There is increasing evidence that obesity and overweight may be related, in part, to adverse work conditions. In particular, the risk of obesity may increase in high-demand, low-control work environments, and for those who work long hours. In addition, obesity may modify the risk for vibration-induced injury and certain occupational musculoskeletal disorders. We hypothesized that obesity may also be a co–risk factor for the development of occupational asthma and cardiovascular disease that and it may modify the worker’s response to occupational stress, immune response to chemical exposures, and risk of disease from occupational neurotoxins. We developed 5 conceptual models of the interrelationship of work, obesity, and occupational safety and health and highlighted the ethical, legal, and social issues related to fuller consideration of obesity’s role in occupational health and safety.

This paper provides an overview of and perspective on the concept of well-being at work. Well-being is a term that reflects not only on one's health but satisfaction with work and life. Well-being is a summative concept that characterizes the quality of working lives, including occupational safety and health (OSH) aspects, and it may be a major determinant of productivity at the individual, enterprise and societal levels. Based on a review of the literature and a recent conference, we suggest a model linking workforce well-being, productivity, and population well-being. To appraise the validity of the model, we consider five questions: (i) is there a robust and usable definition of workplace well-being? (ii) have the variables that influence well-being been aptly described and can they be measured and used in risk assessments? (iii) what is the nature of evidence that well-being is linked to productivity? (iv) what is the state of knowledge on the effectiveness of interventions to promote workplace well-being? and (v) should interventions aimed at improving well-being at work focus on more than work-related factors?

The earliest and most extensive societal exposures to engineered nanoparticles are likely to occur in the workplace. Until toxicologic and health effects research moves forward to characterize more broadly the potential hazards of nanoparticles and to provide a scientific basis for appropriate control of nanomaterials in the workplace, current and future workers may be at risk from occupational exposures. This article reviews a conceptual framework for occupational risk management as applied to engineered nanomaterials and describes an associated approach for controlling exposures in the presence of uncertainty. The framework takes into account the potential routes of exposure and factors that may influence biological activity and potential toxicity of nanomaterials; incorporates primary approaches based on the traditional industrial hygiene hierarchy of controls involving elimination or substitution, engineering controls, administrative controls, and use of personal protective equipment; and includes valuable secondary approaches involving health surveillance and medical monitoring.

The relationship between global climate change and occupational safety and health has not been extensively characterized. To begin such an effort, it may be useful to develop a framework for identifying how climate change could affect the workplace; workers; and occupational morbidity, mortality, and injury. This article develops such a framework based on a review of the published scientific literature from 1988–2008 that includes climatic effects, their interaction with occupational hazards, and their manifestation in the working population. Seven categories of climate-related hazards are identified: (1) increased ambient temperature, (2) air pollution, (3) ultraviolet exposure, (4) extreme weather, (5) vector-borne diseases and expanded habitats, (6) industrial transitions and emerging industries; and (7) changes in the built environment. This review indicates that while climate change may result in increasing the prevalence, distribution, and severity of known occupational hazards, there is no evidence of unique or previously unknown hazards. However, such a possibility should not be excluded, since there is potential for interactions of known hazards and new conditions leading to new hazards and risks.

The future of work embodies changes to the workplace, work, and workforce, which require additional occupational safety and health (OSH) stakeholder attention. Examples include workplace developments in organizational design, technological job displacement, and work arrangements; work advances in artificial intelligence, robotics, and technologies; and workforce changes in demographics, economic security, and skills. This paper presents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's Future of Work Initiative; suggests an integrated approach to address worker safety, health, and well‐being; introduces priority topics and subtopics that confer a framework for upcoming future of work research directions and resultant practical applications; and discusses preliminary next steps. All future of work issues impact one another. Future of work transformations are contingent upon each of the standalone factors discussed in this paper and their combined effects. Occupational safety and health stakeholders are becoming more aware of the significance and necessity of these factors for the workplace, work, and workforce to flourish, merely survive, or disappear altogether as the future evolves. The future of work offers numerous opportunities, while also presenting critical but not clearly understood difficulties, exposures, and hazards. It is the responsibility of OSH researchers and other partners to understand the implications of future of work scenarios to translate effective interventions into practice for employers safeguarding the safety, health, and well‐being of their workers.

Most diseases, injuries, and other health conditions experienced by working people are multifactorial, especially as the workforce ages. Evidence supporting the role of work and personal risk factors in the health of working people is frequently underused in developing interventions. Achieving a longer, healthy working life requires a comprehensive preventive approach. To help develop such an approach, we evaluated the influence of both occupational and personal risk factors on workforce health. We present 32 examples illustrating 4 combinatorial models of occupational hazards and personal risk factors (genetics, age, gender, chronic disease, obesity, smoking, alcohol use, prescription drug use). Models that address occupational and personal risk factors and their interactions can improve our understanding of health hazards and guide research and interventions.