4.2 Article

Ethical thinking in occupational and environmental medicine: Commentaries from the Selikoff Fund for Occupational and Environmental Cancer Research

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE
卷 65, 期 4, 页码 286-320

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajim.23328

关键词

ethics; global warming; medical student education; nuclear workers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article pays tribute to Dr. Irving J. Selikoff, the founder of environmental medicine, and highlights his pioneering efforts in investigating and publicizing workers' exposures. It also discusses the ethics of occupational health, the challenges faced by nuclear energy workers, the climate crisis, and the importance of unions and medical education in promoting workers' health.
A tribute to Dr. Irving J. Selikoff MD, the founder of this journal, is indeed welcome now more than two decades after his passing. He was known during his lifetime as the US Father of Environmental Medicine which at the time encompassed occupational medicine and much more as industry also polluted the general environment. The 1970s were a busy time as OSHA and the EPA were newly formed and high exposures to workers were no exception. Dr. Selikoff was a brave pioneer examining workers throughout the country and Canada, publicizing their exposures, and writing and presenting the scientific results. Industry was not always receptive and controlled an astounding amount of narrative, with the creation of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine filling a void of scientific need. We four authors write about the ethics of occupational health, the plight of nuclear energy workers, the climate crisis and opportunity for unions to engage workers, and the global march toward educating medical students on workers' health and safety. All four of us interacted with Dr. Selikoff during his tenure at Mount Sinai, and over the years joined each other in promoting his legacy. Toward that end we have written articles honoring his memory.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据