Examining the Relationship between Climate Change and Vibriosis in the United States: Projected Health and Economic Impacts for the 21st Century

BACKGROUND

This paper represents, to our knowledge, the first national-level (United States) estimate of the economic impacts of vibriosis cases as exacerbated by climate change. Vibriosis is an illness contracted through food- and waterborne exposures to various Vibrio species (e.g., nonV. cholerae O1 and O139 serotypes) found in estuarine and marine environments, including within aquatic life, such as shellfish and finfish.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to project climate-induced changes in vibriosis and associated economic impacts in the United States related to changes in sea surface temperatures (SSTs).

METHODS

For our analysis to identify climate links to vibriosis incidence, we constructed three logistic regression models by Vibrio species, using vibriosis data sourced from the Cholera and Other Vibrio Illness Surveillance system and historical SSTs. We relied on previous estimates of the cost-per-case of vibriosis to estimate future total annual medical costs, lost income from productivity loss, and mortality-related indirect costs throughout the United States. We separately reported results for V. parahaemolyticus, V. vulnificus, V. alginolyticus, and "V. spp.," given the different associated health burden of each.

RESULTS

By 2090, increases in SST are estimated to result in a 51% increase in cases annually relative to the baseline era (centered on 1995) under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5, and a 108% increase under RCP8.5. The cost of these illnesses is projected to reach $5.2 billion annually under RCP4.5, and $7.3 billion annually under RCP8.5, relative to $2.2 billion in the baseline (2018 U.S. dollars), equivalent to 140% and 234% increases respectively.

DISCUSSION

Vibriosis incidence is likely to increase in the United States under moderate and unmitigated climate change scenarios through increases in SST, resulting in a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality, and costing billions of dollars. These costs are mostly attributable to deaths, primarily from exposure to V. vulnificus. Evidence suggests that other factors, including sea surface salinity, may contribute to further increases in vibriosis cases in some regions of the United States and should also be investigated. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9999a.

Projecting the Suicide Burden of Climate Change in the United States

We quantify and monetize changes in suicide incidence across the conterminous United States (U.S.) in response to increasing levels of warming. We develop an integrated health impact assessment model using binned and linear specifications of temperature-suicide relationship estimates from Mullins and White (2019), in combination with monthly age- and sex-specific baseline suicide incidence rates, projections of six climate models, and population projections at the conterminous U.S. county scale. We evaluate the difference in the annual number of suicides in the U.S. corresponding to 1-6°C of warming compared to 1986-2005 average temperatures (mean U.S. temperatures) and compute 2015 population attributable fractions (PAFs). We use the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Value of a Statistical Life to estimate the economic value of avoiding these mortality impacts. Assuming the 2015 population size, warming of 1-6°C could result in an annual increase of 283-1,660 additional suicide cases, corresponding to a PAF of 0.7%-4.1%. The annual economic value of avoiding these impacts is $2 billion-$3 billion (2015 U.S. dollars, 3% discount rate, and 2015 income level). Estimates based on linear temperature-suicide relationship specifications are 7% larger than those based on binned temperature specifications. Accounting for displacement decreases estimates by 17%, while accounting for precipitation decreases estimates by 7%. Population growth between 2015 and the future warming degree arrival year increases estimates by 15%-38%. Further research is needed to quantify and monetize other climate-related mental health outcomes (e.g., anxiety and depression) and to characterize these risks in socially vulnerable populations.

Projecting the Suicide Burden of Climate Change in the United States

We quantify and monetize changes in suicide incidence across the conterminous United States (U.S.) in response to increasing levels of warming. We develop an integrated health impact assessment model using binned and linear specifications of temperature-suicide relationship estimates from Mullins and White (2019), in combination with monthly age- and sex-specific baseline suicide incidence rates, projections of six climate models, and population projections at the conterminous U.S. county scale. We evaluate the difference in the annual number of suicides in the U.S. corresponding to 1-6°C of warming compared to 1986-2005 average temperatures (mean U.S. temperatures) and compute 2015 population attributable fractions (PAFs). We use the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Value of a Statistical Life to estimate the economic value of avoiding these mortality impacts. Assuming the 2015 population size, warming of 1-6°C could result in an annual increase of 283-1,660 additional suicide cases, corresponding to a PAF of 0.7%-4.1%. The annual economic value of avoiding these impacts is $2 billion-$3 billion (2015 U.S. dollars, 3% discount rate, and 2015 income level). Estimates based on linear temperature-suicide relationship specifications are 7% larger than those based on binned temperature specifications. Accounting for displacement decreases estimates by 17%, while accounting for precipitation decreases estimates by 7%. Population growth between 2015 and the future warming degree arrival year increases estimates by 15%-38%. Further research is needed to quantify and monetize other climate-related mental health outcomes (e.g., anxiety and depression) and to characterize these risks in socially vulnerable populations.

Projecting the Suicide Burden of Climate Change in the United States

We quantify and monetize changes in suicide incidence across the conterminous United States (U.S.) in response to increasing levels of warming. We develop an integrated health impact assessment model using binned and linear specifications of temperature-suicide relationship estimates from Mullins and White (2019), in combination with monthly age- and sex-specific baseline suicide incidence rates, projections of six climate models, and population projections at the conterminous U.S. county scale. We evaluate the difference in the annual number of suicides in the U.S. corresponding to 1-6°C of warming compared to 1986-2005 average temperatures (mean U.S. temperatures) and compute 2015 population attributable fractions (PAFs). We use the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Value of a Statistical Life to estimate the economic value of avoiding these mortality impacts. Assuming the 2015 population size, warming of 1-6°C could result in an annual increase of 283-1,660 additional suicide cases, corresponding to a PAF of 0.7%-4.1%. The annual economic value of avoiding these impacts is $2 billion-$3 billion (2015 U.S. dollars, 3% discount rate, and 2015 income level). Estimates based on linear temperature-suicide relationship specifications are 7% larger than those based on binned temperature specifications. Accounting for displacement decreases estimates by 17%, while accounting for precipitation decreases estimates by 7%. Population growth between 2015 and the future warming degree arrival year increases estimates by 15%-38%. Further research is needed to quantify and monetize other climate-related mental health outcomes (e.g., anxiety and depression) and to characterize these risks in socially vulnerable populations.

How animal agriculture stakeholders define, perceive, and are impacted by antimicrobial resistance: challenging the Wellcome Trust's Reframing Resistance principles

Humans, animals, and the environment face a universal crisis: antimicrobial resistance (AR). Addressing AR and its multi-disciplinary causes across many sectors including in human and veterinary medicine remains underdeveloped. One barrier to AR efforts is an inconsistent process to incorporate the plenitude of stakeholders about what AR is and how to stifle its development and spread-especially stakeholders from the animal agriculture sector, one of the largest purchasers of antimicrobial drugs. In 2019, The Wellcome Trust released Reframing Resistance: How to communicate about antimicrobial resistance effectively (Reframing Resistance), which proposed the need to establish a consistent and harmonized messaging effort that describes the AR crisis and its global implications for health and wellbeing across all stakeholders. Yet, Reframing Resistance does not specifically engage the animal agriculture community. This study investigates the gap between two principles recommended by Reframing Resistance and animal agriculture stakeholders. For this analysis, the research group conducted 31 semi-structured interviews with a diverse group of United States animal agriculture stakeholders. Participants reported attitudes, beliefs, and practices about a variety of issues, including how they defined AR and what entities the AR crisis impacts most. Exploration of Reframing Resistance's Principle 2, "explain the fundamentals succinctly" and Principle 3, "emphasis that this is universal issue; it can affect anyone, including you" reveals disagreement in both the fundamentals of AR and consensus of "who" the AR crisis impacts. Principle 2 may do better to acknowledge that animal agriculture stakeholders espouse a complex array of perspectives that cannot be summed up in a single perspective or principle. As a primary tool to combat AR, behavior change must be accomplished first through outreach to stakeholder groups and understanding their perspectives.

Single-blind, randomised, parallel group study of the Bard Biocath catheter and a silicone elastomer coated catheter

A group of 69 community patients undergoing long-term urethral catheterisation for urinary incontinence took part in this study; 33 patients with a mean age of 70.03 years (+/- 16.6) received the Dow Corning Silastic catheter (16 F 10-ml balloon) and 36 patients with a mean age of 75.61 years (+/- 12.6) received the Bard Biocath catheter (16 F 10-ml balloon). Over a 16-week period catheters were monitored every 2 weeks and changed as necessary. The Bard Biocath catheter remained in situ for an average of 89.61 days (+/- 35.31) and the Silastic catheter remained in situ for an average of 56.7 days (+/- 38.8); this difference was statistically significant. Used catheters were analysed for encrustation using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The average time in situ for non-encrusted Biocath catheters was 83.7 days and 25.28 days for non-encrusted Silastic catheters. It was found that 70% of patients who received Biocath catheters preferred them to their previous catheters whereas only 30% of patients in the Silastic group preferred the trial catheter. The incidence of bypassing was 28% in the Biocath group and 52.8% in the Silastic group.

A study of the clinical efficacy of azelastine in patients with extrinsic asthma, and its effect on airway responsiveness

1. The effect of 4.4 mg azelastine administered orally on airway responsiveness, skin prick testing, daily peak expiratory flow rates and symptoms of asthma was compared with placebo in a 7 week double-blind, parallel group study of 24 patients with extrinsic asthma. The study was in two parts: a 2 week assessment period, during which all patients received placebo tablets but recorded daily peak flow rates (PEFRs) and symptoms, preceding the 7 week double-blind comparison. 2. Azelastine, 4.4 mg, significantly decreased airway responsiveness to histamine compared with placebo both after a single dose (P less than 0.001), and following 7 weeks continuous treatment (P less than 0.02). Airway responsiveness to methacholine was not altered by administration of azelastine compared with placebo. 3. Skin prick test weal diameters to both allergen and histamine were significantly reduced after both a single dose and following 7 weeks continuous therapy treatment with azelastine. 4. There was a significant improvement in both the mean of the morning and the evening peak flow rates recorded during the last week compared with the first week of the study in the group receiving 4.4 mg of azelastine twice daily compared with placebo. Scores for wheeze were significantly reduced during the final 3 weeks of the study in patients receiving azelastine compared both with those receiving placebo and with the first week of the study (P less than 0.05, P less than 0.01). Consumption of inhaled bronchodilators fell significantly during the study in the group receiving azelastine therapy (P less than 0.05); no such fall occurred in the placebo treated patients. 5. A bitter metallic taste was reported by 58% of patients who received azelastine therapy.

The effect of single and multiple dose therapy with azelastine on the immediate asthmatic response to allergen provocation testing

The effect of 2.2 or 4.4 mg of azelastine administered orally on immediate allergen-induced airflow obstruction was studied in 20 young patients with asthma. Provocation testing was performed after a single oral dose of azelastine or placebo and repeated after 3 weeks of twice daily therapy with azelastine or placebo. After multiple dose therapy with 4.4 mg of azelastine for 21 days, significantly more allergen was required to produce a 35% fall in specific airways conductance than after placebo therapy (p less than 0.008). Apart from a "bitter, metallic" taste in the mouth reported by 41.2% of the patients while they were receiving azelastine, no other unwanted effects were encountered.