What are health authorities doing about the health problems caused by unemployment?

Unemployment is over three million in Britain, and unemployment is known to be associated with poor health. It has been suggested that health authorities should produce a comprehensive response to the health problems caused by unemployment, and a survey was undertaken to find how many had done so. All the regional and district health authorities in England, the health boards of Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, and the family practitioner committees of England and Wales were asked by letter what they were doing to respond to the health problems of unemployment. A list of suggestions of what they might be doing was enclosed. The overall response rate was 77% (255/331), and 50% (127/255) of the respondents were doing something--33.3% (3/9) of the regional health authorities, 64% (101/158) of the district health authorities and health boards, and 26% (23/88) of the family practitioner committees. The paper describes what they were doing. A relation was sought between the level of unemployment in an area and the extent of the response, and a significant association was found. Half of Britain''s health authorities are now responding in some way to the health problems associated with unemployment.     

Donor vigilance: What are we doing about it?

Donor vigilance is the systematic monitoring of adverse reactions and incidents in blood donor care with a view to improving quality and safety for blood donors. Standard international definitions are available for surveillance purposes. In recent years advances have been made in determining risk factors for vasovagal and other adverse reactions to blood donation as well as in evaluating preventive measures. Blood establishments should record all adverse reactions in blood donors. Besides its use for individual donor care, this information can be reviewed within and between organisations to guide policy decisions and research for improving donor care.     

What do the biodiversity experiments tell us about consequences of plant species loss in the real world?

Experiments where the diversity of species assemblage is manipulated are sometimes used to predict the consequences of species loss from real communities. However, their design corresponds to a random selection of the lost species. There are three main factors that limit species richness: harshness of the environment, competitive exclusion, and species pool limitation. Species loss is usually caused by increasing effects of these factors. In the first two cases, the species that are excluded are highly non-random subsets of the potential species set, and consequently, the predictions based on random selection of the lost species might be misleading. The data show that the least productive species are those being recently excluded from temperate grasslands and consequently, species loss is not connected with decline of productivity. The concurrent species loss in many communities, however, means also a reduction of the available diaspore pool on a landscape scale, and could result in increased species pool limitation in other communities.