined that social work in the employment sector is a crucial tool for realizing the labor potential of the population and is aimed at achieving both short-term and strategic goals, including promoting productive employment and labor mobility. It is formulated that the technologization of social work is a necessary condition for enhancing the effectiveness of activities in the employment sector. It is established that social technologization, through the scientifically grounded use of methods and approaches, enables the anticipation of social changes and active influence on the labor market. Innovative technologies such as client profiling and case management social support are analyzed, which help reduce job search time and improve the quality of social services provided. The need for implementing social partnership as a mechanism for reconciling the interests of employees and employers is highlighted.
The article examines how issues of identity construction in Russian urban agglomerations are reflected in the Russian regional politicians’ discourse in mass media. The study concerns theoretical problems of identity construction and the role of regional government bodies in shaping the territorial identity of the population. The specificity of the Russian situation is the absence of governing bodies related to the agglomeration level in most urban agglomerations. The empirical basis of the study is the texts of subnational politicians posted on the official websites of regional government bodies: websites of governors and regional governments, official pages in the mass media. The empirical information on identity policy were collected from the Internet sources (official portals of regional executive authorities, media reports). Discourse analysis was carried out after monitoring social media materials (VKontakte web-pages of regional leaders). The article reflects five cases out of sixteen Russian ones related to the Ural and Siberian agglomerations with a megalopolis core. The empirical data cover the period from December 2022 to the end of 2023. The choice of the time period for analysis is determined by the fact that by this period the most significant factors influencing the policy of our state at present (the pandemic and the Special military operation) have already manifested themselves in full. It has been confirmed that the problems of agglomeration development in the public official subfederal discourse in most cases are reduced to economic problems; first of all, it concerns the development of industry, science (high technology), transport, and waste disposal. In all analyzed cases, insufficient attention was found out, paid to the role of the implemented socio-cultural projects of subfederal identity policy, and also distancing from the discussion of the problems of integration of labor migrants in the public space. Insignificant number of messages from representatives of the regional political and administrative elite about the socio-cultural meanings of the formed agglomerations can become a significant limitation of information support for the agglomeration development of modern contemporary Russia.
This research aims to analyse the variables that influence time-related underemployment in Türkiye. The sample was derived from the 2022 Household Labour Force Statistics microdataset from the Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). First, descriptive statistics were used to analyse the distribution of time-related underemployment across the sub-sample groups. For the difference analysis, the Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal– Wallis-H tests were applied. Finally, binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify the determinants of time-related underemployment. All the independent variables, which were categorised as individual, social, and work-related, were found to result in statistically significant differences between the sub-sample groups. Furthermore, the findings indicate that gender, age, level of education, marital status, proximity, region of residence, Social Security Institution (SSI) registration, and workplace situation variables are significant predictors of time-related underemployment. In contrast, the analysis revealed that household size did not emerge as a significant predictor. When considered collectively, these independent variables account for 19.2% of the variance in time-related underemployment risk.
Industrial relations, Social insurance. Social security. Pension
La obra, dirigida por Djamil Tony Kahale Carrillo, que nos presentan Alberto Ayala Sánchez, Concepción Morales Vállez, Djamil Tony Kahale Carrillo, Enrique Sanz Delgado, Francisco Javier Arrieta Idiakez, Isabel Mª Pérez Gázquez, María Salas Porras, Miriam Judit Gómez Romero, Pelayo Jardón Pardo de Santayana y Rafael García García con el título “Garantía y protección integral del Derecho a la libertad sexual y la erradicación de todas las violencias sexuales”, ha sido editado por Ediciones Laborum S.L.
Strategic planning plays an important role in the development of any state, and depending on changing conditions, both in the international arena and within the country itself, measures should be taken, develop a general concept, methodology, mechanism, involve labor resources for their development, to plan policy in a correct and balanced way, to reduce not only the harm from the crisis and other adverse conditions, but also to achieve socio-economic well-being and national security. And the key role in all this should be played by the state, which takes responsibility for the strategic decisions taken and national development.
The horticultural sector is important to the national economy registering an increase in both production volume and exports. This rate of increase in the volume of horticultural production was due to some competitive advantages, such as the geographical location, the potential and the advantage of relations with the European Union offered by the Association Agreement between the Republic of Moldova, the relatively cheap labor force, but also of the state through the implementation of the policy of subsidy. The purpose of the study is to carry out an analysis of the importance of the horticultural sector in the national economy of the Republic of Moldova, namely the analysis of opportunities for foreign trade in horticultural products, with a special focus on trade relations with the EU and the CIS. In order to achieve the purpose of the publication, a series of methods related to the researched theme were used, these being: generalization and synthesis of publications, the method of scientific deduction, the analytical method. The results of the research elucidated the current state of the horticultural sector, the trends of the national market, namely it recorded a significant increase in exports of horticultural products, especially in the European market, while exports to the CIS decreased. The Republic of Moldova presents significant competitive advantages, but also faces disadvantages. These findings emphasize the need for strategic interventions to strengthen the competitiveness of the horticultural sector, support the sustainable development of the sector.
ABSTRACT:The COVID-19 epidemic upended social and economic life in the United States. To reduce transmission, people altered their mobility and interpersonal contact, and state and local governments acted to induce social distancing through across-the-board policies. The epidemic and the subsequent social distancing response led to high unemployment and to efforts to reopen the economy using more-targeted virus mitigation policies.This paper makes five contributions to studying epidemic policy and mobility. First, we review COVID-19 research on mobility, labor markets, consumer behavior, and health. Second, we sketch a simple model of incentives and constraints facing individuals. Third, we propose a typology of government social distancing policies. Fourth, we review new databases measuring cellular mobility and contact. Fifth, we present regression evidence to help disentangle private versus policy-induced changes in mobility.During the shutdown phase, large declines in mobility occurred before states adopted stay-at-home (SAH) mandates and in states that never adopted them, suggesting that much of the decline was a private response to the risk of infection. Similarly, in the reopening phase mobility increased rapidly, mostly preceding official state reopenings, with policies explaining almost none of the increase.
Debido a las nuevas tecnologías cada vez es más frecuente en el entorno del trabajo la aportación de pruebas de origen digital o electrónico con la finalidad de acreditar determinados hechos o incumplimientos laborales cometidos tanto por los empleados como por las propias empresas (prueba digital).
Sin embargo, se suscita la pregunta o incógnita acerca de la base legal suficiente para considerar estas pruebas como válidas o eficaces como medio de prueba en un juicio laboral, y en caso afirmativo, cuál será la forma correcta de aportar judicialmente estos documentos electrónicos para que adquieran pleno valor probatorio en el proceso judicial. La STSJ de las Islas Canarias de 11/18/2022 plantea la posibilidad de comunicar la finalización del contrato al trabajador a través de un correo electrónico y por lo tanto, en la práctica, plantea la validez de dicho medio como prueba en el juicio social.
The minimum wage has increased in multiple states over the past three decades. Research has focused on effects on labor supply, but very little is known about how the minimum wage affects health, including children's health. We address this knowledge gap and provide an investigation focused on examining the impact of the effective state minimum wage rate on infant health. Using data on the entire universe of births in the US over 25 years, we find that an increase in the minimum wage is associated with an increase in birth weight driven by increased gestational length and fetal growth rate. The effect size is meaningful and plausible. We also find evidence of an increase in prenatal care use and a decline in smoking during pregnancy, which are some channels through which minimum wage can affect infant health. Labor market policies that enhance wages can thus affect wellbeing in broader ways, and such health effects should enter into any cost-benefit calculus of such policies.
We present two newdatabases we have constructed to explore the electoral consequences of structural economic policy reforms. One database measures reforms in domestic finance, external finance, trade, product, and labor markets covering 90 advanced and developing economies from 1973 to 2014. The other chronicles the timing and results of national elections. We find that liberalizing reforms are associated with economic benefits that accrue only gradually over time. Because of this delay, liberalizing reforms are costly to democratic incumbents when they are implemented close to elections. Electoral outcomes also depend on the state of the economy: reforms are penalized during contractions but are often rewarded in expansions.
Research on occupational causes of cancer has identified 47 known (Group 1) agents associated with 23 types of cancer through 2017, an increase from 28 agents in 2004 (1, 2). Occupational agents include chemicals and chemical mixtures; radiation and radionuclides; airborne particles and complex mixtures; and metals and metal compounds. The global burden of cancer due to 14 of the Group 1 agents was estimated to total 349 000 [95% uncertainty interval (UI) 269 000–427 000] deaths in 2016, or 3.9% (95% UI 3.2–4.6%) of all cancer deaths, including 299 998 or 17.6% (95% UI 13.8–21.3%) of lung cancer deaths (3). There are also exposures in various occupations, industries, or processes classified as Group 1 where the causal agent is not necessarily identified. In 2022, occupational exposure as a firefighter was most recently classified in Group 1, with sufficient evidence among humans for mesothelioma and bladder cancer, and limited evidence for other cancers (4). Despite achievements in identifying occupational causes of cancer, a range of research needs remain, including identifying additional cancer sites for Group 1 agents and more definitive studies for exposures where the evidence among humans remains limited or inadequate (1, 5–7). There may be outstanding methodological concerns or findings that are inconsistent or of poor quality or informativeness. Research recommendations to address classification uncertainties for 20 priority occupational agents have been detailed (8). They include conducting new epidemiological studies in highly exposed occupations or populations, improving (quantitative) exposure assessment including through biomarkers of exposure, enhancing statistical power through extended follow-up or pooled studies, and furthering human mechanistic studies. High quality human mechanistic evidence can provide valuable information when epidemiology studies are not available or feasible (5). A 2019 Advisory Group considered 170 different agents in terms of their suitability for (re-)evaluation with a range of chemical, metal, or complex exposures of relevance for occupational settings prioritized based on new human epidemiology, mechanistic and/or cancer bioassay data (9). There have been calls to update existing cohorts when valuable follow-up time has accrued allowing investigation of the full potential impact of exposures on health (10). There is a longstanding need for occupational epidemiological and exposure assessment studies in low- and middle-income countries, where there are often few or no available studies and exposure levels maybe higher (11–14). There may also be differences in working conditions, exposure patterns, and worker protections (15, 16). Research challenges include declines in participation rates, funding, and research infrastructures (1, 17–19). In parallel, epidemiological research has innovated over time to comprise increasingly larger-scale prospective cohort studies and consortia, use of electronic data linkage, causal inference methods and triangulation of evidence, reinforcing the ongoing utility of observational research methods (20). The recent COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the need for a global perspective in epidemiological research, multidisciplinarity, and broadening perspectives regarding fundamental underlying determinants of health (21, 22). There have also been calls for greater equity and inclusiveness in health research, both in Europe, and worldwide (23, 24). Efforts to stimulate future research and investment in occupation and cancer may benefit from the use of new rapidly evolving research methods, closer alignment with global public health priorities, and strengthening of international partnerships supporting excellence and inclusiveness in research. For example, a range of methodological advancements have emerged from application of exposome concepts in epidemiology. In Europe, birth cohort consortia seeking to characterize the early-life exposome, as well as other efforts, have driven much innovation (25, 26). The exposome concept was proposed in 2005 to stimulate investment to better characterize environmental exposures throughout the lifecourse using novel technologies, offering a complementary perspective to that of the genome (27). Although occupational exposure has previously not been emphasized, research in the internal and external occupational exposome is now beginning to emerge (28). A range of statistical methods for analysis of multiple correlated exposures have advanced (29). Extended Bayesian profile regression mixture (PRM) models have been used to examine multiple highly correlated ionizing radiation exposures for lung cancer risk among miners (30). An exposome-wide association study examined a range of personal and occupational factors in B-cell lymphoma, suggesting that single-factor research approaches maybe suboptimal for new disease insights (31). There are exposome technologies for personal monitoring of workers (28, 32) and other novel research methods including natural language processing and text mining (33, 34), automated network assembly approaches to summarizing literature (35), efforts to combine epidemiological data with those from other evidence streams (36), and new technologies to facilitate secure decentralized pooled analyses of data (37). However, there is an ongoing need for continued efforts to better characterize the occupational and corresponding non-occupational exposome over the lifecourse. Research priorities include establishing new cohort studies with appropriate biosample collection, improved questionnaire and personal monitoring data, increasing multidisciplinary collaboration to utilize innovative data and methods, and integrating genetic data in exposome studies for causal inference (38-40). At the same time, careful consideration of the policy relevance of exposome studies remains of importance (41), as are continued efforts in conventional epidemiological case–control and cohort studies in occupation and cancer (8). Occupational studies examining exposures of relevance for the general population may favor greater investment (42). There are environmental exposure routes for occupational agents, bystander or spousal exposure to occupational agents, and potential transgenerational health effects (43–45). Birth cohorts may represent a typically underused resource for research in occupation and health (46). Principles for safeguarding integrity in environmental and occupational research have also been outlined (47). Research on occupation and cancer may benefit from closer alignment with recent high-profile initiatives on related topics as well as with global public health priorities. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals note the need for decent work (48). The EU Strategic Framework on Health and Safety at Work describes the elimination of work-related deaths by 2030 and reduced illness through improved data collection, updated rules on hazardous substances, including those of relevance for renewable energy technologies (ie, lead, cobalt) or of asbestos exposure in building renovations for greening, increased health literacy at work, and adapting working conditions for patients (49). A large-scale survey of worker exposure to cancer risk factors is being implemented in Europe to collect standardized data across different European countries (50). The Health Environment Agenda for Europe project defined priority areas for research on rapidly changing work and employment conditions, climate change and worker health, working time and long working hours, ageing workers, and neglected work-related diseases (51). Rapidly changing work conditions were exemplified during the COVID-19 pandemic, with potential direct or indirect effects on health and cancer. Shifts in overall global cancer research focus were also described (52). Increasing unemployment and economic downturns in high- and middle-income countries have been associated with increased cancer mortality for treatable cancers, with less access to healthcare underlying findings (53). There is also increasing interest in precarious employment and potential direct or indirect impacts on health and quality of life (54). Public health efforts directed at catching-up in cancer screening and on improving health systems and public health literacy following the COVID-19 pandemic may offer opportunities to advance cancer control and improved health literacy at work (55, 56). Further, there may greater opportunities for strengthened clinical partnerships for occupational epidemiologists. For example, dramatic gains in survival due to early detection have been demonstrated for lung cancer (57). However, occupational (or environmental) exposures are not systematically incorporated into screening algorithms, and further research and collaboration with clinical partners is warranted (58–61). The potential importance of climate change in cancer, including occupation and cancer, may also not be fully understood (62, 63). Climate change may relate to increasing exposure to environmental or occupational carcinogens, including air pollution, adverse dietary exposures, changes in physical activity levels, ultraviolet radiation, water pollution, infections, and parasites due to extreme weather events, wildfires (4), heat, sea-level rise, and changes in land-use. There may also be disruptions in cancer care. Climate change may further exacerbate existing socioeconomic inequities, and social determinants of cancer. Increasing occupational heat stress is related to acute and chronic health effects as well as reduced productivity (64–66). Studies of occupational heat exposure and cancer risk are beginning to emerge (67). Interventions to jointly address climate change and disease prevention, including cancer, have been proposed (68). There are also new agents rapidly entering the workplace where little is known regarding their carcinogenicity to humans. A planetary health perspective suggests that humanity is outside the safe operating space of the planetary boundary, with increasing production and release of chemical industry production exceeding the ability to conduct safety assessments (69). Lastly, strengthened international partnerships are critical for future advances in occupational cancer research. Efforts in coordination of European birth cohort studies, and later occupational cohort studies, have led to major advancements in research and inclusiveness (25, 26, 70, 71). Network funding initiatives provide valuable support and developed out of a recognized need to increase equitable access to funding and research infrastructures (72). A recent example is the OMEGA-NET COST Action, which sought to improve coordination and harmonization of European occupational cohort studies by connecting researchers through a range of research coordination and capacity building activities, with a particular focus on connecting researchers in traditionally less research-intensive countries (71). Online inventories of occupational cohort studies and exposure assessment tools were developed (73, 74) as were advancements in theoretical frameworks, consensus definitions and recommendations for future research on emerging topics in occupational health (54, 75, 76). The need for occupational epidemiological and exposure monitoring studies in low- and middle-income countries has long been recognized. Priorities for cancer research in low- and middle-income countries have recently been described as separate to those of high-income countries, and highlighted the need to reduce the burden of patients presenting with advanced-stage disease, primary prevention and early detection, and innovative and affordable technology in cancer control (77). Documenting and minimizing exposure to established occupational carcinogens is critical to prioritize interventions and prevent future cancer burden (11, 34, 78). Generating country-specific evidence for effective prevention may be helpful in this regard (77). Research questions on cancers that are of local importance, using appropriate research methods for available infrastructure, and partnerships for mutually rewarding collaborations have been described (77, 79). However, cancer registry and infrastructure challenges have been outlined, including of poor-quality data and an absence of legal frameworks for cancer registration (19). International collaboration has had demonstrated impacts in research and capacity building, though sustained political and financial commitment is needed (16, 80, 81). The occupational epidemiology community has a great opportunity to promote new efforts in occupation and cancer while at the same time reducing inequalities in health and research. Acknowledgements Michelle C Turner is funded by a Ramón y Cajal fellowship (RYC-2017-01892) from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities and co-funded by the European Social Fund. ISGlobal acknowledges support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through the “Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa 2019-2023” Program (CEX2018-000806-S), and support from the Generalitat de Catalunya through the CERCA Program. References 1. Loomis D, Guha N, Hall AL, Straif K. Identifying occupational carcinogens: an update from the IARC Monographs. Occup Environ Med 2018;75:593-603. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2017-104944 2. Siemiatycki J, Richardson L, Straif K, Latreille B, Lakhani R, Campbell S, et al. Listing occupational carcinogens. Environ Health Perspect. 2004;112:1447-1459. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7047 3. GBD 2016 Occupational Carcinogens Collaborators. Global and regional burden of cancer in 2016 arising from occupational exposure to selected carcinogens: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Occup Environ Med 2020;77:151-159. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2019-106012 4. Demers PA, DeMarini DM, Fent KW, Glass DC, Hansen J, Adetona O, et al. Carcinogenicity of occupational exposure as a firefighter. Lancet Oncol 2022;23:985-986. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00390-4 5. IARC. Preamble to the IARC Monographs, amended January 2019. Available from: https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Preamble-2019.pdf. 6. Marant Micallef C, Shield KD, Baldi I, Charbotel B, Fervers B, Gilg Soit Ilg A, et al. Occupational exposures and cancer: a review of agents and relative risk estimates. Occup Environ Med 2018;75:604-614. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2017-104858 7. IARC. Agents Classified by the IARC Monographs, Volumes 1-132. Available from: https://monographs.iarc.who.int/agents-classified-by-the-iarc. 8. Ward EM, Schulte PA, Straif K, Hopf NB, Caldwell JC, Carreón T, et al. Research recommendations for selected IARC-classified agents. Environ Health Perspect 2010;118:1355-1362. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0901828 9. IARC Monographs Priorities Group. Advisory Group recommendations on priorities for the IARC Monographs. Lancet Oncol 2019;20:763-764. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30246-3 10. Vainio H, Weiderpass E. Importance of updating old cohorts for new findings. Occup Environ Med 2017;74:311-312. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2016-103981 11. Loomis D. Estimating the global burden of disease from occupational exposures. Occup Environ Med 2020;77:131-132. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2019-106349 12. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Outdoor air pollution. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans; Volume 109. 2015. Lyon, France. 13. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Some organophosphate insecticides and herbicides. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans; Volume 112. 2017. Lyon, France. 14. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Styrene, Styrene-7,8-oxide, and Quinoline. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans; Volume 121. 2019. Lyon, France. 15. Groß JV, Fritschi L, Erren TC. Shift work and cancer: more research needed from low and middle income countries. Occup Environ Med 2019;76:70. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2018-105457 16. Hosseini B, Hall AL, Zendehdel K, Kromhout H, Onyije FM, Moradzadeh R, et al. Occupational exposure to carcinogens and occupational epidemiological cancer studies in Iran: a review. Cancers 2121;13:3581. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13143581 17. Stayner TL, Collins JJ, Guo YL, Heederik D, Kogevinas M, Steenland K, et al. Challenges and opportunities for occupational epidemiology in the twenty-first century. Curr Environ Health Rep 2017;4:319-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-017-0154-z 18. Sweity S, Sutton C, Downe S, Balaam MC, McElvenny DM. Challenges to and facilitators of occupational epidemiology research in the UK. Health Policy 2020;124:772-780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.05.006 19. Ngwa W, Addai BW, Adewole I, Ainsworth V, Alaro J, Alatise OI, et al. Cancer in sub-Saharan Africa: a Lancet Oncology Commission. Lancet Oncol 2022;23:e251-e312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00720-8 20. McCullough LE, Maliniak ML, Amin AB, Baker JM, Baliashvili D, Barberio J, et al. Epidemiology beyond its limits. Sci Adv 2022;8:eabn3328. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn3328 21. No authors listed. How epidemiology has shaped the COVID pandemic. Nature 2021;589:491-492. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00183-z 22. Hinchliffe S, Manderson L, Moore M. Planetary healthy publics after COVID-19. Lancet Planet Health 2021;5:e230-e236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00050-4 23. Berner-Rodoreda A, Rehfuess EA, Klipstein-Grobusch K, Cobelens F, Raviglione M, Flahaut A, et al. Where is the ‘global’ in the Europèan Union’s health research and innovation agenta? BMJ Glob Health 2019;4:e001559. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001559 24. Gallo F, Seniori Costantini A, Puglisi MT, Barton N. Biomedical and health research: an analysis of country participation and research fields in the EU’s Horizon 2020. Eur J Epidemiol 2021;36:1209-1217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-020-00690-9 25. Vrijheid M, Slama R, Robinson O, Chatzi L, Coen M, van den Hazel P, et al. The human early-life exposome (HELIX): project rationale and design. Environ Health Perspect 2014;122:535-544. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307204 26. Vrijheid M, Basagaña X, Gonzalez JR, Jaddoe VWV, Jensen G, Keun HC, et al. Advancing tools for human early lifecourse exposome research and translation (ATHLETE): Project overview. Environ Epidemiol 2021;5:e166. https://doi.org/10.1097/EE9.0000000000000166 27. Wild CP. Complementing the genome with an “exposome”: the outstanding challenge of environmental exposure measurement in molecular epidemiology. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14(8):1847-1850. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0456 28. Pronk A, Loh M, Kuijpers E, Albin M, Selander J, Godderis L, et al. Applying the exposome concept to working-life health: The EU EPHOR project. Environ Epidemiol 2022 6:e185. https://doi.org/10.1097/EE9.0000000000000185 29. Maitre L, Guimbaud JB, Warembourg C, Güil-Oumrait N, Petrone PM, Chadeau-Hyam M,et al. State-of-the-art methods for exposure-health studies: Results from the exposome data challenge event. Environ Int 2022;168:107422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2022.107422 30. Belloni M, Laurent O, Guihenneuc C, Ancelet S. Bayesian profile regression to deal with multiple highly correlated exposures and a censored survival outcome. First application in ionizing radiation epidemiology. Front Public Health 2020;8:557006. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.557006 31. Hosnijeh FS, Casabonne D, Nieters A, Solans M, Naudin S, Ferrari P, et al. Association between anthropometry and lifestyle factors and risk of B-cell lymphoma: an exposome wide analysis. Int J Cancer 2021;148:2115-2128. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.33369 32. Kuijpers E, van Wel L, Loh M, Galea KS, Makris KC, Stierum R, et al. A Scoping Review of Technologies and Their Applicability for Exposome-Based Risk Assessment in the Oil and Gas Industry. Ann Work Expo Health 2021;65:1011-1028. https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxab039 33. Schoene AM, Basinas I, van Tongeren M, Ananiadou S. A Narrative Literature Review of Natural Language Processing Applied to the Occupational Exposome. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19:8544. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148544 34. Kromhout H, van Tongeren M, Peters CE, Hall AL. Commentary. Occup Environ Med 2020;77:513-514. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2020-106624 35. Scholten B, Guerrero Simon L, Krishnan S, Vermeulen R, Pronk A, Gyori BM, et al. Automated network assembly of mechanistic literature for informed evidence identification to support cancer risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 2022;130:37002. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9112 36. Scholten B, Portengen L, Pronk A, Stierum R, Downward GS, Vlaanderen J, et al. Estimation of the Exposure-Response Relation between Benzene and Acute Myeloid Leukemia by Combining Epidemiologic, Human Biomarker, and Animal Data. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022;31:751-757. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-21-0287 37. Marcon Y, Bishop T, Avraam D, Escriba-Montagut X, Ryser-Welch P, Wheater S, et al. Orchestrating privacy-protected big data analyses of data from different resources with R and DataSHIELD. PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17(3):e1008880 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008880 38. Avery CL, Green Howard A, Ballou AF, Buchanan VL, Collins JM, Downie CG, et al. Strengthening Causal Inference in Exposomics Research: Application of Genetic Data and Methods. Environ Health Perspect 2022;130:55001. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9098 39. Jia P, Lakerveld J, Wu J, Stein A, Root ED, Sabel CE, et al. Top 10 Research Priorities in Spatial Lifecourse Epidemiology. Environ Health Perspect 2019;127:74501. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP4868 40. Vineis P, Robinson O, Chadeau-Hyam M, Dehghan A, Mudway I, Dagnino S. What is new in the exposome? Environ Int 2020;143:105887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105887 41. Health Council of the Netherlands. Relevance of exposome research for policy. No.2022/02e, The Hague, 2022. 42. Blair A, Hines CJ, Thoms KW, Alavanja MCR, Beane Freeman LE, Hoppin JA, et al. Investing in prospective cohorts for etiologic study of occupational exposures. Am J Ind Med 2015;58:113-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22403 43. Li S, Cirillo P, Hu X, Tran V, Krigbaum N, Yu S, et al. Understanding mixed environmental exposures using metabolomics via a hierarchical community network model in a cohort of California women in 1960’s. Reprod Toxicol. 2020;92:57-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reprotox.2019.06.013 44. Louis LM, Lerro CC, Friesen MC, Andreotti G, Koutros S, Sandler DP, et al. A prospective study of cancer risk among Agricultural Health Study farm spouses associated with personal use of organochlorine insecticides. Environ Health 2017;16:95. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-017-0298-1 45. Vermeulen R, Silverman DT, Garshick E, Vlaanderen J, Portengen L, Steenland K. Exposure-response estimates for diesel engine exhaust and lung cancer mortality based on data from three occupational cohorts. Environ Health Perspect 2014;122:172-177. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306880 46. Ubalde-Lopez M, Garani-Papadatos T, Scelo G, Casas M, Lissåker C, Peters S, et al. Working life, health and well-being of parents: a joint effort to uncover hidden treasures in European birth cohorts. Scand J Work Environ Health 2021; 47:550-560. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3980 47. Baur X, Soskolne CL, Bero LA. How can the integrity of occupational and environmental health research be maintained in the presence of conflicting interests? Environ Health 2019;18:93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-019-0527-x 48. United Nations. Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. A/RES/70/1. 49. EC 2021. EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021-2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world of work. COM/2021/323 final. 50. EU-OSHA. Worker survey on exposure to cancer risk factors. Available from: https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/worker-survey-exposure-cancer-risk-factors. Date Accessed Oct 6, 2022. 51. HERA Consortium 2021. EU Research Agenda for the Environment, Climate & Health 2021-2030. Final Draft. https://www.heraresearcheu.eu/hera-2030-agenda 52. Van Hemelrijck M, Lewison G, Fox L, Dnk Vanderpuye V, Murillo R, Booth CM et al. Global cancer research in the era of COVID-19: a bibliometric analysis. Ecancermedicalscience. 2021;15:1264. https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2021.1264 53. Maruthappu M, Watkins J, Noor AM, Williams C, Ali R, Sullivan R, et al. Economic downturns, universal health coverage, and cancer mortality in high-income and middle-income countries, 1990-2010: a longitudinal analysis. Lancet 2016;388:684-695. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00577-8 54. Bodin T, Çağlayan C, Garde AH, Gnesi M, Jonsson J, Kiran S, et al. Precarious employment in occupational health - an OMEGA-NET working group position paper. Scand J Work Environ Health 2020;46:321-329 https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3860 55. Datta GD, Lauzon M, Salvy SJ, Hussain SK, Ghandehari S, Merchant A, et al. Cancer Screening Practices Among Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Front Public Health 2022;14;10:801805. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.801805 56. Hange N, Agoli AM, Lourdes Pormento MK, Sharma A, Somagutta MR et al. Impact of COVID-19 response on public health literacy and communication. Health Promot Perspect 2022;12:1-9. https://doi.org/10.34172/hpp.2022.01 57. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022;72:7-33. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708 58. Burzic A, O’Dowd EL, Baldwin DR. The Future of Lung Cancer Screening: Current Challenges and Research Priorities. Cancer Manag Res 2022;14:637-645. https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S293877 59. Delva F, Laurent F, Paris C, Belacel M, Brochard P, Bylicki O, Chouaïd C, et al. LUCSO-1-French pilot study of LUng Cancer Screening with low-dose computed tomography in a smokers population exposed to Occupational lung carcinogens: study protocol. BMJ Open 2019;:e025026. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025026 60. Dement JM, Ringen K, Hines S, Cranford K, Quinn P. Lung cancer mortality among construction workers: implications for early detection. Occup Environ Med 2020;77:207-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2019-106196 61. Veronesi G, Baldwin DR, Henschke CI, Ghislandi S, Iavicoli S, Oudkerk M, et al. Recommendations for Implementing Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography in Europe. Cancers (Basel) 2020;12:0. 62. Hiatt RA, Beyeler N. Cancer and climate change. Lancet Oncol 2020;21:e519-e527. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30448-4 63. Nogueira LM, Yabroff KR, Bernstein A. Climate change and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2020;70:239-244. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21610 64. Andrews O, Le Quéré C, Kjellstrom T, Lemke B, Haines A. Implications for workability and survivability in populations exposed to extreme heat under climate change: a modelling study. Lancet Planet Health 2018;2:e540-e547. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30240-7 65. He C, Zhang Y, Schneider A, Chen R, Zhang Y, Ma W, Kinney PL, Kan H. The inequality labor loss risk from future urban warming and adaptation strategies. Nat Commun 2022;13:3847. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31145-2 66. Gronlund CJ. Racial and socioeconomic disparities in heat-related health effects and their mechanisms: a review. Curr Epidemiol Rep 2014;1:165-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40471-014-0014-4 67. Hinchliffe A, Kogevinas M, Pérez-Gómez B, Ardanaz E, Amiano P, Marcos-Delgado A, et al. Occupational heat exposure and breast cancer risk in the MCC-Spain study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2021;30:364-372. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-0732 68. Vineis P, Huybrechts I, Millett C, Weiderpass E. Climate change and cancer: converging policies. Mol Oncol 2021;15:764-769. https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.12781 69. Persson L, Carney Almroth BM, Collins CD, Cornell S, de Witt CA, Diamond ML, et al. Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities. Environ Sci Technol 2022;56:1510-1521. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04158 70. Vrijheid M, Casas M, Bergström A, Carmichael Am, Cordier, Effesbo M, et al. European birth cohorts for environmental health research. Environ Health Perspect 2012;120:29-37. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1201c28 71. Turner MC, Mehlum IS. Coordination and Harmonisation of European Occupational Cohorts is Needed. Occup Environ Med 2018;75:474-476. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2017-104955 72. COST Strategic Plan. COST 060/17. 2017. Available from: https://www.cost.eu/uploads/2019/08/COST_StrategicPlan.pdf 73. Kogevinas M, Schlünssen V, Mehlum IS, Turner MC. The OMEGA-NET international inventory of occupational cohorts. Ann Work Expo Health 2020;64:565-568. https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxaa039 74. Peters S, Vienneau D, Sampri A, Turner MC, Castaño G, Bugge M, et al. Occupational exposure assessment tools in Europe: a comprehensive inventory overview. Ann Work Expo Health 2022;66:671-686. https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxab110 75. Atkas E, Bergbom B, Godderis L, Kreshpaj B, Marinov M, Mates D, et al. Migrant workers occupational health research: an OMEGA-NET working group position paper. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2022;95:765-777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-021-01803-x 76. Guseva Canu I, Marca SC, Dell’Oro F, Balazs A, Bergamaschi E, Besse C, et al. Harmonized definition of occupational burnout: A systematic review, semantic analysis, and Delphi consensus in 29 countries. Scand J Work Environ Health 2021;47:95-107. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3935 77. Pramesh CS, Badwe RA, Bhoo-Pathy N, Booth CM, Chinnaswamy G, Dare AJ, et al. Priorities for cancer research in low- and middle-income countries: a global
Este ensayo presenta algunos análisis, resultado de experiencias de investigación doctoral realizadas de 2010-2015 en Cuba, integradas con experiencias de investigaciones recientes (2020-21 en curso) en la Amazonía Tocantina Paraense, Brasil. Con base materialista histórico-dialéctica, utiliza procedimientos de relevamiento de literatura, observaciones libres y notas de campo. El intercambio de estas investigaciones construyen demostraciones de que las comunidades rurales están movilizadas por necesidades sentidas comunes, permeadas por la cultura, que las hacen seguir luchando, resistiendo y viviendo.
Palabras-clave: Intercambio de investigaciones; Comunidades rurales; Necesidades sentidas
Special aspects of education, Labor market. Labor supply. Labor demand
Abstract Background In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, billions of people were asked by their state and local governments not to go to work and not leave the house unless they had to. The goal of this qualitative study was to collect the lived experiences of a small group of parents and lactation professionals in the United States about what it was like to feed babies human milk under these conditions of quarantine. Methods This project is a social constructionist analysis of lactation narratives of 24 parents feeding their children human milk and 13 lactation professionals. They were interviewed remotely in 2020–21 via videoconferencing about their experiences and perspectives on the pandemic’s effect on lactation. Additionally, photographs of 16 of the parents are provided to visualize their practices and how they chose to represent them. Results Four interrelated themes were identified in participants’ narratives about how they experienced and made sense of human milk feeding during the pandemic: the loneliness of lactation during the pandemic, the construction of human milk as a resource to cope with the crisis, the (in)visibility of lactation amidst heightened multitasking, and the sense of connection created by human milk feeding at a time of unprecedented solitude. Conclusions While the pandemic may have had both positive and negative effects on lactation, it exposed continuing inequities in infant feeding, generating new forms of (in)visibility for lactating labor. Going forward, one lesson for policy and lawmakers may be that to adequately support lactation, they should take cues from the families who had positive experiences during the crisis. This would call for systemically overhauling of US laws and policies by guaranteeing: universal basic income, paid parental leave for at least six months, paid lactation leaves and breaks, affordable housing, universal health care, subsidized childcare programs, and equal access to high-quality, non-discriminatory, and culturally appropriate medical care—including lactation counseling—, among other initiatives.
Veronica Souza de Araujo, Rachel Barros de Oliveira
A pandemia causada pelo novo coronavírus (SARS-CoV-2) no ano de 2020 impôs profundas modificações nos diferentes arranjos de socialização. No Brasil, suas consequências foram sentidas sobretudo pela população negra e periférica, que trabalha nas ocupações mais precarizadas, muitas vezes na informalidade e que também compõe grande parte dos trabalhadores nomeados como essenciais, e, portanto, mais expostos à contaminação pelo vírus. Como exemplo deste quadro, analisamos os impactos da pandemia sobre as trabalhadoras domésticas, categoria formada majoritariamente por mulheres negras. Consideramos a colonialidade e o racismo estrutural da sociedade brasileira como dimensões fundamentais para a análise da realidade, elencamos casos recentes de violação de direitos e as mobilizações postas em prática pela categoria.
Palavras-chave: trabalho doméstico; COVID-19; racismo estrutural; colonialidade; movimento sindical.
Special aspects of education, Labor market. Labor supply. Labor demand
Es sobradamente reiterada la afirmación –que responde a una realidad incuestionable–, que estamos en una sociedad en continuo proceso de envejecimiento. Y ello, que se ha ofrecido y presentado como un problema, no es más que la consecuencia de la mejora de nuestra calidad de vida. Es cierto que coincide con una simultánea caída del índice de natalidad, pero no es menos cierto que estamos en un mundo sobresaturado. Al margen de lo anterior, la evolución social, laboral, económica y tecnológica, nos trae nuevas formas de prestación laboral, carreras de cotización devaluadas y necesidades cambiantes a las que tiene que responder un Sistema diseñado, esencialmente, bajo otros parámetros completamente diferentes.
A. Introduction
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the protection of consumer privacy had reached a milestone with the enactment of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).[i] Stores that screen customers for elevated temperatures challenge the basic ethical underpinnings of the new law: that personal private medical data is to be controlled by oneself. The pinnacle of privacy and control over personal data, the CCPA as it applies to data being collected new ways could impede COVID-19 public health goals.[ii] Yet there is precedent to release personal medical information in other public consumer arenas. “Government has a unique role in public health”[iii] which now calls for extraordinary means to control the spread of COVID-19. In the absence of clear governmental guidance, companies must navigate public health and implement fair policies to promote safety, acting in what is traditionally government’s realm. Customers, as opposed to employees, would arguably be subject to data collection but not storage.[iv] Customers will be subject to actions that violate traditional notions of the doctor patient relationship, data privacy, and freedom. The actions can be justified as noncoercive, a public health necessity, and as less restrictive than keeping businesses closed. The justification does not necessarily imply that companies should be managing the public health task themselves. Temperature screening, important now as some stores selling essential goods are implementing it, will become more crucial as more indoor public spaces, malls, retail stores, and service industries reopen.
B. Is temperature screening worth the sacrifice?
“In a liberal, pluralistic democracy, the justification of coercive policies, as well as other policies, must rest on moral reasons that the public in whose name the policies are carried out could reasonably be expected to accept.”[v] Temperature screening is not coercive: staying home is an option for customers (not employees). Another option is to arrive at the store, deny the screening, and be denied entrance to the normally open-to-the-public space, also negating the coercive aspect. The customer, having made the decision, would be free to leave. In certain industries, businesses have rules that more severely restrict people’s freedom and include the collection of personal medical information. In most cases, there is a legal requirement for the action. Airport scans, recently adapted to reveal less and preserve more privacy, are TSA-driven and not imposed on customers by airlines themselves. Airlines do have a lot of power to ensure that flights are safe, on balance, giving them power over personal data. Amusement parks are governed by rules and regulations by state, local, and the federal government that include height and weight requirements; they ensure safety by following laws as well as internal and industry guidelines. Even bungee jumping and zip-lining are regulated to promote safety in ways that may require demonstrating an absence of certain medical conditions. Customers must divulge personal information and medical histories. The permitting process in many industries requires proof of safety measures and agreement to hold inspections. From the customer perspective, the laws and regulations matter less than the action. Customers benefit from safe airlines and amusement parks and willingly give medical information in exchange for participation in air travel or amusement park entertainment. Temperature screening is within accepted standards of requirements to participate, justified by the public health it would promote and its non-coercive nature.
While many stores have nondiscrimination policies, the potentially contagious customer does not have any fundamental right to access that would override the public health concern. It is reasonable to accept and even embrace temperature screening knowing others inside the space will also have been screened. Temperatures often indicate the most contagious time in a viral stage and even non-COVID-19 temperatures can indicate contagious conditions. Temperature is usually protectable data: it is to be kept private if it is a product of a hospital or doctor’s appointment.
COVID-19 disproportionately affects certain populations including, most notably, the elderly. Reopening stores and businesses is an opportunity for those without special vulnerabilities wanting to go back to public space. Immunocompromised individuals may choose to protect themselves by staying home, wearing additional personal protective gear, or avoiding crowds. My own immunocompromised post-chemotherapy daughter is incredibly cautious, going to great lengths to protect herself regardless of government directives. She benefits from those directives because other members of our household are less likely to bring the virus home if public spaces are closed or engaging in temperature screening and enforcing social distancing and mask recommendations. Stay-at-home orders combined with other nonpharmaceutical interventions like closing schools and wearing masks in crowded spaces should work for flattening the curve.[vi] The strain on the economy and on personal liberty makes them unsustainable in the long term. A solution like temperature screening makes public spaces safer but may work best in conjunction with particularly vulnerable people continuing to avoid crowded public spaces.
There is an urgency to addressing the ethical basis for retail stores performing temperature screening as some stores have already begun. In Connecticut, LaBonne’s grocery stores began checking temperatures without recording data.[vii] Atlanta’s City Farmer’s Market chain is also screening its customers. Walmart has chosen to stay out of what it considers a public policy issue, refraining from testing customers’ temperatures.[viii] Greenburgh, New York, a municipality, is requiring grocery stores and pharmacies to check temperatures.[ix] Temperature screening is a valid and effective way of controlling the spread of COVID-19, and will become especially important when more businesses reopen.[x] It is reasonable to conclude that no one should be permitted entry into enclosed spaces with a fever. The efficacy of temperature checks has been debated with many public health experts in favor.[xi] Other countries that have successfully contained the virus have used temperature checks.[xii] This paper assumes enough efficacy to warrant some temperature screening policy -- some benefit or containment would derive from screening those entering public indoor spaces and barring those with a temperature of 100.4 or higher from entrance.
Temperature screening of customers has two rationales: under OSHA, such precautions protect employees by limiting exposure to customers who may carry the virus; and, the precautions serve the public health goal of transmission prevention. If reporting requirements or tracking ensued, the public health benefits would grow at the expense of control over one’s own data. Websites usually offer data restriction choices by using a pop-up. An in-person temperature screening is a new data point that companies (especially small retail companies) are not prepared to deal with. If any data is collected, customers should be notified about how the temperature would be used, who can access it, and how the customer would remain deidentified. Failing to track the febrile customer who might transmit the virus seems more ethically problematic than the privacy violation. Without government directives, stores would have trouble justifying saving or sharing the data for the sake of public health.
Public health initiatives required by law, permitted by law, and ones not addressed by law have different ethical implications. Efficacy alone would not allow stores to impede freedom and privacy more severely. Stores cannot detain those who display a symptom or refuse to wear a mask. Temperature screening must be within reason to be considered permissible. Stores like Walmart are using the absence of a governmental directive as an excuse to avoid an efficacious and sensible policy. Walmart is permitted to remain open as essential, a huge economic benefit. Customers may see Walmart’s stance as more ethical: valuing customer privacy and freedom. Stores like LaBonne’s are managing risk themselves to protect employees and the public. In Greenburgh, store employees can simply argue they are following a local government directive. Temperature screening should be accepted within a rights-driven, liberty-oriented society because it is a reasonable safety measure that creates the possibility of cautiously reopening many stores and public spaces. Some freedom is gained by a small loss of privacy and a different freedom.
C. Privacy in public temperature screening
Privacy in the doctor patient relationship enhances value by promoting trust. Confidentiality promotes open communication with doctors and healthcare professionals. In COVID-19 customer temperature screening, the person taking the temperature is likely not trained in confidentiality and not HIPAA educated. Customers, traditionally not seen as patients, are operating outside of the traditional scope for the sake of the common good, allowing a non-invasive screening. Stores that screen customers should have a non-invasive thermometer that hovers and does not touch the customer. Evaluated by the principles of efficacy, necessity, and the least restrictive means, temperature screening may allow more freedom to move about and more businesses to open. Strict stay-at-home orders prevent the necessity for widespread screening, yet reopening stores creates a situation ripe for more pervasive temperature screening.
Companies, stores, the local government, or police have little to no experience with personal medical data collection in the sphere of retail goods and services. In some cases, people might ask for a private space for the temperature screening. Stores should provide such a space but realistically they probably will not, making the screening a public event. LaBonne’s is not storing the data but arguably an elevated temperature would be witnessed by others outside the store who may know the identity of the febrile customer as many shop among their friends and neighbors. Yelling the temperature over to a different employee would be a serious breach of privacy; the employee taking customer temperatures should be trained to be discreet.
D. An ethical lapse: the failure to record data that could improve public health and the economy
The results (a high or normal temperature) bring up the ethical conundrum: if the customers are asked to leave, the data and the customer are still in limbo. As COVID-19 testing becomes more readily available, the customers could be referred to a COVID-19 testing site. Failure to track them could allow them to try their luck at another store, spreading the virus if in fact they do have it. For privacy, it would be best not to store any temperature data creating no metadata for the event. For public health, tracking those with an elevated temperature is worthwhile and has been helpful in other countries. The right thing for a business to do probably lies in between: for an elevated temperature, recommend an online doctor’s appointment or send the customer home to consider seeking medical advice. A government directive to report elevated temperatures for legitimate public health purposes like tracking is reasonable and would be an appropriate directive for stores to follow. Absent government use of the data, companies and stores should not be operating vigilante public health schemes that track and ban certain customers for extended periods, behavior that risks producing scarlet-letter-style stigma.
WHO goals to find, isolate, test, and treat every case would be furthered by tracking and testing those with elevated temperatures.[xiii] South Korea has in place a mechanism through apps and electronic bracelets to track those who test positive.[xiv] While their policies conflict with privacy and freedom, more businesses could reopen and more people could go more places while following social distancing and mask-wearing recommendations. The US population might be amenable to a model like South Korea’s when it is key to exercising freedom to move about in public, allowing workers to return to work, and consumers to enjoy stores and businesses. WHO seems not to envision its goals being handled by companies rather than public health authorities. The return to retail businesses and in-person services should be commensurate with a distinct protocol that fairly applies to all customers. The tradeoff for forgoing privacy is allowing stores to open, people to work, and consumers to consume.
D. Ethical baseline: notice and informed consent
Notice of policies affecting customers is an ethical obligation. Companies should make a statement on a website and install signs announcing that temperature screening will begin on a certain date (official notice) and what the screening will entail. Businesses that require temperature taking could provide exceptions based on proof of antibodies or a current negative COVID-19 test, especially if the “immunity cards” considered by Anthony Fauci become widely circulated.[xv] Otherwise, there is no obvious expeditious way to request, accept, or deny an exception if the interaction is taking place outside on the curb instead of online.[xvi]
Kinsa, the thermometer company now well known for gathering temperature data, sells the data to pharmacies who use it for commercial purposes, specifically, to boost sales of products people with an elevated temperature might want.[xvii] Through a built-in feature, Kinsa avoids any type of consent of the unwitting customer. While no personal data accompanies the temperature data, Kinsa is profiting from the data in unexpected ways and stores’ notice to customers should include that type of data collection as well.
E. Conclusion
Government entities should weigh in on stores and businesses imposing temperature screening as a condition of entry. The stores are ensuring employee safety and contributing to public health by conducting temperature screening. Absent government directive, companies should agree not to store or use customer medical information, despite the data’s valuable role in public health. A government order requiring reporting for the sake of tracking and isolating those with COVID-19 would be a proper use of government authority ensuring ethical data protocols. The data is essentially wasted in the absence of any reporting requirements. Hopefully, companies and customers will participate freely in screening to make shopping safer. As stay-at-home orders expire, government should oversee the uniform application of tracking and testing those with elevated temperatures. For now, the government vacuum in retail temperature screening is handing power to retailers and grocers who do not know quite what to do with it.
April 22, 2020
photo credit: Photo by Thomas Le on Unsplash
[i] AB375, Title 1.81.5, The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018. California Civil Code, Part 4, Division 3.
[ii] Gavin Newson plans to enforce the CCPA beginning in July. “…in an email to Forbes, an “advisor” to the California Attorney General seemingly made it clear that the office intends to stick with the enforcement deadline of July 1, further issuing a stern warning to California businesses: “We’re all mindful of the new reality created by COVID-19 and the heightened value of protecting consumers’ privacy online that comes with it. We encourage businesses to be particularly mindful of data security in this time of emergency.”” Robert B. Milligan, John Tomaszewski, & Darren Dummit, “The Impact Of COVID-19 On The California Consumer Privacy Act,” Trading Secrets blog, April 6, 2020. https://www.tradesecretslaw.com/2020/04/articles/privacy-2/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-the-california-consumer-privacy-act/
[iii] Childress, James F., Faden, Ruth R., et al., “Public Health Ethics: Mapping the Terrain,” Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, 30 (2002):170-178.
[iv] Employees and customers call for different treatment: employees rightly subject to some tracking and stored data. There is some government input with respect to employee temperature screening. The American with Disabilities Act (ADA) governs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), some states, and the CDC have given broad guidance urging temperature screening in certain cases but not giving procedural advice. Wilmer Hale (law firm website), “COVID-19: Screening Employee Temperatures: What Employers Need to Know,” April 3, 2020. https://www.wilmerhale.com/en/insights/client-alerts/20200403-screening-employee-temperatures-what-employers-need-to-know; and see Justine Phillips, Paul Cowie, and Kelly Hensley, “Employee Privacy Forecast: Temperature Checks,” Labor and Employment Law Blog, March 25, 2020. https://www.laboremploymentlawblog.com/2020/03/articles/coronavirus/employee-privacy-forecast-temperature-checks/
[v] Childress, p. 171.
[vi] Markel, Howard, “What history revealed about cities that socially distanced during a pandemic,” PBS NewsHour online, April 20, 2020. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/what-history-can-teach-us-about-flattening-the-curve?fbclid=IwAR1CQzbfhiLm-1hmB586kt6RsCBPcI5Q8KwKaOmln_pyN9KKKpOSAsOJvGs
[vii] “LaBonne’s Markets to Take Customers’ Temperatures,” NBCConnecticut.com , April 8, 2020. https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/coronavirus/labonnes-markets-to-take-customers-temperatures/2251765/
[viii] Nathaniel Meyersohn, “Why stores could start taking customers' temperatures,” CNN Business, April 9, 2020. “Dr. Luciana Borio, former director for medical and biodefense preparedness at the National Security Council under President Donald Trump and former acting chief scientist at the FDA. "Even a modest benefit can be of value when our public health options are so limited in the absence of diagnostic tests, capacity for large scale contact tracing or a vaccine." Matthew Freeman, associate professor of environmental health and epidemiology at Emory University's Rollins School of Public Health, said it "makes sense for businesses to take the temperatures of shoppers to protect employees and patrons, but what would be the response if someone did indeed have a fever? A plan of action is critical."” https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/09/business/walmart-amazon-home-depot-whole-foods-temperatures/index.html See also https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2020/04/09/coronavirus-grocery-stores-taking-temperature-reading/
[ix] Propper, David, “Supermarkets and pharmacies in Greenburgh could start taking temperatures of workers, customers,” Rockland/Westchester Journal News, April 9, 2020. https://www.lohud.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/04/09/greenburgh-supervisor-wants-customers-and-workers-get-temperature-taken-before-entering-store/2974662001/ “Next week, when I extend the order I intend (unless otherwise directed by the state) to also require the non invasive taking of temperature of employees and customers. I don’t believe that people with temperature should be allowed into the stores --we all worry about the risk of being infected or infecting others. Many people in Westchester are dying from the COVID-19 -partially because people are careless or inconsiderate of others. Although NYS law authorizes me to issue the order - the Town Board unanimously approved a resolution endorsing the contents.” Greenburgh Supervisor, Paul Feiner. https://greenburghny.com/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=433
See also Kimmel, Robert, “Strict New Rules for Groceries and Pharmacies in Unincorporated Greenburgh to Combat COVID-19,” The Hudson Independent. https://thehudsonindependent.com/strict-new-rules-for-groceries-and-pharmacies-in-unincorporated-greenburgh-to-combat-covid-19/
[x] Meyersohn.
[xi] Meyersohn.
[xii] “Covid-19: Drones take Italians’ temperature and issue fines,” The Star, April 11, 2020. https://www.thestar.com.my/tech/tech-news/2020/04/11/covid-19-drones-take-italians-temperature-and-issue-fines Italy is using drones to enforce strict policies that ensure those with elevated temperatures are not out in public.
[xiii] Boseley, Sarah, “WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case,” The Guardian, March 13, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/who-urges-countries-to-track-and-trace-every-covid-19-case ““You can’t fight a virus if you don’t know where it is,” the WHO’s director general, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said at a briefing on Friday. “Find, isolate, test and treat every case to break the chains of Covid transmission. Every case we find and treat limits the expansion of the disease.””
[xiv] Josh Smith, Hyonhee Shin, and Sangmi Cha, “Ahead of the curve: South Korea's evolving strategy to prevent a coronavirus resurgence,” Reuters, April 15, 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-southkorea-respons/ahead-of-the-curve-south-koreas-evolving-strategy-to-prevent-a-coronavirus-resurgence-idUSKCN21X0MO
[xv] Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID, part of the NIH), is considering an antibody test immunity card to be carried as proof one has developed antibodies. Forgey, Quint, “Fauci: Coronavirus immunity cards for Americans are ‘being discussed,’” Politico, April 10, 2020. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/10/fauci-coronavirus-immunity-cards-for-americans-are-being-discussed-178784
[xvi] Milligan.
[xvii] “Taking people’s temperatures can help fight the coronavirus,” The Economist, March 26, 2020. https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2020/03/26/taking-peoples-temperatures-can-help-fight-the-coronavirus Users of Kinsa apps which offer medical advice based on temperature data are likely aware the company stores and sells the data. Thermometer users probably do not realize their temperatures are recorded or that the company can narrow down their location to the zip code.