Banning the word "accident"

Banning the "A word": where's the evidence?

BACKGROUND It is argued that use of the term "accident" has a negative effect on prevention efforts as the term implies that such events are due to chance. AIM To test the hypothesis that use of "injury" in place of "accident" can influence professional attitudes towards "accident/injury" prevention. SETTING Leeds Health Authority area serving the population (n=740,000) of the city of Leeds...

[Why not use the word accident].

How members of the public interpret the word accident.

OBJECTIVE To explore what the word accident means to the lay public. This interpretation is of interest because it has been raised by injury control professionals as one justification for discouraging use of that word. METHODS A national telephone survey of 943 adults in the United States was conducted. Respondents were selected at random from households whose phone numbers were generated usi...

The case for banning cigarettes.

Lifelong smokers lose on average a decade of life vis-à-vis non-smokers. Globally, tobacco causes about 5-6 million deaths annually. One billion tobacco-related deaths are predicted for the 21st century, with about half occurring before the age of 70. In this paper, we consider a complete ban on the sale of cigarettes and find that such a ban, if effective, would be justified. As with many poli...

Banning asbestos in Asia: campaigns and strategies by the Asian Network for the Rights of Occupational Accident Victims (ANROAV).

China, India, Indonesia, and Thailand are among the largest consumers of asbestos. Because markets in the West are dwindling, asbestos is heavily promoted in Asia. In spite of widespread usage, asbestos-related diseases are surprisingly few and reported cases of mesothelioma are rare in Asia except in Japan, Korea, and Singapore. The problem lies in diagnosis. Most of the asbestos-related disea...