2012年12月14日，老美把PM2.5的标准值降低到12微克每立方米（年均值），并说由此带来的健康收益为40-90多亿美元（原来的值好像是15）。 原文： On December 14, 2012, EPA updated the national air quality standards for PM 2.5 by revising the annual standard to 12 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). Updated last in 1997, the revised annual standard will have major economic benefits with comparatively low costs. EPA estimates health benefits of the revised standard would range from $4 billion to over $9 billion per year. 原文链接： http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/bd4379a92ceceeac8525735900400c27/e4cef67086019f9a85257af60059cdbc!OpenDocument PM2.5也称为苏特（SOOT），意为烟灰、煤烟，就是指小于等于2.5微米的颗粒。苏特是衡量空气污染的重要指标。 苏特能够进入肺的深处，会带来一系列严重的健康危害。这包括死的早、心脏病、中风、急性支气管炎、儿童哮喘加重等。 翻译可能不当，请参照原文： Soot, also known as fine particle pollution (PM 2.5 ), can penetrate deep into the lungs and has been linked to a wide range of serious health effects, including premature death, heart attacks, and strokes, as well as acute bronchitis and aggravated asthma among children. 曹相生 2013,1.18
“Recently, we have witnessed exceptional Olympic Games in both Beijing and Vancouver, which not only broke sporting records, but also set new standards in terms of audience figures and commercial support for the Olympic Movement. As the Olympic marketing programmes continue to grow and develop, they ensure the future viability of the Games and provide essential support not only for the Olympic Games, but also for the Olympic Movement and the Olympic athletes.” Gerhard Heiberg, IOC Marketing Commission Chairman With the ability to attract a global audience of billions, the Olympic Games provide one of the most effective international marketing platforms in the world. By using the unique platform provided by the Games, the Olympic Marketing Programme plays an integral role in the promotion, financial security and stability of the Olympic Movement. The IOC’s marketing partners have therefore become valued members of the Olympic Family. Objectives of the Olympic Marketing Programme The main objective of the Olympic Marketing Programme is to ensure the independent financial stability of the Olympic Movement. By creating long-term marketing programmes, the future of both the Olympic Movement and the Olympic Games are ensured, with the revenue generated distributed equitably throughout the entire Olympic Movement. The Olympic Marketing Programme also ensures that the Olympic Games can be experienced by the maximum number of people throughout the world, principally via broadcast to television and digital media platforms, and that the equity that is inherent in the Olympic image and ideal is protected. Olympic Revenue Sources There are several major programmes through which the IOC generates revenue for the Olympic Movement. The IOC manages the sale of broadcast rights, The Olympic Partners (TOP) worldwide sponsorship programme and the IOC official supplier and licensing programme. Under the direction of the IOC, the Organising Committees for the Olympic Games(OCOGs) manage domestic sponsorship, ticketing and licensing programmes within the host country. National Olympic Committees (NOCs) also manage their own commercial sponsorship programmes, granting Olympic marketing rights within the NOC country or territory only, in categories that do not compete with the TOP partners. These local sponsorship programmes support their sports development activities and Olympic teams, in addition to the support provided by the TOP Programme. Revenue Distribution The IOC distributes over 90% of Olympic marketing revenue to organisations within the Olympic Movement. These include the 204 NOCs, their Olympic teams and athletes, the OCOGs and the International Federations (IFs) of the various Olympic sports. These funds help support the staging of the Olympic Games and promote the development of sport around the world. The IOC retains less than 10% of Olympic marketing revenue to cover the operational and administrative costs of governing the Olympic Movement. For more information about the Olympic marketing programmes, please read the IOC’s Marketing Fact File (www.olympic.org/Documents/IOC_Marketing/OLYMPICMARKETING-FACT-FILE-2012.pdf). “The Olympic symbol, seen by billions of people during each edition of the Olympic Games, is present every day around the globe via the National Olympic Committees and other numerous associations. It has grown to become one of the world’s most recognised brands, serving as a visual ambassador for the Olympic Movement.” Jacques Rogge, IOC President The Olympic rings, which are one of the most widely recognised symbols in the world, are the visual representation of the Olympic brand and embody the vision,mission, values and working principles of the Olympic Movement. The Olympic values of Excellence, Friendship and Respect are at the core of the Olympic brand and are based on the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, which were established more than a century ago in The Olympic Charter. These positive universal values give the Olympic brand a powerful, emotive and unique identity that transcends sport and resonates strongly with people of all ages and cultures from all over the world. Indeed, according to IOC research conducted in 2008, 96% of people globally can correctly identify them. The enduring strength of the Olympic brand is the foundation of the Olympic marketing programme, which attracts commercial partners that are eager to align their own brands with the values of Olympism. The London 2012 Brand “This is a truly innovative brand logo that graphically captures the essence of the London 2012 Olympic Games – namely to inspire young people around the world through sport and the Olympic values. Each edition of the Olympic Games brings its own flavour and touch to what is now well over a century of modern Olympic history; the brand launched today by London 2012 is, I believe, an early indication of the dynamism, modernity and inclusiveness with which London 2012 will leave its Olympic mark.” Jacques Rogge, IOC President The London 2012 brand is based around the Games’ official emblem, which was unveiled in 2007. The unique design is based on the number 2012 – the year of the Games – and also includes the Olympic rings and the name of the host city, London. The emblem is dynamic, modern and flexible, reflecting a brand savvy world where people, especially young people, no longer relate to static logos but respond to a dynamic brand that works with new technology and across traditional and new media networks. It has become London 2012’s visual icon, instantly recognisable amongst all age groups, all around the world, and has been adapted to adopt a number of different colour schemes, including those of the official partners. The brand’s ability to appeal to young people is also reflected in the official motto for the Games – ‘Inspire a Generation’ – which represents the promise made by the Organising Committee when London won the bid for the Games. 原文见 http://www.olympic.org/Documents/IOC_Marketing/London_2012/IOC_Marketing_Media_Guide_2012.pdf
发展中国家很多实验室普遍存在生物安全性方面的缺陷，这些缺陷难免会造成病原体泄漏等生物安全危机，其影响可能会是全球性的。有关专家呼吁WHO等世界性组织牵头制定有关实验室安全的全球性标准。请看今天《自然》杂志发表的新闻述评。 Nature | News Biosafety concerns for labs in the developing world As report reveals lax standards in Asia-Pacific, researchers debate how to enforce rules. Ewen Callaway 22 May 2012 Biocontainment labs across the Asia-Pacific region all too often fail to live up to the term. An inspection of dozens of labs has found that nearly one-third of the biosafety hoods intended to protect workers from deadly pathogens did not work properly — an offence for which a Western lab could be shut down. In one facility, only a shower curtain enclosed a table on which the brains of rabid dogs were routinely dissected. Such deficiencies are symptomatic of a biosafety crisis in many of the laboratories that diagnose and study infectious agents in developing countries, say biorisk experts who attended a meeting at London’s Chatham House on 17May, where the results of the inspection were presented. The weaknesses could have repercussions around the globe if pathogens were released. “The strength of a chain is based on its weakest link, and developing countries are the weakest link,” says Teck-Mean Chua, former president of the Asia-Pacific Biosafety Association based in Singapore, which co-sponsored the anonymized laboratory inspection. Complaints of inadequate lab protocol in developing countries may not surprise many biologists, but they are attracting attention as scientists and research agencies in the West place increasing emphasis on biosafety. Discussions at the meeting skirted around the controversies surrounding the publication of research on mammal-transmissible forms of the H5N1 influenza virus. However, attendees did talk about how measures to protect lab workers and contain pathogens would affect research on diseases such as flu. In most Western countries, rules on biosafety — meant to safeguard lab workers against infection — and biosecurity, which protects the general public, became much stricter after 2001, when anthrax attacks in the United States raised the spectre of bioterrorism using laboratory-prepared pathogens. But stringent biosafety and biosecurity rules are unworkable in many developing countries, where researchers often need to handle infectious agents such as anthrax and plague to protect public health, but lack the infrastructure of the West, says Nigel Lightfoot, an associate fellow at the Centre on Global Health Security at Chatham House, who chaired last week’s meeting. “When you don’t have any electricity, the answer is not to build a very high-security laboratory,” he says. “You’ve got to move away from the costly bells-and-whistles solutions to what is practical.” Speakers suggested solutions such as small biocontainment boxes, for example, and also pointed out that pathogens that are endemic in a particular region present a lower biosecurity risk there than in Western laboratories. “We cannot stop them from working on things they need to for the health of their countries,” says Tim Trevan, executive director of the International Council for the Life Sciences, a non-governmental organization based in Arlington, Virginia, which is interested in biosafety and biosecurity in the Middle East and Africa. Lightfoot believes that “you’re going to have dual standards” to cover different areas. But having two sets of lab rules may not sit well with either side, says Nicoletta Previsani, who heads the biorisk-management team at the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva, Switzerland. Scientists in developing countries may feel that they are being left with less-than-safe labs, whereas those in richer countries could feel overburdened by regulations that others don’t have to follow. Some meeting attendees, including Chua, called on the WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in Rome and the World Organisation for Animal Health in Paris to take the lead in establishing global standards for lab safety and security. But Previsani says that such organizations cannot tell their member states how to operate their labs. Lightfoot adds that the WHO lacks the money and staff to act as a regulator. In January, the agency issued a five-year plan on laboratory biorisk management, in which it emphasized that it would be better placed in an organizational role, coordinating activities between stakeholders (see go.nature.com/xd9vdj ). Lightfoot argues that networks of non-governmental organizations and biosafety bodies ought to press developing nations to institute better lab standards. Donors could also help by paying more attention to the long-term sustainability of labs that they help to establish, adds Toby Leslie, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who has trained lab workers in Afghanistan. Too often, he says, money is spent on infrastructure and equipment without considering whether the laboratories can be operated safely by knowledgeable staff for years to come. A planned national health laboratory in Kabul, for instance, will need long-term support for maintenance and training. “I can’t see a way that Afghanistan is going to be able to support it independently,” says Leslie. Nature 485 , Pages: 425 Date published: (24 May 2012) DOI: doi:10.1038/485425a http://www.nature.com/news/biosafety-concerns-for-labs-in-the-developing-world-1.10687
标签: standards
