If work and the workplace contribute to poor health behaviors, should employers attempt to improve those behaviors? It likely is in the employer's best interest to do so and Cheap cigarettes online.

Poor health behaviors can lead to chronic disease. Workers with chronic disease may be at higher risk for workplace injury, have more absenteeism, and diminished productivity at work. Once injured, workers with chronic diseases take longer to return to work. The best strategy is for employers to promote healthy behaviors to prevent these chronic diseases. Visit: Buy tobacco online Australia.

Many state health departments offer chronic disease prevention programs. Surprisingly, there needs to be more state-level information about the health behaviors of workers across occupations. We recently presented findings from a research study;[1], whose main objective was to estimate obesity and other worker health behaviors by occupation in Washington State. We used the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey for this research. BRFSS is the world's largest telephone health survey and a nationwide surveillance system, collecting ongoing behavioral information in the U.S. and providing valuable public health data.

The prevalence of obesity among all Washington workers was 24.6%. However, the prevalence of obesity across occupations ranged from 11.6% to 38.6%. The three occupational groups with the highest obesity prevalence were:

1.     Truck drivers, 38.6%.

2.     Transportation and material moving (bus drivers, crane operators, etc.), 37.9%.

3.    Protective services (for example, firefighters, police officers, and correctional officers), 33.3%.

When compared to health-diagnosing occupations (physicians and dentists, for example) and after adjusting for other covariates, most occupations had significantly increased odds of obesity.

Including occupation on the BRFSS allows estimation of the prevalence of current smoking, adequate fruit and vegetable intake, and leisure time physical activity levels. Based on these measures, specific occupational groups can be evaluated against national and state efforts at promoting workplace wellness. For example, of the 28 occupational groups, 10 had already met the Healthy People 2020 goal for smoking prevalence at less than 12%.-

Using occupation to target workplace wellness and health promotion activities makes sense when you look at correlations between good and poor health behaviors. In this research, occupations with a high prevalence of obesity had a lower prevalence of vigorous leisure time physical activity, a lower prevalence of adequate fruit and vegetable consumption, and a higher prevalence of smoking.

Only 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009 BRFSS data were used because respondents' fruit and vegetable intake information was collected only in those years. Since there are very few systematic measures of workers' health by occupation at the state level, we want to emphasize the value of capturing health information by occupation across all states in BRFSS. The findings of this research study identify high-risk occupational groups of obesity in Washington State for better allocation of financial and public health resources. Similar research could be done for other health concerns of the workforce in other states.

Also worthy of further exploration is the connection between the conditions and nature of the work within an industry sector and health behaviors. The work demands, risks, schedules, remuneration, and other requirements that many jobs in certain industries and occupations entail have the potential to influence the overall health of workers in those occupations strongly. How do these parameters affect health behaviors and, ultimately, health outcomes? How can workplace policies, environments, and conditions be safer and more conducive to positive health opportunities and more informed decision-making? How can we better understand the interaction between healthier, safer work and a healthier citizenry? Current research funded by NIOSH is beginning to examine these issues more comprehensively.

The Washington findings from the BRFSS that the prevalence of obesity varies by occupation are consistent with another recent study out of NIOSH that examined the prevalence of obesity among workers by industry and occupation and by work organization factors using data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey Occupational Health Supplement (NHIS-OHS). Like the BRFSS data, the NHIS data showed a relatively high prevalence of obesity among workers in protective service, transportation, and material moving occupations. After adjusting for covariates, employment in health care and social assistance and public administration industries, architecture, engineering, community, social service, protective service, and office and administrative support occupations was also associated with increased obesity prevalence. Among all workers, working more than 40 hours per week and exposure to a hostile work environment were also significantly associated with obesity.

The NIOSH Total Worker HealthTM program takes a comprehensive approach to promote worker health by advancing the integration of health protection and health promotion in the workplace. The effort focuses on improving work quality and safety and empowering workers for better health-related decision-making. Visit the NIOSH Total Worker HealthTM website to learn more about the current research, interventions, and promising practices.

Reducing Worker Exposure to E.T.S.

What better time than during the American Cancer Society's annual Great American Smokeout to highlight the benefit of comprehensive smoke-free workplaces on workers' health? Furnishing a smoke-free work environment has been shown to reduce exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (E.T.S.) among non-smokers and decrease smoking among employees. In Massachusetts, recent surveillance findings suggest that one approach to reaching that goal – comprehensive state laws mandating smoke-free workplaces – had a measurable positive impact. 

The U.S. Surgeon General reports that there is no safe exposure to E.T.S., also known as secondhand smoke (USDHHS 2006). Workers can be exposed to E.T.S. in their workplaces if co-workers or members of the public are permitted to smoke. E.T.S. causes lung cancer and heart disease and is also linked to respiratory diseases. Not only does E.T.S. worsen asthma, but it also increases the likelihood of developing asthma.

In 2004, Massachusetts became the third state behind Delaware and New York to pass a comprehensive law banning smoking in bars, restaurants, and non-hospitality workplaces. The Massachusetts Smoke-Free Workplace Law (M.G.L. Ch. 270, § 22) requires all enclosed workplaces with one or more employees to be smoke-free.

We recently presented findings from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System demonstrating that since the 2004 ban in Massachusetts, the prevalence of E.T.S. exposure at work among non-smokers declined from 8% in 2003 (the year before the ban was passed) to 5.4% in 2010. At the same time, smoking among workers declined from 18.5% in 2004 to 12.7% in 2010. And while smoking prevalence had declined before the law was passed, the drop was steeper after it went into effect. These findings suggest that comprehensive smoking bans work, but our results indicate more work.