The medium-term perceived impact of work from home on life and work domains of knowledge workers during COVID-19 pandemic: A survey at the National Research Council of Italy.

Objective: The study aimed to investigate perceptions and determinants of the overall impact on life and work domains among a community of knowledge workers after 18 months of forced work from home due to the pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional study with a retrospective assessment was conducted early in 2022 at the National Research Council of Italy. Five single-item questions explored the perceived impact on life domain while a 7-item scale the impact on the work domain. Bivariate analyses and multivariate regressions were used to evaluate the associations between impacts and some key factors defined by 29 ad hoc closed questions. Results: More than 95% of the 748 respondents reported a perceived change in at least one item of the life domain. For each of these items, although a large group of subjects has reported that working from home had no impact (from 27 to 55%), in the rest of the sample the positive evaluation (from 30 to 60%) clearly prevailed over the negative one. Overall, most of the subjects (64%) rated the impact on the work experience positively. Relationship with colleagues and participation in the work context were the items where the greatest number of negative rates was concentrated (27 and 25%, respectively). On the other hand, positive perceptions prevailed over both negative perceptions and lack of impact perceptions on the subjects of organizational flexibility and quality of work. The frequency of work-room sharing, home-work commute time and changes in sedentary lifestyle, have been identified as common explanatory factors of perceived impacts on both domains. Conclusion: Overall, respondents reported positive rather than negative perceived impacts of forced work from home in both their lives and work. The obtained results suggest that policies to promote the physical and mental health of employees, strengthen inclusion and maintain a sense of community are necessary to improve workers' health and prevent the effects of perceived isolation on research activities.

The Gofman-Tamplin Cancer Risk Controversy and Its Impact on the Creation of BEIR I and the Acceptance of LNT.

BACKGROUND:  The major public dispute between John Gofman and his colleague Arthur Tamplin and the United States (US) Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) at the end of the 1960s and during the early 1970s significantly impacted the course of cancer risk assessment in the US and worldwide. The challenging and provocative testimony of Gofman to the US Senate in early 1970 lead to the formation of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) I Committee in order to evaluate the accuracy of claims by Gofman and Tamplin that emissions from nuclear power plants would significantly increase the occurrence of genetic defects and cancers. BEIR I recommended the adoption of the linear non-threshold (LNT) dose response model for the assessment of cancer risks from radiation exposures. The US EPA adopted this recommendation and generalized it to incorporate chemical carcinogens, thereby affecting cancer risk assessments over the next decades. Despite the scientific limitations and ideological framework of their perspectives, Gofman and Tamplin are of considerable historical importance since they had essential roles in affecting the adoption of LNT by regulatory agencies.

Linear Non-Threshold (LNT) historical discovery milestones.

The present paper provides a summarized identification of critical historical milestones in the discovery of the flawed and corrupt foundations of cancer risk assessment, with particular focus on the LNT Dose Response model. The milestone sequence presented herein is based on a large body of published findings by the author. The history of LNT and cancer response represents what may be the most significant case of scientific misconduct reported in the US, with its revelation severely damaging the scientific credibility and moral authority of leading US regulatory agencies and organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the journal Science. The consequences of this corrupt history are substantial, affecting cancer risk assessment throughout the world, critical aspects of national economies, the development of critical technologies and public health practices.

Ethical Issues in the US 1956 National Academy of Sciences BEAR I Genetics Panel Report to the Public.

ABSTRACT: This paper presents newly discovered evidence from the personal correspondence of four US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) Genetics Panelists that their 1956 report to the public was written by a third party and was neither reviewed nor approved by the Panel prior to its publication and release to the public. The letters revealed that the 1956 Report contained serious errors and did not represent the views of the Panel. The failure of the US NAS to notify the public that the Report had not been reviewed and approved by the Panel represents a serious breach of ethics. Further ethical issues relate to the failure of the NAS to (1) correct the errors in the Report within an appropriately timely manner and (2) reveal the lack of approval by the Panel even after the Report's release. In light of these discoveries and the profound historical-and continuing-significance of the 1956 Report to all conventional cancer-related risk assessment processes, we opine that this ethical improbity must be acknowledged and that this document must be retracted by the NAS.

Modifying the National Research Council weight gain model to estimate daily gain for stockers grazing bermudagrass in the southern United States.

The energy requirements, feed intake, and performance of grazing animals vary daily due to changes in weather conditions, forage nutritive values, and plant and animal maturity throughout the grazing season. Hence, realistic simulations of daily animal performance can be made only by the models that can address these changes. Given the dearth of simple, user-friendly models of this kind, especially for pastures, we developed a daily gain model for large-frame stockers grazing bermudagrass sCynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.], a widely used warm-season perennial grass in the southern United States. For model development, we first assembled some of the classic works in forage-beef modeling in the last 50 yr into the National Research Council (NRC) weight gain model. Then, we tested it using the average daily gain (ADG) data obtained from several locations in the southern United States. The evaluation results showed that the performance of the NRC model was poor as it consistently underpredicted ADG throughout the grazing season. To improve the predictive accuracy of the NRC model to make it perform under bermudagrass grazing conditions, we made an adjustment to the model by adding the daily departures of the modeled values from the data trendline. Subsequently, we tested the revised model against an independent set of ADG data obtained from eight research locations in the region involving about 4,800 animals, using 30 yr (1991-2020) of daily weather data. The values of the various measures of fit used, namely the Willmott index of 0.92, the modeling efficiency of 0.75, the R2 of 0.76, the root mean square error of 0.13 kg d-1, and the prediction error relative to the mean observed data of 24%, demonstrated that the revised model mimicked the pattern of observed ADG data satisfactorily. Unlike the original model, the revised model predicted more closely the ADG value throughout the grazing season. The revised model may be useful to accurately reflect the impacts of daily weather conditions, forage nutritive values, seasonality, and plant and animal maturity on animal performance.

Leveraging Integrated Primary Care to Address Patients' and Families' Unmet Social Needs: Aligning Practice with National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine Recommendations.

Primary care is well-poised to address unmet social needs that affect health. Integrated primary care is increasingly common and can be leveraged to facilitate identification of practice and clinician-level modifiable characteristics and assist practices to address unmet social needs for patients and families. A recent National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM)'s consensus report identified 5 critical system-level activities to facilitate the integration of addressing social needs into health care: awareness (ask patients), adjustment (flexible intervention delivery), assistance (intervention to address the social need), alignment (link with community resources), and advocacy (policy change). This article outlines how integrated primary care characteristics, such as routine screening, functional workflows, interprofessional team communication, and patient-centered practices, exemplify the NASEM report's activities and offer robust biopsychosocial tools for addressing social needs. We provide a case to illustrate how these strategies might be used in practice.

The National Academies' Roundtable on Genomics and Precision Health: Where we have been and where we are heading.

The clinical application of genetics and genomics to advance precision health is one of the most dynamic and promising areas of medicine. In 2020, building on nearly 15 years of work, the Roundtable on Genomics and Precision Health of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine undertook a strategic planning process to assess its strengths, consider the current challenges facing the field, and set out new goals for its future work. As a result, the Roundtable has updated its vision and mission and prioritized four major areas of inquiry-innovation, dialogue, equity, and adoption-while keeping true to its founding goal of providing a neutral convening space for the diversity of stakeholders in genomics and precision health. The Roundtable is unique for its breadth of membership and is committed to fostering a new era for precision health built on decades of expanding knowledge and the emergence of new technologies. To achieve its goals, the Roundtable seeks to broaden its membership's diversity and to engage with new audiences. Roundtable members explore how evidence-based discoveries in genomics could be adopted and used in innovative ways to better serve human health, how equitable access to genomic and precision health technologies can be ensured, and how the Roundtable and broader genomics and precision health community can communicate more effectively to inform the public regarding genomics and precision health. As a first principle, the Roundtable is working to support the overall goal that all people benefit from genomics for precision health.

The International Academy of Health Sciences Informatics (IAHSI): 2020 Report.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the major activities of the International Academy of Health Sciences Informatics (IAHSI) in the 2020 time period and to welcome its 2020 Class of Fellows. METHOD: Report from the members of the Academy's Board. RESULTS: Due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, both Plenary meetings in 2020 had to be organized as virtual meetings. Scientific discussions, focusing on mobilizing computable biomedical knowledge and on data standards and interoperability formed major parts of these meetings. A statement on the use of informatics in pandemic situations was elaborated and sent to the World Health Organization. A panel on data standards and interoperability started its work. 34 Fellows were welcomed in the 2020 Class of Fellows so that the Academy now consists of 179 members. CONCLUSIONS: There was a shift from supporting to strategic activities in the Academy's work. After having achieved organizational stability, the Academy can now focus on its strategic work and so on its main objective.

Perspective: Impact of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Report on the Process for the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.

The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) recommended steps to redesign the process of developing the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) are based on 5 guiding principles (enhance transparency; promote diversity of expertise and experience; support a deliberative process; manage biases and conflicts of interest; and adopt state-of-the-art processes and methods). Using these principles and recommendations, the USDA and HHS updated the process for developing the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines, including the process for appointing members and managing the work of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Modifications included having public comment on the topics and questions to be addressed by the Federal Advisory Committee, reviewing professional and financial activities on potential appointees to the committee prior to their appointment, redesigning the website to provide status updates on the work of the committee as analytical frameworks and draft conclusions were developed, strengthening the approaches for conducting systematic reviews, and adding a public meeting for discussion of the final report before its submission to the Secretaries of the USDA and HHS. Because the DGA is reviewed and updated every 5 y, it is possible to learn from each cycle what works well and where improvements in the process can be implemented. The current article illustrates, from the perspective of the advisory committee, the impact of the NASEM report on the development of the scientific report by examining changes in the process consistent with the 5 principles.

Ethical failings: The problematic history of cancer risk assessment.

This paper demonstrates that unethical conduct by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) I Genetics Panel led to their recommendation of the Linear Non-Threshold (LNT) Model for radiation risk assessment and its subsequent adoption by the US and the world community. The analysis, which is based largely on preserved communications of the US NAS Genetics Panel members, reveals that Panel members and their administrative leadership at the NAS displayed an integrated series of unethical actions designed to ensure, (1) the acceptance of the LNT and (2) funding to radiation geneticist panel members and professional colleagues. These findings are significant because major public policies in open democracies, such as cancer risk assessment and other issues impacted by public fears of radiation or chemical exposures, require ethical foundations. Recognition of these ethical failures of the BEAR I Genetics Panel should require a high level administrative, legislative and scientific reassessment of the scientific foundations of cancer risk assessment, with the likely result necessitating revision of current policies and practices. The BEAR I Genetics Panel, 1956 Science journal publication should immediately be retracted because it contains deliberate misrepresentations of the scientific record that were designed to manipulate scientific and public opinion on radiation risk assessment in a dishonest manner.

Evaluation of predicted ration nutritional values by NRC (2001) and INRA (2018) feed evaluation systems, and implications for the prediction of milk response.

Net energy and protein systems (hereafter called feed evaluation systems) offer the possibility to formulate rations by matching feed values (e.g., net energy and metabolizable protein) with animal requirements. The accuracy and precision of this approach relies heavily on the quantification of various animal digestive and metabolic responses to dietary changes. Therefore, the aims of the current study were, first, to evaluate the predicted responses to dietary changes of total-tract digestibility (including organic matter, crude protein, and neutral detergent fiber) and nitrogen (N) flows at the duodenum (including microbial N and undigested feed N together with endogenous N) against measurements from published studies by 2 different feed evaluation systems. These feed evaluation systems were the recently updated Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA, 2018) and the older, yet widely used, National Research Council (NRC, 2001) system. The second objective was to estimate the accuracy and precision of predicting milk yield responses based on values of net energy (NEL) and metabolizable protein (MP) supply predicted by the 2 feed evaluation systems. For this, published studies, with experimentally induced changes in either NEL or MP content, were used to calibrate the relationship of NEL and MP supply, with milk component yields. Based on the slope, root mean square prediction error, and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), the results obtained show that total nonammonia nitrogen flow at the duodenum was predicted with similar accuracy and precision, but considerably better prediction was achieved when the INRA model was used to predict organic matter and neutral detergent fiber digestibility responses. The average NEL and MP content predicted by both models was similar, but NEL and MP content of individual diets differed substantially between both models as indicated by determination coefficients of 0.45 (NEL content) and 0.50 (MP content). Despite these differences, this work shows that when response equations are calibrated with NEL and MP values either from the INRA model or from the NRC model, the accuracy and precision (slope, root mean square prediction error, and CCC) of the predicted milk component yields responses is similar between the models. The lowest accuracy and precision were observed for milk fat yield response, with CCC values in the range of 0.37 to 0.40, compared with milk lactose and protein yields responses for which CCC values were in the range of 0.75 to 0.81.