Continuing benefits of the Montreal Protocol and protection of the stratospheric ozone layer for human health and the environment.

The protection of Earth's stratospheric ozone (O3) is an ongoing process under the auspices of the universally ratified Montreal Protocol and its Amendments and adjustments. A critical part of this process is the assessment of the environmental issues related to changes in O3. The United Nations Environment Programme's Environmental Effects Assessment Panel provides annual scientific evaluations of some of the key issues arising in the recent collective knowledge base. This current update includes a comprehensive assessment of the incidence rates of skin cancer, cataract and other skin and eye diseases observed worldwide; the effects of UV radiation on tropospheric oxidants, and air and water quality; trends in breakdown products of fluorinated chemicals and recent information of their toxicity; and recent technological innovations of building materials for greater resistance to UV radiation. These issues span a wide range of topics, including both harmful and beneficial effects of exposure to UV radiation, and complex interactions with climate change. While the Montreal Protocol has succeeded in preventing large reductions in stratospheric O3, future changes may occur due to a number of natural and anthropogenic factors. Thus, frequent assessments of potential environmental impacts are essential to ensure that policies remain based on the best available scientific knowledge.

The effects of exposure to solar radiation on human health.

This assessment by the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) of the Montreal Protocol under the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) evaluates the effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation on human health within the context of the Montreal Protocol and its Amendments. We assess work published since our last comprehensive assessment in 2018. Over the last four years gains have been made in knowledge of the links between sun exposure and health outcomes, mechanisms, and estimates of disease burden, including economic impacts. Of particular note, there is new information about the way in which exposure to UV radiation modulates the immune system, causing both harms and benefits for health. The burden of skin cancer remains high, with many lives lost to melanoma and many more people treated for keratinocyte cancer, but it has been estimated that the Montreal Protocol will prevent 11 million cases of melanoma and 432 million cases of keratinocyte cancer that would otherwise have occurred in the United States in people born between 1890 and 2100. While the incidence of skin cancer continues to rise, rates have stabilised in younger populations in some countries. Mortality has also plateaued, partly due to the use of systemic therapies for advanced disease. However, these therapies are very expensive, contributing to the extremely high economic burden of skin cancer, and emphasising the importance and comparative cost-effectiveness of prevention. Photodermatoses, inflammatory skin conditions induced by exposure to UV radiation, can have a marked detrimental impact on the quality of life of sufferers. More information is emerging about their potential link with commonly used drugs, particularly anti-hypertensives. The eyes are also harmed by over-exposure to UV radiation. The incidence of cataract and pterygium is continuing to rise, and there is now evidence of a link between intraocular melanoma and sun exposure. It has been estimated that the Montreal Protocol will prevent 63 million cases of cataract that would otherwise have occurred in the United States in people born between 1890 and 2100. Despite the clearly established harms, exposure to UV radiation also has benefits for human health. While the best recognised benefit is production of vitamin D, beneficial effects mediated by factors other than vitamin D are emerging. For both sun exposure and vitamin D, there is increasingly convincing evidence of a positive role in diseases related to immune function, including both autoimmune diseases and infection. With its influence on the intensity of UV radiation and global warming, the Montreal Protocol has, and will have, both direct and indirect effects on human health, potentially changing the balance of the risks and benefits of spending time outdoors.

Linkages between COVID-19, solar UV radiation, and the Montreal Protocol.

There are several connections between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), solar UV radiation, and the Montreal Protocol. Exposure to ambient solar UV radiation inactivates SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19. An action spectrum describing the wavelength dependence of the inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 by UV and visible radiation has recently been published. In contrast to action spectra that have been assumed in the past for estimating the effect of UV radiation on SARS-CoV-2, the new action spectrum has a large sensitivity in the UV-A (315-400 nm) range. If this "UV-A tail" is correct, solar UV radiation could be much more efficient in inactivating the virus responsible for COVID-19 than previously thought. Furthermore, the sensitivity of inactivation rates to the total column ozone would be reduced because ozone absorbs only a small amount of UV-A radiation. Using solar simulators, the times for inactivating SARS-CoV-2 have been determined by several groups; however, many measurements are affected by poorly defined experimental setups. The most reliable data suggest that 90% of viral particles embedded in saliva are inactivated within ~ 7 min by solar radiation for a solar zenith angle (SZA) of 16.5° and within ~ 13 min for a SZA of 63.4°. Slightly longer inactivation times were found for aerosolised virus particles. These times can become considerably longer during cloudy conditions or if virus particles are shielded from solar radiation. Many publications have provided evidence of an inverse relationship between ambient solar UV radiation and the incidence or severity of COVID-19, but the reasons for these negative correlations have not been unambiguously identified and could also be explained by confounders, such as ambient temperature, humidity, visible radiation, daylength, temporal changes in risk and disease management, and the proximity of people to other people. Meta-analyses of observational studies indicate inverse associations between serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 positivity or severity of COVID-19, although the quality of these studies is largely low. Mendelian randomisation studies have not found statistically significant evidence of a causal effect of 25(OH)D concentration on COVID-19 susceptibility or severity, but a potential link between vitamin D status and disease severity cannot be excluded as some randomised trials suggest that vitamin D supplementation is beneficial for people admitted to a hospital. Several studies indicate significant positive associations between air pollution and COVID-19 incidence and fatality rates. Conversely, well-established cohort studies indicate no association between long-term exposure to air pollution and infection with SARS-CoV-2. By limiting increases in UV radiation, the Montreal Protocol has also suppressed the inactivation rates of pathogens exposed to UV radiation. However, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the expected larger inactivation rates without the Montreal Protocol would have had tangible consequences on the progress of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Relative rates of cancers and deaths in Australian communities with PFAS environmental contamination associated with firefighting foams: A cohort study using linked data.

BACKGROUND: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are environmental contaminants that are potentially harmful to health. We examined if rates of selected cancers and causes of deaths were elevated in three Australian communities with local environmental contamination caused by firefighting foams containing PFAS. The affected Australian communities were Katherine in Northern Territory, Oakey in Queensland and Williamtown in New South Wales. METHODS: All residents identified in the Medicare Enrolment File (1983-2019)-a consumer directory for Australia's universal healthcare-who ever lived in an exposure area (Katherine, Oakey and Williamtown), and a sample of those who ever lived in selected comparison areas, were linked to the Australian Cancer Database (1982-2017) and National Death Index (1980-2019). We estimated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) for 23 cancer outcomes, four causes of death and three control outcomes, adjusting for sex, age and calendar time of diagnosis. FINDINGS: We observed higher rates of prostate cancer (SIR=1·76, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1·36-2·24) in Katherine; laryngeal cancer (SIR=2·71, 95 % CI 1·30-4·98), kidney cancer (SIR=1·82, 95 % CI 1·04-2·96) and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality (SIR=1·81, 95 % CI 1·46-2·33) in Oakey; and lung cancer (SIR=1·83, 95 % CI 1·39-2·38) and CHD mortality (SIR=1·22, 95 % CI 1·01-1·47) in Williamtown. We also saw elevated SIRs for control outcomes. SIRs for all other outcomes and overall cancer were similar across exposure and comparison areas. INTERPRETATION: There was limited evidence to support an association between living in a PFAS exposure area and risks of cancers or cause-specific deaths.

Environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation, and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, Update 2021.

The Environmental Effects Assessment Panel of the Montreal Protocol under the United Nations Environment Programme evaluates effects on the environment and human health that arise from changes in the stratospheric ozone layer and concomitant variations in ultraviolet (UV) radiation at the Earth's surface. The current update is based on scientific advances that have accumulated since our last assessment (Photochem and Photobiol Sci 20(1):1-67, 2021). We also discuss how climate change affects stratospheric ozone depletion and ultraviolet radiation, and how stratospheric ozone depletion affects climate change. The resulting interlinking effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation, and climate change are assessed in terms of air quality, carbon sinks, ecosystems, human health, and natural and synthetic materials. We further highlight potential impacts on the biosphere from extreme climate events that are occurring with increasing frequency as a consequence of climate change. These and other interactive effects are examined with respect to the benefits that the Montreal Protocol and its Amendments are providing to life on Earth by controlling the production of various substances that contribute to both stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change.

Environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation, and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, Update 2020.

This assessment by the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) provides the latest scientific update since our most recent comprehensive assessment (Photochemical and Photobiological Sciences, 2019, 18, 595-828). The interactive effects between the stratospheric ozone layer, solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation, and climate change are presented within the framework of the Montreal Protocol and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. We address how these global environmental changes affect the atmosphere and air quality; human health; terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; biogeochemical cycles; and materials used in outdoor construction, solar energy technologies, and fabrics. In many cases, there is a growing influence from changes in seasonality and extreme events due to climate change. Additionally, we assess the transmission and environmental effects of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, in the context of linkages with solar UV radiation and the Montreal Protocol.

Environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, update 2019.

This assessment, by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP), one of three Panels informing the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, provides an update, since our previous extensive assessment (Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2019, 18, 595-828), of recent findings of current and projected interactive environmental effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation, stratospheric ozone, and climate change. These effects include those on human health, air quality, terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, biogeochemical cycles, and materials used in construction and other services. The present update evaluates further evidence of the consequences of human activity on climate change that are altering the exposure of organisms and ecosystems to UV radiation. This in turn reveals the interactive effects of many climate change factors with UV radiation that have implications for the atmosphere, feedbacks, contaminant fate and transport, organismal responses, and many outdoor materials including plastics, wood, and fabrics. The universal ratification of the Montreal Protocol, signed by 197 countries, has led to the regulation and phase-out of chemicals that deplete the stratospheric ozone layer. Although this treaty has had unprecedented success in protecting the ozone layer, and hence all life on Earth from damaging UV radiation, it is also making a substantial contribution to reducing climate warming because many of the chemicals under this treaty are greenhouse gases.

The effect of sunscreen on vitamin D: a review.

BACKGROUND: Sunscreen use can prevent skin cancer, but there are concerns that it may increase the risk of vitamin D deficiency. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to review the literature to investigate associations between sunscreen use and vitamin D3 or 25 hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature following the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. We identified manuscripts published in English between 1970 and 21 November 2017. Eligible studies were experimental [using an artificial ultraviolet radiation (UVR) source], field trials or observational studies. The results of each of the experimental studies and field trials are described in detail. Two authors extracted information from observational studies, and applied quality scoring criteria that were developed specifically for this question. These have been synthesized qualitatively. RESULTS: We included four experimental studies, three field trials (two were randomized controlled trials) and 69 observational studies. In the experimental studies sunscreen use considerably abrogated the vitamin D3 or 25(OH)D production induced by exposure to artificially generated UVR. The randomized controlled field trials found no effect of daily sunscreen application, but the sunscreens used had moderate protection [sun protection factor SPF) ~16]. The observational studies mostly found no association or that self-reported sunscreen use was associated with higher 25(OH)D concentration. CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence that sunscreen decreases 25(OH)D concentration when used in real-life settings, suggesting that concerns about vitamin D should not negate skin cancer prevention advice. However, there have been no trials of the high-SPF sunscreens that are now widely recommended. What's already known about this topic? Previous experimental studies suggest that sunscreen can block vitamin D production in the skin but use artificially generated ultraviolet radiation with a spectral output unlike that seen in terrestrial sunlight. Nonsystematic reviews of observational studies suggest that use in real life does not cause vitamin D deficiency. What does this study add? This study systematically reviewed all experimental studies, field trials and observational studies for the first time. While the experimental studies support the theoretical risk that sunscreen use may affect vitamin D, the weight of evidence from field trials and observational studies suggests that the risk is low. We highlight the lack of adequate evidence regarding use of the very high sun protection factor sunscreens that are now recommended and widely used.

Human health in relation to exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation under changing stratospheric ozone and climate.

The Montreal Protocol has limited increases in the UV-B (280-315 nm) radiation reaching the Earth's surface as a result of depletion of stratospheric ozone. Nevertheless, the incidence of skin cancers continues to increase in most light-skinned populations, probably due mainly to risky sun exposure behaviour. In locations with strong sun protection programs of long duration, incidence is now reducing in younger age groups. Changes in the epidemiology of UV-induced eye diseases are less clear, due to a lack of data. Exposure to UV radiation plays a role in the development of cataracts, pterygium and possibly age-related macular degeneration; these are major causes of visual impairment world-wide. Photodermatoses and phototoxic reactions to drugs are not uncommon; management of the latter includes recognition of the risks by the prescribing physician. Exposure to UV radiation has benefits for health through the production of vitamin D in the skin and modulation of immune function. The latter has benefits for skin diseases such as psoriasis and possibly for systemic autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis. The health risks of sun exposure can be mitigated through appropriate sun protection, such as clothing with both good UV-blocking characteristics and adequate skin coverage, sunglasses, shade, and sunscreen. New sunscreen preparations provide protection against a broader spectrum of solar radiation, but it is not clear that this has benefits for health. Gaps in knowledge make it difficult to derive evidence-based sun protection advice that balances the risks and benefits of sun exposure.

Environmental effects of ozone depletion, UV radiation and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, update 2017.

The Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) is one of three Panels of experts that inform the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. The EEAP focuses on the effects of UV radiation on human health, terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, air quality, and materials, as well as on the interactive effects of UV radiation and global climate change. When considering the effects of climate change, it has become clear that processes resulting in changes in stratospheric ozone are more complex than previously held. Because of the Montreal Protocol, there are now indications of the beginnings of a recovery of stratospheric ozone, although the time required to reach levels like those before the 1960s is still uncertain, particularly as the effects of stratospheric ozone on climate change and vice versa, are not yet fully understood. Some regions will likely receive enhanced levels of UV radiation, while other areas will likely experience a reduction in UV radiation as ozone- and climate-driven changes affect the amounts of UV radiation reaching the Earth's surface. Like the other Panels, the EEAP produces detailed Quadrennial Reports every four years; the most recent was published as a series of seven papers in 2015 (Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2015, 14, 1-184). In the years in between, the EEAP produces less detailed and shorter Update Reports of recent and relevant scientific findings. The most recent of these was for 2016 (Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2017, 16, 107-145). The present 2017 Update Report assesses some of the highlights and new insights about the interactive nature of the direct and indirect effects of UV radiation, atmospheric processes, and climate change. A full 2018 Quadrennial Assessment, will be made available in 2018/2019.

Are low sun exposure and/or vitamin D risk factors for type 1 diabetes?

The global variation in type 1 diabetes (T1D) incidence rates is one of the most significant observed for any non-communicable disease. Geographical patterns in incidence suggest that low sun exposure may contribute to the wide disparity, with incidence rates generally increasing with distance from the Equator. T1D development is associated with hyperactivity of the adaptive immune system leading to autoimmune destruction of insulin-secreting pancreatic ß cells. Both exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and vitamin D, with their known immunosuppressive effects, have the potential to delay or inhibit the disease. Efforts to confirm the role of UVR by vitamin D dependent and independent pathways in the pathogenesis of T1D have been challenged by inconsistent results among studies. Human observational studies and animal and in vitro experiments indicate that at least some of the benefits of sun exposure come from improved vitamin D status. There is no evidence of benefit for T1D risk of vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy at current recommended levels (400 IU per day); but some evidence supports that higher sun exposure and/or vitamin D sufficiency in pregnancy, or supplementation in early life, decreases T1D risk. Further research is required to confirm an association between UVR exposure and T1D and clarify the mechanisms involved.

Population attributable fractions and joint effects of key risk factors for multiple sclerosis.

AIM: We examined the combined effect of having multiple key risk factors and the interactions between the key risk factors of multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: We performed an incident case-control study including cases with a first clinical diagnosis of central nervous system demyelination (FCD) and population-based controls. RESULTS: Compared to those without any risk factors, those with one, two, three, and four or five risk factors had increased odds of being an FCD case of 2.12 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-4.03), 4.31 (95% CI, 2.24-8.31), 7.96 (95% CI, 3.84-16.49), and 21.24 (95% CI, 5.48-82.40), respectively. Only HLA-DR15 and history of infectious mononucleosis interacted significantly on the additive scale (Synergy index, 3.78; p = 0.03). The five key risk factors jointly accounted for 63.8% (95% CI, 43.9-91.4) of FCD onset. High anti-EBNA IgG was another important contributor. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of FCD onset can be explained by the currently known risk factors, with HLA-DR15, ever smoking and low cumulative sun exposure explaining most. We identified a significant interaction between HLA-DR15 and history of IM in predicting an FCD of CNS demyelination, which together with previous observations suggests that this is a true interaction.

The consequences for human health of stratospheric ozone depletion in association with other environmental factors.

Due to the implementation of the Montreal Protocol, which has limited, and is now probably reversing, the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer, only modest increases in solar UV-B radiation at the surface of the Earth have occurred. For many fair-skinned populations, changing behaviour with regard to exposure to the sun over the past half century - more time in the sun, less clothing cover (more skin exposed), and preference for a tan - has probably contributed more to greater levels of exposure to UV-B radiation than ozone depletion. Exposure to UV-B radiation has both adverse and beneficial effects on human health. This report focuses on an assessment of the evidence regarding these outcomes that has been published since our previous report in 2010. The skin and eyes are the organs exposed to solar UV radiation. Excessive solar irradiation causes skin cancer, including cutaneous malignant melanoma and the non-melanoma skin cancers, basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, and contributes to the development of other rare skin cancers such as Merkel cell carcinoma. Although the incidence of melanoma continues to increase in many countries, in some locations, primarily those with strong sun protection programmes, incidence has stabilised or decreased over the past 5 years, particularly in younger age-groups. However, the incidence of non-melanoma skin cancers is still increasing in most locations. Exposure of the skin to the sun also induces systemic immune suppression that may have adverse effects on health, such as through the reactivation of latent viral infections, but also beneficial effects through suppression of autoimmune reactivity. Solar UV-B radiation damages the eyes, causing cataracts and pterygium. UV-B irradiation of the skin is the main source of vitamin D in many geographic locations. Vitamin D plays a critical role in the maintenance of calcium homeostasis in the body; severe deficiency causes the bone diseases, rickets in children and osteomalacia in adults. Although many studies have implicated vitamin D deficiency in a wide range of diseases, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease, more recent evidence is less compelling, with meta-analyses of supplementation trials failing to show a beneficial effect on the health outcomes that have been tested. It continues to be difficult to provide public health messages to guide safe exposure to the sun that are accurate, simple, and can be used by people with different skin types, in different locations, and for different times of the year or day. There is increasing interest in relating sun protection messages to the UV Index. Current sun protection strategies are outlined and assessed. Climatic factors affect the amount of UV radiation received by the skin and eyes, separately from the effect of ozone depletion. For example, cloud cover can decrease or increase the intensity of UV radiation at Earth's surface and warmer temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns may alter the amount of time people spend outdoors and their choice of clothing. The combination of changes in climate and UV radiation may affect the number of pathogenic microorganisms in surface waters, and could have an impact on food security through effects on plant and aquatic systems. It remains difficult to quantify these effects and their possible importance for human health.

The relationship between ambient ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and objectively measured personal UVR exposure dose is modified by season and latitude.

Despite the widespread use of ambient ultraviolet radiation (UVR) as a proxy measure of personal exposure to UVR, the relationship between the two is not well-defined. This paper examines the effects of season and latitude on the relationship between ambient UVR and personal UVR exposure. We used data from the AusD Study, a multi-centre cross-sectional study among Australian adults (18-75 years), where personal UVR exposure was objectively measured using polysulphone dosimeters. Data were analysed for 991 participants from 4 Australian cities of different latitude: Townsville (19.3°S), Brisbane (27.5°S), Canberra (35.3°S) and Hobart (42.8°S). Daily personal UVR exposure varied from 0.01 to 21 Standard Erythemal Doses (median = 1.1, IQR: 0.5-2.1), on average accounting for 5% of the total available ambient dose. There was an overall positive correlation between ambient UVR and personal UVR exposure (r = 0.23, p < 0.001). However, the correlations varied according to season and study location: from strong correlations in winter (r = 0.50) and at high latitudes (Hobart, r = 0.50; Canberra, r = 0.39), to null or even slightly negative correlations, in summer (r = 0.01) and at low latitudes (Townsville, r = -0.06; Brisbane, r = -0.16). Multiple regression models showed significant effect modification by season and location. Personal exposure fraction of total available ambient dose was highest in winter (7%) and amongst Hobart participants (7%) and lowest in summer (1%) and in Townsville (4%). These results suggest season and latitude modify the relationship between ambient UVR and personal UVR exposure. Ambient UVR may not be a good indicator for personal exposure dose under some circumstances.

Early-life hygiene-related factors affect risk of central nervous system demyelination and asthma differentially.

The increasing prevalence of immune-related diseases, including multiple sclerosis, may be partly explained by reduced microbial burden during childhood. Within a multi-centre case-control study population, we examined: (i) the co-morbid immune diseases profile of adults with a first clinical diagnosis of central nervous system demyelination (FCD) and (ii) sibship structure in relation to an autoimmune (FCD) and an allergic (asthma) disease. FCD cases (n = 282) were aged 18-59 years; controls (n = 558) were matched on age, sex and region. Measures include: history of doctor-diagnosed asthma; sibling profile (number; dates of birth); and regular childcare attendance. FCD cases did not differ from controls with regard to personal or family history of allergy, but had a greater likelihood of chronic fatigue syndrome [odds ratio (OR) = 3·11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·11, 8·71]. Having any younger siblings showed reduced odds of FCD (OR = 0·68; 95% CI: 0·49, 0·95) but not asthma (OR = 1·47; 95% CI: 0·91, 2·38). In contrast, an increasing number of older siblings was associated with reduced risk of asthma (P trend = 0·04) but not FCD (P trend = 0·66). Allergies were not over-represented among people presenting with FCD. Sibship characteristics influence both FCD and asthma risk but the underlying mechanisms differ, possibly due to the timing of the putative 'sibling effect'.

Occupational exposure and risk of central nervous system demyelination.

Inconsistent evidence exists regarding the association between work-related factors and risk of multiple sclerosis (MS). We examined the association between occupational exposures and risk of a first clinical diagnosis of central nervous system demyelination (FCD), which is strongly associated with progression to MS, in a matched case-control study of 276 FCD cases and 538 controls conducted in Australia (2003-2006). Using a personal residence and work calendar, information on occupational history and exposure to chemicals and animals was collected through face-to-face interviews. Few case-control differences were noted. Fewer cases had worked as professionals (≥6 years) than controls (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.37, 0.96). After further adjustment for number of children, cases were more likely to have ever been exposed to livestock than controls (AOR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.03, 2.29). Among women, there was an increase in FCD risk associated with 10 or more years of exposure to livestock (AOR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.22, 6.33) or 6 or more years of farming (AOR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.23, 3.25; also adjusted for number of children). Similar findings were not evident among men. Thus, farming and exposure to livestock may be important factors in the development of FCD among women, with this finding further revealed after the confounding effect of parity or number of children is considered.

The AusD Study: a population-based study of the determinants of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration across a broad latitude range.

Observational studies suggest that people with a high serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration may have reduced risk of chronic diseases such as osteoporosis, multiple sclerosis, type 1 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. The AusD Study (A Quantitative Assessment of Solar UV Exposure for Vitamin D Synthesis in Australian Adults) was conducted to clarify the relationships between ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, dietary intake of vitamin D, and serum 25(OH)D concentration among Australian adults residing in Townsville (19.3°S), Brisbane (27.5°S), Canberra (35.3°S), and Hobart (42.8°S). Participants aged 18-75 years were recruited from the Australian Electoral Roll between 2009 and 2010. Measurements were made of height, weight, waist:hip ratio, skin, hair, and eye color, blood pressure, and grip strength. Participants completed a questionnaire on sun exposure and vitamin D intake, together with 10 days of personal UV dosimetry and an associated sun-exposure and physical-activity diary that was temporally linked to a blood test for measurement of 25(OH)D concentration. Ambient solar UV radiation was also monitored at all study sites. We collected comprehensive, high-quality data from 1,002 participants (459 males, 543 females) assessed simultaneously across a range of latitudes and through all seasons. Here we describe the scientific and methodological issues considered in designing the AusD Study.

Variability in vitamin D assays impairs clinical assessment of vitamin D status.

BACKGROUND: Measuring serum 25(OH)D concentration is common in clinical practice despite the questionable reliability of assays. AIMS: The aim of the present study was to examine agreement in 25(OH)D concentrations measured by different assays and laboratories, and consider related clinical implications. METHODS: Serum samples from 813 participants in the Australian Multicentre Study of Environment and Immune Function (the Ausimmune Study) were assayed for 25(OH)D concentration. Duplicate samples from subsets of subjects were sent to different laboratories, two using DiaSorin Liaison (Laboratory A and B) and one using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS - selected here as the nominal gold standard). Pairwise within-assay (both within-laboratory and between-laboratories) and between-assay agreement was examined using Deming regression and Bland-Altman plots. Common 25(OH)D cut-points for classification of vitamin D deficiency were used to compare the different assays. RESULTS: 25(OH)D concentrations measured using Liaison were substantially lower at Laboratory A than at Laboratory B (mean bias -11.60 nmol/L, 95% limits of agreement -46.39, 23.18). Both Liaison assays returned much lower 25(OH)D concentrations than LC-MS/MS (mean bias up to -26.05 nmol/L, 95% limits of agreement of -13.21, 65.31). For Laboratory A participants, 46% (355/765) were classified as vitamin D deficient (25(OH)D <50 nmol/L) using Liaison compared with 17% (128/765) using LC-MS/MS. For Laboratory B participants, the respective figures were 36% (76/209) and 20% (41/209). Hence, between 1-in-5 and 1-in-3 participants were misclassified as 'deficient'. CONCLUSION: Bias and variability in 25(OH)D measurements sufficient to affect significantly clinical decision-making were found both between-laboratories and between-assays. The adoption of common standards to allow assay calibration is required urgently.

Epstein-Barr virus and multiple sclerosis.

This review of the considerable evidence linking Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection to risk and disease progression in multiple sclerosis (MS) builds on the background to the virus and its interactions with the human host available in the online supplement (see supplement, available online only). The evidence for a similarity in the geographic patterns of occurrence of MS and EBV infection (with infectious mononucleosis or EBV specific serology used as surrogate markers), when reviewed critically, is very limited. There is strong evidence however that people with MS are more likely to report a past history of infectious mononucleosis (thought to represent initial EBV infection at an older age), and higher titres of EBV specific antibodies are associated with an increased risk of developing MS. Elevated levels of the latter are apparent many years before MS onset (compared with non-MS controls) and there is a dose-response relationship between MS risk and antibody titre, with antibodies to the EBV nuclear antigen-1 particularly important. The evidence in relation to EBV DNA load in blood or CSF is conflicting, as is that in relation to T cell responses to EBV. Several hypotheses that have been proposed to explain the links between EBV and MS risk are reviewed and gaps requiring further research are identified.