English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

For this paper, we will consider the necessity of full disclosure and the duty to inform the public of the results of public health related and environmental health studies. The focus of the paper is that the results of the research, which is related to public and environmental health can lead to risks for public health that can endanger human health, so no matter how small the statistical representativeness is, full transparency must be achieved. We chose to review and make an analysis on the public health issues related to the duty to inform the public of research results in a study of dry cleaning workers; the 10b.case as exposed by Steven S. Coughlin in his book “Case Studies in Public Health Ethics”, 2009. In supporting the theme of this paper, the necessity for full transparency of data, which could be of public health and environmental health interest – we will bring a series of pros and cons to full disclosure, followed by a construction of counter arguments and will offer possible solutions to the issue of full disclosure towards the public in the case of data or results of public health related research.

Transparency and the Duty of Full Disclosure in Public and Environmental Health