PubMed · 1247435
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R Strelow. 1976. Noise control act.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1247435/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Transport noise is an increasingly prominent feature of the urban environment, making noise pollution an important environmental public health issue. This paper reports on the 2001-2003 RANCH project, the first cross-national epidemiologic study known to examine exposure-effect relations between aircraft and road traffic noise exposure and reading comprehension. Participants were 2,010 children aged 9-10 years from 89 schools around Amsterdam Schiphol, Madrid Barajas, and London Heathrow airports. Data from The Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom were pooled and analyzed using multilevel modeling. Aircraft noise exposure at school was linearly associated with impaired reading comprehension; the association was maintained after adjustment for socioeconomic variables (beta = -0.008, p = 0.012), aircraft noise annoyance, and other cognitive abilities (episodic memory, working memory, and sustained attention). Aircraft noise exposure at home was highly correlated with aircraft noise exposure at school and demonstrated a similar linear association with impaired reading comprehension. Road traffic noise exposure at school was not associated with reading comprehension in either the absence or the presence of aircraft noise (beta = 0.003, p = 0.509; beta = 0.002, p = 0.540, respectively). Findings were consistent across the three countries, which varied with respect to a range of socioeconomic and environmental variables, thus offering robust evidence of a direct exposure-effect relation between aircraft noise and reading comprehension.
Bacteria and fungi, isolated from United States Air Force (USAF) aviation fuel samples, were identified by gas chromatograph fatty acid methyl ester (GC-FAME) profiling and 16S or 18S rRNA gene sequencing. Thirty-six samples from 11 geographically separated USAF bases were collected. At each base, an above-ground storage tank, a refueling truck, and an aircraft wing tank were sampled at the lowest sample point, or sump, to investigate microbial diversity and dispersion within the fuel distribution chain. Twelve genera, including four Bacillus species and two Staphylococcus species, were isolated and identified. Bacillus licheniformis, the most prevalent organism isolated, was found at seven of the 11 bases. Of the organisms identified, Bacillus sp., Micrococcus luteus, Sphinogmonas sp., Staphylococcus sp., and the fungus Aureobasidium pullulans have previously been isolated from aviation fuel samples. The bacteria Pantoea ananatis, Arthrobacter sp., Alcaligenes sp., Kocuria rhizophilia, Leucobacter komagatae, Dietza sp., and the fungus Discophaerina fagi have not been previously reported in USAF aviation fuel. Only at two bases were the same organisms isolated from all three sample points in the fuel supply distribution chain. Isolation of previously undocumented organisms suggests either, changes in aviation fuel microbial community in response to changes in aviation fuel composition, additives and biocide use, or simply, improvements in isolation and identification techniques.
World War II became known as the "wizard war" because the cycles of developing countermeasures and counter-countermeasures to the weapons deployed by all sides drove rapid technological change. However, technological innovation was not the only contribution scientists made to the war effort. Through Operational Research (OR)--the scientific scrutiny of new weapons, their deployment and relative efficiency--scientists also influenced how warfare itself was conducted. This new scientific field emerged in the UK, where it helped to tighten the defense against the Luftwaffe. It quickly spread to other aspects of the military machine, improving both antisubmarine campaigns and bombing strategy. But although this analytical approach to warfare offered military commanders a factual basis on which to base difficult decisions and deal with tactical and strategic uncertainty, it was not without controversy. Indeed, several recommendations that came out of OR sparked disputes over the allocation of resources and strategic priorities.