Did you know that Wednesday was World Malaria Day? Farzaneh and Aman at Technology, Health & Development marked the occasion with posts about initiatives that are tackling the disease, while Merrill Goozner at GoozNews wonders why the World Banks seems to lack a sense of urgency on the issue.
Regular ScienceBlogs readers probably noticed that bloggersâ use of charts from scientific journals, and the larger issue of open scientific discourse, was a hot topic this week. It all started when Shelley Batts of Retrospectacle put up an informative post about a study recently published in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture regarding alcoholâs effect on berriesâ antioxidant activity. She included a chart and graph from the published results in her post, and soon received a threat of legal action from the journalâs publishers if she didnât take them down. Bloggers were eloquent in their outrage; check the comments on this post for links to other bloggers’ reactions, or see the extensive list of links compiled by Coturnix at A Blog Around the Clock. Shelley soon received an email from the journalâs publisher apologizing for any misunderstanding, and stating that they would typically grant permissionon request and did not see a need to pursue the matter further.
Below the fold, thereâs more on global health, environmental topics, and U.S. politics.
At Global Health Policy, Nandini Ooman checks on progress towards universal access to AIDS treatment and Rachel Nugent explores the World Bankâs position on family planning.
Tara C. Smith at Aetiology gives another reason why Hepatitis B vaccination is important.
David Roberts at Gristmill reports that California is threatening to sue the U.S. EPA for obstructionism.
Lisa Stiffler at Dateline Earth gives some additional context to the recent study linking PCBs and autism.
Alex Formuzis Enviroblog checks out the Defense Department official in charge of cleaning up rocket fuel thatâs contaminating drinking water.
Bill Miller at DeSmogBlog notes that auto execs are admitting that global warming is real and requires action.
Ian Hart at Integrity of Science warns that a deceptive White House letter about climate change is still making the rounds.
Rachel Benson Gold & Elizabeth Nash at RH Reality Check summarize the 2007 U.S. state legislative trends in reproductive health.
Matt Madia at Reg Watch has the latest in Bushâs changes to the regulatory process: a confusing memo from Susan Dudley and a hearing on the executive order.
Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles and Orac at Respectful Insolence have some insights related to U.S. government funding of scientific research.
What else is worth a read? Leave suggestions in the comments.
Thanks for doing the weekly roundups, great to see what everyone else has on their radars.
Not sure if you saw this story below, the coverage on occupational health issues globally could be much greater that it is given the lack of regulatory protection in many other countries:
Workplace cancers cause 200,000 deaths a year: WHO
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070427/hl_nm/cancer_workplace_dc
I am wondering if this estimate is in line with what other experts think, in some ways it is lower than I thought.
I’m not an expert, but I would guess that a lot of occupational illnesses don’t get reported as such — even in the U.S., where we collect data on occupational injuries and illnesses, we miss a lot of the illnesses because they develop after an employee has left the place where the exposure occurred.
I did see something from the International Metalworkers’ Federation recently saying that the toll of occupational cancer is 600,000 deaths a year — and they attributed that to the ILO. I couldn’t find the source for that statistic, though.