Environment Subcommittee Research Articles

TFOS lifestyle report: Effects of the digital environment on the ocular surface and adnexa

This presentation summarizes the findings of the Digital Environment Subcommittee of the recent Workshop of the Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society, entitled “A Lifestyle Epidemic: Ocular Surface Disease” (www.tearfilm.org). Digital environments are common in modern life and involve extensive screen time, often exceeding 4 h a day. Examples of digital devices include professional items, such as networked wayfinding systems or connected workstations, but also personal computers, televisions, and mobile phones. Although the prevalence of digital eye strain is very high, reaching 97% across the world, currently there is a lack of an agreed definition and established diagnostic criteria for the condition. Symptoms of digital eye strain are heterogeneous and non‐specific, may overlap with other ocular diseases, and include ocular tiredness, blur, ocular soreness, eye strain, ocular pain, burning, ocular dryness, and light sensitivity. They produce significant, chronic, and frequent discomfort that can affect the quality of life and reduce work and school performance. Although there is a large demand for treatments to relieve symptoms of digital eye strain, interventions are not well established. Proposed methods, such as incorporating rest breaks and the 20/20/20 rule, improving blinking, oculomotor exercises, and optimizing the work environment will be discussed. Also, the influence of such interventions as refractive correction, blue‐blocking filters, ocular surface disease management approaches to improve tear film quality and/or quantity and nutritional supplementation will be presented based on current, best evidence data. In conclusion, considering the ubiquitous use of digital technology, screening for digital eye strain should become incorporated into routine ocular assessments. The unified definition and diagnostic criteria proposed in the TFOS report will help standardize and improve the quality of future epidemiological studies.

Determinants of environmental investment: Evidence from Europe

This study investigates the corporate governance determinants of environmental investment in European firms. Using a sample of firms listed on the Bloomberg European Index 500 from 2001 to 2015, this study finds that firms with more independent directors, and female directors, are likely to invest more in the environment. It also finds that environmental investment is likely to be higher in firms with an environmental sub-committee of the board. Finally, this study documents that firms with CEO bonus plans linked to environmental compliance/performance are likely to incur higher environmental investment. The findings are robust to several alternative measures and methods. The findings of this study made a significant contribution to the environmental investment literature by adopting a quantifiable and non-biased monetary measure of environmental investment. Moreover, this study contributes to the literature by providing generalizable empirical evidence for a significantly positive association between a range of corporate governance characteristics and the level of environmental investment. Therefore, the findings of this study have practical implications to institutional investors. • Corporate governance mechanisms positively affect firms’ environmental investment. • A gender-diverse board engages more in environmental investment. • Firms with more independent director are likely to invest more in the environment. • Environmental investment is higher in firms with an environmental sub-committee. • Bonus plan linked to environmental performance promotes environmental investment.

McGill University Faculty of Medicine.

McGill University Faculty of Medicine.

Meaning of existence of social and environmental subcommittee in AESJ

Meaning of existence of social and environmental subcommittee in AESJ

A study of the roles, opportunities and challenges of environmental sub-committees (ESCs): A case of Masvingo district, Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe is committed to the implementation of environmental management strategies that promote the conservation of biological diversity while supporting sustainable utilisation of natural resources. As part of this strategy, Environmental Sub-Committees have been established throughout the country in order to support the work of Environmental Committees. This study was conducted in Masvingo District to determine the role of Environmental Sub-Committees in Natural Resources Management and the challenges they face. Purposive sampling was used to select the respondents in the Wards which had functional committees. Questionnaires were used in interviews with 38 Environmental Sub-Committee members from 12 wards as well as representatives from 8 organisations that interface with Environmental Sub-Committees. The results showed that the major roles of Environmental Sub-Committees were related to promoting environmental awareness and in the enforcement of environmental laws. Major challenges faced by Environmental Sub-Committees were resistance from the communities, absence of an Environmental sub-Committee identification system and inadequate transport. The majority of the respondents highlighted that there was a need to amend several by-laws in order to enhance environmental protection within the District. The most common offences are related to deforestation (41%), veld fires (27%) and gold panning (12%). There was a high incidence of repeat offenders and this was attributed to the non-deterrent fines currently in place. It was therefore recommended that Environmental Sub-Committees should strengthen efforts to create awareness of their activities among those stakeholders who are also involved in natural resources management. Environmental Sub-Committees can play a pivotal role in Natural Resources Management if the challenges that they face are fully addressed.

Congress probes environmental health institute director

Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives are calling for an investigation into whether Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, violated an antilobbying law. In a Dec. 18 editorial summarizing a special PLOS Biology issue on chemical regulation in the U.S., Birnbaum and one of the journal’s editors urged citizens to “work to ensure our government officials pass health-protective policies based on the best available scientific evidence” (PLOS Biol. 2017, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2004814). Reps. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chair of the House Science Committee, and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), chair of the environment subcommittee, say such statements are prohibited by a law that forbids executive branch employees from lobbying Congress using federal funds. Birnbaum’s editorial “does exactly what the Anti-Lobbying Act prohibits: it targets the general public to persuade citizens to communicate certain issues to elected representatives,” the congressmen wrote in...

The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Establishment Act: An Interim Report

As we reported in the December 2000 issue of Academic Radiology (1), the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1795, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Establishment Act, in September and sent that legislation to the Senate. Since that time, the Academy of Radiology Research has been working with the Senate sponsor of this bill, Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss), to advance this proposal in the Senate. Unfortunately, at the time this article was written, the Senate had not yet acted on this legislation. The Congress had been expected to complete its work and adjourn for the election by early or mid-October. Instead, the House and Senate remained in session throughout October but were unable to resolve differences on important legislation. Both Houses therefore recessed with plans to return in mid-November after the election to complete work on controversial tax and spending bills. The fiscal year 2001 appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education was among the bills that were not yet passed when the Congress recessed. Funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is included in this legislation. Senate consideration of the proposal to establish an institute was thus postponed at least until mid-November. Because we have detailed the main arguments in support of the proposed institute in recent issues of Academic Radiology, we will focus in this article on the nature of the opposition that has delayed final passage of this proposal. The primary source of opposition thus far has been the NIH itself, which has traditionally opposed virtually all proposals to create new institutes. Although the NIH did not provide a witness for the September 13 hearing in the House Commerce Health and Environment Subcommittee, the agency did submit a written statement to the Subcommittee expressing opposition to the bill. In its printed testimony for the hearing record, the NIH emphasizes that it is already “making a large and growing investment” in bioimaging and bioengineering and that these fields “are proving to be integral to the operations of all of the present Institutes and Centers” (2). Moreover, the NIH takes the position that the present structure, rather than the establishment of a separate institute for imaging and bioengineering, fosters collaboration between engineers/physicists and clinicians/biologists that focuses research attention on “compelling biological questions.” The NIH also asserts that it recognizes that imaging and bioengineering do not fit neatly into a single existing institute and is taking effective steps to coordinate activities across the institutes. These include the Bioengineering Consortium (BECON), which was established in 1997 “to bring all of the Institutes and Centers together to shape the future directions of the NIH” in imaging and bioengineering and to “address problems raised by these scientific communities” (2). Additionally, in response to a Acad Radiol 2001; 8:116–118

CFDを利用した高層建物周辺の風環境予測手法の開発 : その1:ベンチマークテストによる各種k-εモデルの相互比較

Recently, the prediction of wind environment around a building using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) technique comes to be carried out at the practical design stage. However, there have been very few studies, which examined the accuracy of CFD prediction of flow around a high-rise building including the velocity distribution at pedestrian level. The working group for CFD prediction of wind environment around building, which consists of researchers from several universities and private companies, was organized in Air Environment Sub-committee considering such a background. At the first stage of the project, the working group planned to carry out the cross comparison of CFD results of flow around a high rise building by various numerical methods, in order to clarify the major factors which affect prediction accuracy. This paper presents the results of this comparison.

Good science, sound policy, and the environment

Rep. George E. Brown Jr. (D-Calif.) is a good friend of science. He is one of the few members of Congress who understands how it works. So when he expresses alarm about what he sees as an attack on the basic integrity of the science community and suggests that scientists get much more serious and aggressive in responding, attention should be paid. Brown was first elected to Congress in 1963. He is a long-term member and former chairman of the House Committee on Science, and he is now its ranking minority member. He expresses his disquiet in a recent report, Environmental Science Under Siege: Fringe Science and the 104th Congress. It is concerned with three hearings, entitled Scientific Integrity and the Public Trust. held in 1995 and 1996 by the Energy & Environment Subcommittee of the Committee on Science. The hearings were on alleged abuses in the science of stratospheric ozone depletion, global climate change, ...

Focus on Basic Plasma Science

In the article “Fusion plan gathers steam” describing the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Environment Subcommittee hearing on restructuring the fusion energy program ([22 Mar., p. 1660][1]), Andrew Lawler quotes me as “warn[ing] that the lack of small-scale university fusion experiments is keeping young people from entering the field.” While this statement is likely correct, it was not part of my written testimony nor my remarks at the hearing. As co-chair of a recent National Research Council (NRC) study, Plasma Science: From Fundamental Science to Technological Applications (National Academy Press, 1995), I focused my remarks on small-scale basic research in plasma science. Of all of the areas considered in the NRC study, this was found to be the area of plasma science most in need of support. Because the fusion program is the largest nondefense user of plasma science, the study recommended that the program provide increased support for research in the underlying basic science. Rather than being a critic of the new Department of Energy (DOE) program, I am pleased to say that both the report of DOE's Fusion Energy Advisory Committee, and the testimony of Martha Krebs at the hearing, indicate that they recognize the need to increase support for basic plasma science. Krebs, director of the Office of Energy Research, outlined DOE's plans to significantly increase funding for basic plasma science, beginning in fiscal year 1997, which will be an important step in remedying the current situation. [1]: /lookup/volpage/272/1660a

House GOP may ease environmental cutbacks

Rep. Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.), a leader of House Republican moderates, last week said he is encouraged, positive, and upbeat about the chances of moderating severe environmental rollbacks proposed so far by the Republican-controlled Congress. Boehlert chairs the Water Resources & Environment Subcommittee of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. Speaking before the Clean Water Network—a coalition of hundreds of grassroots groups meeting in Washington, D.C.—Boehlert said House support is rising for effective environmental regulation. He predicted that severe cuts by the House in the Environmental Protection Agency's budget will be moderated in negotiations with the Senate. And he believes 17 House-imposed riders putting restrictions on EPA regulations may be removed or changed (C&EN, July 24, page 6). When the Clean Water Act was introduced this year, we thought it was a disaster, Boehlert said. So we formed a coalition that gathered 185 votes against it. This coalition building al...

Inside H.R. 226

Among legislation introduced on the first day of the 104th Congress was H.R. 226, a Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) reauthorization bill. Identical to H.R. 3392, passed by the House in the 103rd Congress, the bill was introduced by John Dingell (D‐Michigan), ranking minority member of the House Commerce Committee and its Health and Environment Subcommittee. Dingell introduced the measure to serve as a starting point for reauthorization discussions in this session of Congress. He chaired the House committee that marked up the bill passed by the 103rd Congress. This article summarizes H.R. 226, which will be a factor in the debate on SDWA reauthorization.

Environmental Protection Agency Sets Blueprint For Revamping R&D Effort

The Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research & Development (ORD) is headed for a major shakeup. Long underutilized by the agency and criticized for being overmanaged in recent studies, the office is now up for reauthorization by Congress and for reorganization by EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner. An integral part of strengthening the quality of science at EPA will be the reinvigorating of our research program, Browner told the full House Committee on Science, Space & Technology during a hearing on July 27. Our goal is nothing less than to create the premier environmental science organization in the country. Committee chairman George E. Brown Jr. (D.-Calif.) agrees that it is past time for EPA to upgrade the quality of its science. Regrettably, EPA's ORD has failed to satisfactorily address research and research management issues, some of which were identified when I first became chairman of the environment subcommittee over 18 years ago, Brown says. An ...

Superfund progress, future challenges detailed

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has removed or controlled significant amounts of hazardous waste from a number of sites around the country, a General Accounting Office (GAO) official told the Senate Environment Subcommittee on Superfund, Recycling & Solid Waste Management, which is working toward a 1994 revision of the law. But, he said, the agency is facing enormous challenges, resource demands, and questions about the best approach to clean up the hundreds of remaining sites. As detailed earlier this month by Peter F. Guerrero, GAO associate director for environmental protection issues, EPA has placed nearly 1300 hazardous waste sites with the most serious problems on a National Priorities List (NPL). By the end of fiscal 1992, EPA had completed cleanup work and removed from the list 40 sites that it believes have been cleaned to a level protective of human health and the environment; had conducted 3244 emergency removals at NPL and non-NPL sites; had ...

House Science Committee reorganizes

Following new House rules for the 103rd Congress that are designed to reduce the proliferation of subcommittees, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee has been reorganized. Its six subcommittees have been reduced to five. It retains its subcommittees on science, space, energy, and investigations and oversight. The Environment Subcommittee was eliminated, and most of its jurisdiction was taken over by the Technology and Competitiveness Subcommittee, which was renamed the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment, and Aviation.

When Senators and Publics Meet at the Environmental Protection Subcommittee

The hearings of the Senate Environmental Protection Subcommittee on reauthorizing the Clean Air Act of 1987 are analyzed and contrasted with Senate hearings of other committees to show how these hearings fit into the societal debate on clean air. The discourse of the hearings is analyzed by examining the language of the talk and by analyzing the style of argument. The discourse in these hearings is shown to be distinctive by comparing it with other hearings. The argument of the paper is that this distinctiveness is the result of the type of communication possible in electronic/mass media communication.

U.S. global warming position called “smoke and mirrors”

“The administration's position on global warming due to greenhouse gases is purely and simply smoke and mirrors,” says Albert Gore (D‐Tenn.) and “is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who looks at it.”Testifying before the House Health and the Environment Subcommittee, the Tennessee Democrat noted that the administration is hiding behind rhetoric by saying that it promises to stabilize greenhouse gases in the year 2000, not by the year 2000. This, Gore said, means that any year after 2000 is not covered, nor is any year between now and 2000, and that the administration will attempt to reduce greenhouse gases for 1 calendar year only, with no long‐term solutions to the problem.

Prevention of Lead Paint—or Prevention of Pica?

The otherwise excellent and timely statement on acute and chronic childhood lead poisoning of the Academy's Committee on Environmental Hazards and Subcommittee on Accidental Poisoning of the Committee on Accident Prevention1 has one serious omission. After calling attention to pica as a major factor in lead poisoning in young children, this fundamental cause for most cases of plumbism is disregarded. A basic part of the problem would appear to be how it attacks the reasons why the children eat the paint on the walls in the first place.