Children's environment in Central Europe: threats and chances

Our plain-English summary of Children's environment in Central Europe: threats and chances, by S. Böse-O'Reilly, U. Heudorf, T. Lob-Corzilius, et al (International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 2007).

The study

• Authors: S. Böse-O'Reilly, U. Heudorf, T. Lob-Corzilius, K.E. von Mühlendahl, M. Otto, S. Schmidt
• Journal: International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health
• Published: 2007;210(5):503-7
• Cited by: 5 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Many of the "classical" environmental hazards and risks (such as anthropogenic chemical and physical factors, e.g., asbestos, dioxin, electromagnetic fields and "pesticides") are in our countries not major determinants of children's health and well being; however, there may exist unseen or unrecognized causal contexts. Some hazards, such as UV light, noise, fine particles, tobacco smoke, legal and illegal drugs, and radon, are considered important by experts, but are still largely ignored by the public. In our society, despite of, or maybe because of the multitude of information and disinformation, adequate risk perception continues to be a problem. Furthermore, ever-new environmental toxicants will come to the surface and occupy medial interest, and thus, continuing attention is warranted. Of our children's environment, yet other facets are of prime importance: nutrition, housing and traffic and public media. Most important, however, is the fact that society (governments, administration, industry and consumers) are disregarding the long-term sustainability of their actions and behaviour, thus endangering the future of our children and grandchildren. This is in contrast with the existing declarations and official action plans. In future, ranking of priorities for research and actions will be necessary, taking into account costs and effectiveness since resources to be invested into these issues certainly will remain limited.

In plain English

This article was an editorial overview, not a study. It introduced a journal issue reflecting the proceedings of a workshop on children's environmental health held in Osnabrück, Germany, in November 2006. The authors wrote on behalf of the Commission on Environmental Health of the German Academy of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. Asbestos appeared only once, in the abstract, in a list of "classical" environmental hazards, along with dioxin, electromagnetic fields and pesticides. The authors stated that these hazards are not major determinants of children's health in their countries, but added that unseen or unrecognized causal links may exist. The article collected no data on asbestos or any other exposure. Instead, it described international declarations and action plans on children's environmental health and discussed public risk perception. The authors also stated that psychosocial factors were at that time the most important cause of harm to children's well-being and health. The authors concluded that society is disregarding long-term sustainability. They also concluded that research and action priorities will need to be ranked by cost and effectiveness, because resources are limited.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Editorial / introductory overview of workshop proceedings (no original data)
• Who was studied: No study population. The article discusses children's environmental health in Central Europe in general terms.
• Exposure: Asbestos is mentioned only in passing, in the abstract, as one of several 'classical' environmental hazards (with dioxin, electromagnetic fields and pesticides). The authors describe these as not major determinants of children's health in their countries, while noting that unrecognized causal contexts may exist.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that society is disregarding long-term sustainability, endangering future generations. They also concluded that research and action priorities will need to be ranked by cost and effectiveness because resources will remain limited. They considered psychosocial factors the most important current pathogenetic factor for children's well-being and health.

Related studies

• Environmental threats to children's health in Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific — W.A. Suk, K.M. Ruchirawat, et al. (2003)
• Children's health in Latin America: the influence of environmental exposures — A. Laborde, F. Tomasina, et al. (2015)
• Environmental health of children — A.M. Dunn, C. Burns, et al. (2003)
• Environmental aftermath — L. Claudio (2001)
• Exposure to asbestos-containing vermiculite ore and respiratory symptoms among individuals who were children while the mine was active in Libby, Montana — L.C. Vinikoor, T.C. Larson, et al. (2010)
• Occupational and environmental medicine: moving the factory fence or hedging our bets? — P.G. Lewis (2000)

Browse more research in International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, or return to medical research.