An anonymous reader shares a report: Expect record-breaking temperatures to change the workplace, the World Health Organization (WHO) and World Meteorological Organization (WMO) warned today in a new report. When workers don't have adequate protections from heat stress, their health and productivity suffer.

It's a risk employers and lawmakers have to take more seriously if they want to keep workers safe and businesses prosperous, the agencies say. That means finding ways to adapt in a warming world, and paying close attention to groups that might be more vulnerable than others.

[...] More than 2.4 billion people around the world -- 71 percent of the working population -- experience workplace heat stress, according to estimates from the ILO. Each year, 22.85 million occupational injuries and 18,970 fatalities are linked to excessive heat at work. The report also says that worker productivity falls 2-3 percent with every degree increase above 20 degrees Celsius in wet-bulb globe temperature, a measure that takes humidity and other environmental factors into account.

Microsoft researchers have identified 40 occupations [PDF] with the highest exposure to AI, ranking jobs by how closely their tasks align with AI's current capabilities. The study analyzed 200,000 real-world conversations from Copilot users and compared AI performance against occupational data.

Interpreters and translators top the list, followed by historians and passenger attendants. Customer service and sales representatives, comprising about 5 million U.S. jobs, also face significant AI competition. Knowledge workers performing computer, math, or administrative tasks showed high vulnerability, as did sales positions involving information sharing and explanation. The research found occupations requiring Bachelor's degrees demonstrate higher AI applicability than those with lower educational requirements.

First, the top 10 least affected occupations by generative AI: 1. Dredge Operators
2. Bridge and Lock Tenders
3. Water Treatment Plant and System Operators
4. Foundry Mold and Coremakers
5. Rail-Track Laying and Maintenance Equipment Operators
6. Pile Driver Operators
7. Floor Sanders and Finishers
8. Orderlies
9. Motorboat Operators
10. Logging Equipment Operators Now, the top 40 most affected occupations by generative AI:1. Interpreters and Translators
2. Historians
3. Passenger Attendants
4. Sales Representatives of Services
5. Writers and Authors
6. Customer Service Representatives
7. CNC Tool Programmers
8. Telephone Operators
9. Ticket Agents and Travel Clerks
10. Broadcast Announcers and Radio DJs
11. Brokerage Clerks
12. Farm and Home Management Educators
13. Telemarketers
14. Concierges
15. Political Scientists
16. News Analysts, Reporters, Journalists
17. Mathematicians
18. Technical Writers
19. Proofreaders and Copy Markers
20. Hosts and Hostesses
21. Editors
22. Business Teachers, Postsecondary
23. Public Relations Specialists
24. Demonstrators and Product Promoters
25. Advertising Sales Agents
26. New Accounts Clerks
27. Statistical Assistants
28. Counter and Rental Clerks
29. Data Scientists
30. Personal Financial Advisors
31. Archivists
32. Economics Teachers, Postsecondary
33. Web Developers
34. Management Analysts
35. Geographers
36. Models
37. Market Research Analysts
38. Public Safety Telecommunicators
39. Switchboard Operators
40. Library Science Teachers, Postsecondary.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Air pollution from traffic can cause a significant rise in blood pressure that can last up to 24 hours, according to a study via the University of Washington. The spike is comparable to the effect of a high-sodium diet and can contribute to cardiovascular problems. Long-term exposure to vehicle exhaust has been widely linked with respiratory problems such as asthma, especially in children. "Traffic air pollution increases blood pressure within an hour of being in traffic and it stays elevated a day later," said author of the study Joel Kaufman, a physician and professor of environmental and occupational health sciences at the University of Washington.

Sixteen healthy people between the ages of 22 and 45 underwent three separate drives as passengers through Seattle rush hour. Two of those drives were "unfiltered," meaning the road air was allowed to enter the car, as is the case for many drivers on the road today. On the third drive, a Hepa (high efficiency particulate absorbing) filter was installed in the car, with participants unaware which drive had filtration. The researchers measured the blood pressure of the passengers before, during and after the two-hour drive. Breathing unfiltered air resulted in blood pressure increase of more than 4.5mm Hg (millimeters of mercury) compared to filtered air. Most of the pollution came from tailpipe exhaust or the fossil fuel combustion, as well as brake and tire wear. The filters were most effective in reducing ultrafine particles (86% decrease), black carbon, which is mostly from diesel (86%), and PM2.5 (60%) while gasses like carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide were unaffected. "The clue here is that these tiniest particles are probably what's responsible for blood pressure difference," Kaufman said.

"If you live in an area that has heavy traffic-related air pollution, you want to keep your windows closed and have air filtration capability in your home."

The Biden administration is proposing a ban on TCE, a highly toxic chemical commonly used in stain removers, adhesives and degreasers, and which had been found to be contaminating drinking water on a wide scale across the US. From a report: The move comes after years of mounting scientific evidence showing TCE is "extremely toxic" at low levels of exposure, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wrote in a statement. "The science is loud and clear on TCE. It is a dangerous toxic chemical and proposing to ban it will protect families, workers and communities," said the EPA deputy administrator, Janet McCabe.

TCE, or trichloroethylene, is a volatile organic compound that humans are frequently exposed to in a variety of settings, though those who use products with the chemical in an occupational setting are most at risk. It's also commonly used in carpet cleaning treatments, hoof polishes, brake cleaners, pepper spray and lubricants. Among other health issues, the chemical is thought to be a carcinogen and a liver toxin, harm male reproduction, cause neurological damage, damage kidneys and cause Parkinson's disease.

According to Bloomberg the U.S. Labor Department's "OSHA" regulatory agency has "cited Amazon for exposing workers to ergonomic risks at several facilities." But how widespread is the problem?

29% of America's warehouse workers are working for Amazon, a team of researchers estimates. And "More than two-thirds of Amazon warehouse workers surveyed by researchers reported that they took unpaid time off to recover from pain or exhaustion sustained on the job." The new national study, published Wednesday by the University of Illinois Chicago's Center for Urban Economic Development, found that 69% of workers surveyed stayed home without pay to recover, including 34% who did so three or more times. The data suggests "injury and pain at Amazon are far more widespread" than previously known, said Beth Gutelius, research director at the center and a leading expert on logistics and warehouse work.

The report is based on a 98-question online survey that gathered responses from 1,484 warehouse workers in 451 facilities across 42 states, the researchers said. It was conducted between April and August and measured the percentage of workers who took time off during the previous month. Amazon employs hundreds of thousands of warehouse workers in the U.S.

Amazon spokesperson Maureen Lynch Vogel said the report was "not a 'study' — it's a survey done on social media, by groups with an ulterior motive." She recommended that people read the safety data Amazon submits each year to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, "which shows that rates in our buildings have improved significantly, and we're slightly above the average in some areas and slightly below the average in others."
41% of the workers surveyed reported being injured while working at an Amazon warehouse, according to the article. And "the share rises to 51% for people who have worked at the company for more than three years."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Federal regulators from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) found that three Amazon warehouse facilities had violated legislation designed to require employers to provide safe working environments. Investigations found that Amazon workers are at high risk for back injuries and other musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), especially in warehouse environments that prioritize speed over safety. Amazon must pay a $60,269 fine for the violations at warehouses in Deltona, Florida; Waukegan, Illinois; and New Windsor, New York. As part of the same investigation, OSHA found in December that six Amazon warehouse facilities had failed to record and report worker injuries and illnesses. There are three similar, ongoing investigations at Amazon facilities in Colorado, Idaho and New York.

OSHA's findings show an ongoing pattern of employee injuries, including stuck-by injuries while handling objects over 50 pounds. An example report from July reads, "crushing/smashing; face; furniture (61 lbs)." Another reads, "strain/sprain; lower leg; fitness equipment (148 lbs.)" The Florida warehouse was also cited for being too hot, which can potentially cause heat-related illness. Amazon has on-site clinics called Amcare for employees who may suffer injuries on the job, but OSHA claims that these facilities can be prohibitive to workers receiving adequate medical care. Amazon employees told investigators that the Amcare clinic in Deltona, Florida, required injured workers to wait three weeks after an injury before they could be referred to a physician. OSHA also found that if an employee suffered head trauma and dizziness, they were not immediately referred to a physician. Further reading: Amazon Kicks Off Round of Job Cuts Affecting 18,000 People

Friday America's Department of Labor announced that its Occupational Safety and Health Administration has launched an ongoing investigation into six Amazon warehouses in five different states, and has already cited Amazon during those inspections for failing to properly record work-related injuries and illnesses. OSHA issued Amazon citations for 14 recordkeeping violations, including failing to record injuries and illnesses, misclassifying injuries and illnesses, not recording injuries and illnesses within the required time, and not providing OSHA with timely injury and illness records....

"Our concern is that nothing will be done to keep an injury from recurring if it isn't even recorded in the logbook," said Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Doug Parker, "which — in a company the size of Amazon — could have significant consequences for a large number of workers."
You can read all the specifics in a 70-page document online. The Chicago Tribune writes that "In one case, a worker's head injury was classified as a muscle strain, OSHA said." ABC News writes that workers at the six investigated Amazon fulfillment-center warehouses "have complained of a grueling pace, uncomfortable heat and the potential for injury."

Amazon faces proposed penalties of $29,008.

Time magazine teamed up with a London based non-profit newsroom called the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, in an investigation that reveals that "horrific" videos "are part and parcel of everyday work for TikTok moderators in Colombia." They told the Bureau of Investigative Journalism about widespread occupational trauma and inadequate psychological support, demanding or impossible performance targets, punitive salary deductions and extensive surveillance. Their attempts to unionize to secure better conditions have been opposed repeatedly. TikTok's rapid growth in Latin America — it has an estimated 100 million users in the region — has led to the hiring of hundreds of moderators in Colombia to fight a never-ending battle against disturbing content. They work six days a week on day and night shifts, with some paid as little as 1.2 million pesos ($254) a month, compared to around $2,900 for content moderators based in the U.S....

The nine moderators could only speak anonymously for fear they might lose their jobs, or undermine their future employment prospects.... The TikTok moderation system described by these moderators is built on exacting performance targets. If workers do not get through a huge number of videos, or return late from a break, they can lose out on a monthly bonus worth up to a quarter of their salary. It is easy to lose out on the much-needed extra cash. Ãlvaro, a current TikTok moderator, has a target of 900 videos per day, with about 15 seconds to view each video. He works from 6am to 3pm, with two hours of break time, and his base salary is 1.2m pesos ($254) a month, only slightly higher than Colombia's minimum salary.... He once received a disciplinary notice known internally as an "action form" for only managing to watch 700 videos in a shift, which was considered "work avoidance". Once a worker has an action form, he says, they cannot receive a bonus that month....

Outsourcing moderation to countries in the global south like Colombia works for businesses because it is cheap, and workers are poorly protected.... For now... TikTok's low-paid moderators will keep working to their grueling targets, sifting through some of the internet's most nightmarish content.
The moderators interviewed all had "contractor" status with Paris-based Teleperformance, which last year reported €557 million ($620m) in profit on €7.1 billion ($8.1 billion) in revenue. In fact, Teleperformance has more than 7,000 content moderators globally, according to stats from Market Research Future, and the moderators interviewed said that besides TikTok, Teleperformance also provided content moderators to Meta, Discord, and Microsoft.

According to a new report from the International Federation of Robotics (IFR), China now has almost half of all the world's robot installations and that it is increasing its lead rapidly. Engineering.com reports: The IFR, which exists to "promote research, development, use and international co-operation in the entire field of robotics," has been reporting that China has been the world leader in implementing industrial robots for the last 8 years. We have not been paying attention. In 3 years, China has almost doubled the number of industrial robot installations. With its 243,000 robot installations in 2020, China has almost half of all the industrial robots in the world, according to the Wall Street Journal.

A majority of new industrial robots are used in electronics manufacture (for circuit boards, consumer electronics, etc.) and in automobile assembly, particularly in the surging production of electric vehicles (EVs).One must wonder why China, a country with so much cheap manual labor available, would opt for expensive robots with their special demands for tech support. China may have a giant population (1.4 billion people), but its workforce is actually decreasing, says the IFR, due to an increasing segment of its population aging and a growing competition for service jobs. China also expects a leveling off of its rural-to-urban migration. China's government is determined not to let a declining workforce cause a drop in manufacturing, and as only a centralized, authoritarian government can, it has made robotizing a national priority and has mobilized its forces.

China's latest five-year plan for the robotics industry, released in December 2021 by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), aims for nothing less than making China a world leader in robot technology and industrial automation. And it appears to be working. China went from 10 robots per ten thousand employees 10 years ago to 246 robots per ten thousand employees in 2020, the ninth best ranking in the world. To keep the robots state of the art and operational, China's Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security introduced 18 new occupational titles in June, including "robotics engineering technician."

"It appears that we need the First Law of Robotics NOW!" quips Slashdot reader Bruce66423.

Mint reports: During a tournament in Moscow, a chess-playing robot fractured a 7-year-old boy's finger when the youngster attempted a quick move without giving the device enough time to finish its task. On July 19, at the Moscow Chess Open competition, the incident took place. The youngster is fine, but one of his fingers has been broken, according to Sergey Smagin, vice president of the Russian Chess Federation, who spoke to state-run news organisation RIA Novosti.

The boy, Christopher, is one of the top 30 young chess players in Moscow, and he is just nine years old. In a nation where chess has essentially become a national obsession and source of pride, that makes him very good.
"The boy is all right," the VP of the Russian Chess Federation assured Russia's state-run news organization. "They put a plaster cast on the finger to heal faster."

"The robot broke the child's finger," Sergey Lazarev, Moscow Chess Federation President, told Tass news agency. "This is of course bad." The BBC reports: A video shared on social media shows the robot taking one of the boy's pieces. The boy then makes his own move, and the robot grabs his finger. Four adults rush to help the boy, who is eventually freed and ushered away.

Mr Lazarev said the machine had played many previous matches without incident.

The boy was able to finish the final days of the tournament in a cast, Tass reports.
From the Guardian: Sergey Smagin, vice-president of the Russian Chess Federation, told Baza the robot appeared to pounce after it took one of the boy's pieces. Rather than waiting for the machine to complete its move, the boy opted for a quick riposte, he said. "There are certain safety rules and the child, apparently, violated them. When he made his move, he did not realise he first had to wait," Smagin said. "This is an extremely rare case, the first I can recall," he added.

Lazarev had a different account, saying the child had "made a move, and after that we need to give time for the robot to answer, but the boy hurried and the robot grabbed him". Either way, he said, the robot's suppliers were "going to have to think again"....

According to one 2015 study, one person is killed each year by an industrial robot in the US alone. Indeed, according to the US occupational safety administration, most occupational accidents since 2000 involving robots have been fatalities.
Reportedly the boy's parents have now contacted the public prosecutor's office.

"A Russian grandmaster, Sergey Karjakin, said the incident was no doubt due to 'some kind of software error or something.'"

Amazon workers only make up a third of US warehouse employees, but in 2021, they suffered 49 percent of the injuries for the entire warehouse industry, according to a report by advocacy group Strategic Organizing Center (or SOC). The Verge reports: After analyzing data from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the union coalition found that Amazon workers are twice as likely to be seriously injured than people who work in warehouses for other companies. The report considers "serious injuries" to be ones where workers either have to take time off to recover or have their workloads reduced, following OSHA's report classification (pdf) of "cases with days away from work" and "cases with job transfer or restriction." The data shows that, over time, the company has been shifting more toward putting people on light duty, rather than having them take time off. The report authors also note that Amazon workers take longer to recover from injuries than employees at other companies: around 62 days on average, versus 44 across the industry.

Amazon employees have said it's not the work itself that's particularly dangerous but rather the grueling pace the company's automated systems demand. Amazon actually had workers go slower in 2020 to help combat COVID-19, which accounts for the notably lower injury rates that year. But, as the report notes, the injuries increased by around 20 percent between 2020 and 2021 as the company resumed its usual pace -- though the injury rates for 2021 were still lower than they were in 2019. [...] Unfortunately, this study's results tell the same story we've been hearing for years. Even with its reduced injury rates in 2020, Amazon workers were still hurt twice as often as other warehouse workers, according to SOC. Further reading: Amazon Workers At 100 More Facilities Want To Unionize (Yahoo Finance)

The U.S. workplace safety watchdog is investigating the circumstances around the collapse during Friday night's storm of an Amazon.com building in Illinois in which six workers died, an official at the U.S. Department of Labor said on Monday. From a report: The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has six months to complete its investigation, issue citations, and propose monetary penalties if violations of workplace safety and/or health regulations are found, Scott Allen, a U.S. Department of Labor regional director for public affairs, said via email. He added that compliance officers have been on site since Saturday. Six workers were killed when the Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville, Illinois, buckled under the force of a devastating storm, police said. A barrage of tornadoes ripped through six U.S. states, leaving a trail of death and destruction at homes and businesses stretching more than 200 miles (322 km).

The head of America's Intelligence Community reports that the U.S. intelligence community "was able to reach broad agreement" on several key issues about the origins of COVID-19.

"We judge the virus was not developed as a biological weapon," they announced today.

In addition, the U.S. intelligence community report includes a second new assessment: that China's officials "did not have foreknowledge of the virus before the initial outbreak of COVID-19 emerged."

Beyond that, they note that most of the intelligence community's agencies also specifically assess that SARS-CoV-2 "probably was not genetically engineered" (albeit with "low confidence"). Of the 19 member agencies in the U.S. intelligence community, just two believed that there just wasn't enough evidence to actually issue an assessment of either possibility, the report adds.

The [U.S.] intelligence community judges they will be unable to provide a more definitive explanation for the origin of COVID-19 unless new information allows them to determine the specific pathway for initial natural contact with an animal or to determine that a laboratory in Wuhan was handling SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor virus before COVID-19 emerged. The intelligence community — and the global scientific community — lacks clinical samples or a complete understanding of epidemiological data from the earliest COVID-19 cases. If we obtain information on the earliest cases that identified a location of interest or occupational exposure, it may alter our evaluation of hypotheses.

China's cooperation most likely would be needed to reach a conclusive assessment of the origins of COVID-19. Beijing, however, continues to hinder the global investigation, resist sharing information, and blame other countries, including the United States. These actions reflect, in part, China's government's own uncertainty about where an investigation could lead as well as its frustration the international community is using the issue to exert political pressure on China.
In assessing whether a lab incident or a "natural" exposure to an infected animal caused the outbreak, they cited assessments from eight different U.S. intelligence community elements. Half of them agreed with the National Intelligence Council assessment (with low confidence) "that the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to an animal infected with it or a close progenitor virus — a virus that probably would be more than 99 percent similar to SARS-CoV-2. These analysts give weight to China's officials' lack of foreknowledge, the numerous vectors for natural exposure, and other factors."

Three of the remaining four "remain unable to coalesce around either explanation without additional information, with some analysts favoring natural origin, others a laboratory origin, and some seeing the hypotheses as equally likely." One element did assess "with moderate confidence that the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2 most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology... Variations in analytic views largely stem from differences in how agencies weigh intelligence reporting and scientific publications and intelligence and scientific gaps."

The 18-page assessment includes an appendix addressing details of specific theories, but ultimately concludes that "Our growing understanding of the similarities of SARS-CoV-2 to other coronaviruses in nature and the ability of betacoronaviruses — the genus to which SARS-CoV-2 belongs — to naturally recombine suggests SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically engineered." It even notes that the much-discussed furin cleavage sites "have been identified in naturally occurring coronaviruses in the same genetic location [as in SARS-CoV-2]. This suggests that SARS-CoV-2 or a progenitor virus could have acquired its furin cleavage sites through natural recombination with another virus."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times, written by Tara Parker-Pope: Covid precautions have turned many parts of our world into a giant salad bar, with plastic barriers separating sales clerks from shoppers, dividing customers at nail salons and shielding students from their classmates. Intuition tells us a plastic shield would be protective against germs. But scientists who study aerosols, air flow and ventilation say that much of the time, the barriers don't help and probably give people a false sense of security. And sometimes the barriers can make things worse. Research suggests that in some instances, a barrier protecting a clerk behind a checkout counter may redirect the germs to another worker or customer. Rows of clear plastic shields, like those you might find in a nail salon or classroom, can also impede normal air flow and ventilation.

Under normal conditions in stores, classrooms and offices, exhaled breath particles disperse, carried by air currents and, depending on the ventilation system, are replaced by fresh air roughly every 15 to 30 minutes. But erecting plastic barriers can change air flow in a room, disrupt normal ventilation and create "dead zones," where viral aerosol particles can build up and become highly concentrated. There are some situations in which the clear shields might be protective, but it depends on a number of variables. The barriers can stop big droplets ejected during coughs and sneezes from splattering on others, which is why buffets and salad bars often are equipped with transparent sneeze guards above the food. But Covid-19 spreads largely through unseen aerosol particles. While there isn't much real-world research on the impact of transparent barriers and the risk of disease, scientists in the United States and Britain have begun to study the issue, and the findings are not reassuring.

A study published in June and led by researchers from Johns Hopkins, for example, showed that desk screens in classrooms were associated with an increased risk of coronavirus infection. In a Massachusetts school district, researchers found (PDF) that plexiglass dividers with side walls in the main office were impeding air flow. A study looking at schools in Georgia found that desk barriers had little effect on the spread of the coronavirus compared with ventilation improvements and masking. Before the pandemic, a study published in 2014 found that office cubicle dividers were among the factors that may have contributed to disease transmission during a tuberculosis outbreak in Australia. British researchers have conducted modeling studies simulating what happens when a person on one side of a barrier -- like a customer in a store -- exhales particles while speaking or coughing under various ventilation conditions. The screen is more effective when the person coughs, because the larger particles have greater momentum and hit the barrier. But when a person speaks, the screen doesn't trap the exhaled particles -- which just float around it. While the store clerk may avoid an immediate and direct hit, the particles are still in the room, posing a risk to the clerk and others who may inhale the contaminated air. [...] While further research is needed to determine the effect of adding transparent shields around school or office desks, all the aerosol experts interviewed agreed that desk shields were unlikely to help and were likely to interfere with the normal ventilation of the room. Depending on the conditions, the plastic shields could cause viral particles to accumulate in the room. The report did mention a study (PDF) by researchers with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in Cincinnati that tested different sized transparent barriers in an isolation room using a cough simulator. It found that "under the right conditions, taller shields, above 'cough height,' stopped about 70 percent of the particles from reaching the particle counter on the other side, which is where the store or salon worker would be sitting or standing." However, the research was conducted under highly controlled conditions and took place in an isolation room with consistent ventilation rates that didn't "accurately reflect all real-world situations," according to the study's authors. It also "didn't consider that workers and customers move around, that other people could be in the room breathing the redirected particles and that many stores and classrooms have several stations with acrylic barriers, not just one, that impede normal air flow."

smooth wombat writes: Problems at Amazon warehouses are well known, such as employees not having enough time to use the restroom (and getting docked pay for doing so) to insufficient protections during the pandemic, which lead to numerous deaths and nearly 20,000 infections (Note: the total number of infections is both Amazon and Whole Foods. Amazon declined to provide a break out of infections at each location). Now comes a union-backed study which indicates the number of injuries at Amazon warehouses is 80% higher than its competitors.

The BBC reports: "This new study comes from the Strategic Organizing Center (SOC), a coalition of labour unions. It analysed workplace safety data reported to the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration from 2017 to 2020. It found that 'workers at Amazon warehouses are not only injured more frequently than in non-Amazon warehouses, they are also injured more severely.' Workers forced to take time off for injuries were absent for an average of 46.3 days, it said -- a week longer than the average across the warehouse industry. And compared to its largest retail competitor Walmart, Amazon's overall injury rate was more than double, at 6.5 per 100 employees compared with three."

In response to the study, Amazon equated its workers to industrial athletes. "Just like an athlete who trains for an event, industrial athletes need to prepare their bodies to be able to perform their best at work," it warns. "Some positions will walk up to 13 miles a day... [others] will have a total of 20,000lb (9,072kg) lifted before they complete their shift," it said.

Long working hours are leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths per year, according to a new study by the World Health Organization and the International Labor Organization. The Seattle Times reports: Working more than 55 hours a week in a paid job resulted in 745,000 deaths in 2016, the study estimated, up from 590,000 in 2000. About 398,000 of the deaths in 2016 were because of stroke and 347,000 because of heart disease. Both physiological stress responses and changes in behavior (such as an unhealthy diet, poor sleep and reduced physical activity) are "conceivable" reasons that long hours have a negative impact on health, the authors suggest.

Other takeaways from the study:

- Working more than 55 hours per week is dangerous. It is associated with an estimated 35% higher risk of stroke and 17% higher risk of heart disease compared with working 35-40 hours per week.
- About 9% of the global population works long hours. In 2016, an estimated 488 million people worked more than 55 hours per week.
- Long hours are more dangerous than other occupational hazards. In all three years that the study examined (2000, 2010 and 2016), working long hours led to more disease than any other occupational risk factor, including exposure to carcinogens and the nonuse of seat belts at work. And the health toll of overwork worsened over time: From 2000 to 2016, the number of deaths from heart disease because of working long hours increased 42%, and from stroke 19%.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: Federal health officials on Friday updated public guidance about how the coronavirus spreads, emphasizing that transmission occurs by inhaling very fine respiratory droplets and aerosolized particles, as well as through contact with sprayed droplets or touching contaminated hands to one's mouth, nose or eyes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now states explicitly -- in large, bold lettering -- that airborne virus can be inhaled even when one is more than six feet away from an infected individual. The new language, posted online, is a change from the agency's previous position that most infections were acquired through "close contact, not airborne transmission."

As the pandemic unfolded last year, infectious disease experts warned for months that both the C.D.C. and the World Health Organization were overlooking research that strongly suggested the coronavirus traveled aloft in small, airborne particles. Several scientists on Friday welcomed the agency's scrapping of the term "close contact," which they criticized as vague and said did not necessarily capture the nuances of aerosol transmission. "C.D.C. has now caught up to the latest scientific evidence, and they've gotten rid of some old problematic terms and thinking about how transmission occurs," said Linsey Marr, an aerosol expert at Virginia Tech. The new focus underscores the need for the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration to issue standards for employers to address potential hazards in the workplace, some experts said.

Razer has created a concept reusable N95 respirator called Project Hazel, featuring Chroma RGB LEDs and microphones and amplifiers to project your voice. The Verge reports: It's a concept design with a glossy outside shell made of waterproof and scratch-resistant recycled plastic, which is transparent to allow for lip-reading and seeing facial cues when you chat with people. Currently, there isn't a price or release date attached. Razer refers to Project Hazel as a surgical N95, but it hasn't yet earned any of the necessary approvals and certifications from the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or Occupational Safety and Health Administration. In a statement to The Verge, Razer said it is working with a team of medical experts and scientists who are helping to develop the mask.

The main features of this mask lie within its two circular zones that flank your mouth. They're used for ventilation, giving the device an almost futuristic gas mask look. Razer claims Project Hazel will use active disc-type ventilators, filtering air that's breathed in, as well as the CO2 that's being exhaled. The company adds that it will be certified to filter 95 percent of airborne particles, including the COVID-19 virus and other common pathogens. [...] Microphones and amplifiers embedded in the ventilators will project your voice through the mask, so you won't have to worry about sounding muffled. Razer told us that it's working with THX sound engineers to find a balance in terms of how loud the speakers should be for accessibility purposes. [...] Each of the respirator-meets-amplifier rings can glow in the color of your choosing. And when it gets dark, a set of LEDs activate automatically to shine light on your mouth so others can still see you talk. The company also envisions that each mask will include a large charging case that sterilizes the mask with UV light when it's not in use.

An anonymous reader shares an investigative report by LA Times: The plane had begun its descent into Boston. Inside the cockpit, the captain was slumped in his seat. Sitting beside him, copilot Eric Tellmann was starting to pass out. Tellmann managed to strap on his oxygen mask, then grabbed the captain's arm and forced him to follow suit. Reviving slowly, the captain looked at Tellmann through his mask, and his eyes grew wide with fear. A strange smell had permeated the plane that day. Passengers and flight attendants were coughing and wiping teary eyes. The pilots briefly lifted their masks and could still smell the odor as the runway drew nearer. Tellmann and the captain parked the Airbus A319 at the gate. But they had no memory of landing or taxiing Spirit Airlines Flight 708. Tellmann went to the hospital for treatment and spent the next week at home in bed, vomiting and shaking and feeling "like a freight train had run over us," he said in a letter to his union about the July 2015 event. A mysterious smell. Strange symptoms. A trip to the emergency room. The signs were all there: Something had gone seriously wrong with the plane's air supply.

The air you breathe on airplanes comes directly from the jet engines. Known as bleed air, it is safe, unless there is a mechanical issue -- a faulty seal, for instance. When that happens, heated jet engine oil can leak into the air supply, potentially releasing toxic gases into the plane. For decades, the airline industry and its regulators have known about these incidents -- called fume events -- and have maintained that they are rare and that the toxic chemical levels are too low to pose serious health risks. But a Times investigation found that vapors from oil and other fluids seep into planes with alarming frequency across all airlines, at times creating chaos and confusion: Flight attendants vomit and pass out. Passengers struggle to breathe. Children get rushed to hospitals. Pilots reach for oxygen masks or gasp for air from opened cockpit windows. Such events are documented in airport paramedic records, NASA safety reports, federal aviation records and other filings reviewed by The Times. Tellmann, the Spirit Airlines pilot, was one of hundreds of airline crew members and passengers who reported being sickened or impaired on flights in recent years. A Times analysis of NASA safety reports from January 2018 to December 2019 identified 362 fume events that airline crew members reported to the agency, with nearly 400 pilots, flight attendants and passengers receiving medical attention. During at least 73 of those flights, pilots used emergency oxygen. Four dozen pilots were described as impaired to the point of being unable to perform their duties. Because they're made voluntarily, the NASA safety reports are the "tip of the iceberg," according to a recent study by a researcher from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

70% of America's movie theatres have now re-opened for business, reports NPR: "When our patrons come back, they'll see the safe environment we've provided for them," said John Fithian, president and CEO of the National Association of Theater Owners.

Fithian invited two medical experts and the heads of the country's biggest theater chains to launch a public awareness campaign dubbed "CinemaSafe," meant to ease moviegoer's fears. The campaign featured new industry-wide health and safety protocols, including mandatory face masks for moviegoers and employees, social distancing and regular sanitizing in theaters with better air ventilation, reduced theater capacity (most between 30% and 50%), and contact-less, electronic ticket sales.

Fithian says the protocols will be followed by more than 2,600 theater locations, including more than 30,000 screens in the U.S. The National Association of Theater Owners used guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

"It's important to understand that going to the movies is not risk free," said David F. Goldsmith, an epidemiologist at George Washington University who consulted with the National Association of Theater Owners on the protocols. Still, during the announcement, he said he had not seen any medical literature evidence showing movie theaters around the world have been a venue for viral transmission of COVID-19. "Honestly, time will tell," he said.
The New York Times reports that six U.S. states say it's still too dangerous to open their movie theatres — New York, California, New Jersey, North Carolina, Maryland and New Mexico.

But Megan Colligan, the president of Imax Entertainment, countered at a news conference Friday that "Some people go to the gym, some people go to church, some people need to go to the beach and surf, and some people really do need to go to the movies."