Children are commonly exposed to second-hand smoke (SHS) in the domestic environment or inside vehicles of smokers. Unfortunately, prenatal tobacco smoke (PTS) exposure is still common, too. SHS is hazardous to the health of smokers and non-smokers, but especially to that of children. SHS and PTS increase the risk for children to develop cancers and can trigger or worsen asthma and allergies, modulate the immune status, and is harmful to lung, heart and blood vessels. Smoking during pregnancy can cause pregnancy complications and poor birth outcomes as well as changes in the development of the foetus. Lately, some of the molecular and genetic mechanisms that cause adverse health effects in children have been identified. In this review, some of the current insights are discussed. In this regard, it has been found in children that SHS and PTS exposure is associated with changes in levels of enzymes, hormones, and expression of genes, micro RNAs, and proteins. PTS and SHS exposure are major elicitors of mechanisms of oxidative stress. Genetic predisposition can compound the health effects of PTS and SHS exposure. Epigenetic effects might influence in utero gene expression and disease susceptibility. Hence, the limitation of domestic and public exposure to SHS as well as PTS exposure has to be in the focus of policymakers and the public in order to save the health of children at an early age. Global substantial smoke-free policies, health communication campaigns, and behavioural interventions are useful and should be mandatory.

Background: Climate change is safe to be one of the biggest challenges of mankind. Human activities, especially the combustion of fossil fuels, contribute to the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and thus to the pace of climate change. The effects of climate change are already being felt, and the resulting damage will most likely be enormous worldwide. Because global impacts vary widely and will lead to very different national vulnerability to climate impacts, each country, depending on its economic background, has different options to ward off negative impacts. Decisions have to be made to mitigate climate consequences according to the preparedness and the vulnerability of countries against the presumed impacts. This requires a profound scientific basis. To provide sound background information, a bibliometric study was conducted to present global research on climate change using established and specific parameters. Bibliometric standard parameters, established socioeconomic values, and climate change specific indices were used for the analyses. This allowed us to provide an overall picture of the global research pattern not only in terms of general aspects, but also in terms of climate change impacts, its effects and regional differences. For this purpose, we choose representative indices, such as the CO₂ emissions for the responsibility of countries, the global climate risk index as a combination value for the different types of damage that countries can expect, the increase in sea level as a specific parameter as a measure of the huge global environmental impacts, and the readiness and vulnerability index for the different circumstances of individual countries under which climate change will take place. We hope to have thus made a comprehensive and representative selection of specific parameters that is sufficient to map the global research landscape. We have supplemented the methodology accordingly. Results: In terms of absolute publication numbers, the USA was the leading country, followed by the UK, and China in 3rd place. The steep rise in Chinese publication numbers over time came into view, while their citation numbers are relatively low. Scandinavian countries were leading regarding their publication numbers related to CO₂ emission and socioeconomic indices. Only three developing countries stand out in all analyses: Costa Rica, the Fiji Atoll, and Zimbabwe, although it is here that the climate impact will be greatest. A positive correlation between countries’ preparedness for the impacts of climate change and their publication numbers could be shown, while the correlation between countries’ vulnerability and their publication numbers was negative. Conclusions: We could show that there exists an inequity between national research efforts according to the publication output and the demands and necessities of countries related to their socioeconomic status. This inequity calls for a rethink, a different approach, and a different policy to improve countries' preparedness and mitigation capacity, which requires the inclusion of the most affected regions of the world in a strengthened international cooperation network.

The European Commission's current efforts to launch the largest proposal to restrict per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in history reflect the dire global plight of PFAS accumulation in the environment and their health impacts. While there are existing studies on PFAS research, there is a lack of comprehensive analysis that both covers the entire research period and provides deep insights into global research patterns, incentives, and barriers based on various parameters. We have been able to demonstrate the increasing interest in PFAS research, although citation numbers are declining prematurely. Policy regulations based on proving and establishing the toxicity of PFASs have stimulated research in developed countries and vice versa, with increasing emphasis on ecological aspects. China, in particular, is investing increasingly in PFAS research, but without defining or implementing regulations - with devastating effects. The separation of industrial and environmental research interests is clear, with little involvement of developing countries, even though their exposure to PFAS is devastating. It, therefore, requires increased globally networked and multidisciplinary approaches to address PFAS contamination challenges.