Search

MISCOMMUNICATION OF EVALI RISK BY HEALTH AUTHORITIES Some of the information from Australian governments about EVALI has been inaccurate and misleading. Nicotine vaping was not the cause of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury in the United States In January 2020, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) concluded that EVALI was strongly linked to vitamin E acetate [[12]]. EVALI (E-cigarette, or Vaping, product use-Associated Lung Injury) was an outbreak of severe and sometimes fatal lung injury in North America between mid-2019 and early 2020 [[1]]. [Extracted from the article]

Heterosexual exposure accounts for most HIV transmission in sub‐Saharan Africa, and this mode, as a proportion of new infections, is escalating globally. The scientific evidence accumulated over more than 20 years shows that among the strategies advocated during this period for HIV prevention, male circumcision is one of, if not, the most efficacious epidemiologically, as well as cost‐wise. Despite this, and recommendation of the procedure by global policy makers, national implementation has been slow. Additionally, some are not convinced of the protective effect of male circumcision and there are also reports, unsupported by evidence, that non‐sex‐related drivers play a major role in HIV transmission in sub‐Saharan Africa. Here, we provide a critical evaluation of the state of the current evidence for male circumcision in reducing HIV infection in light of established transmission drivers, provide an update on programmes now in place in this region, and explain why policies based on established scientific evidence should be prioritized. We conclude that the evidence supports the need to accelerate the implementation of medical male circumcision programmes for HIV prevention in generalized heterosexual epidemics, as well as in countering the growing heterosexual transmission in countries where HIV prevalence is presently low., Review Implementation of male circumcision (MC) for HIV prevention in sub‐Saharan Africa remains disappointingly slow despite its proven efficacy of greater than 60% based on the results of three randomized [...]

Objective: To conduct a pilot study to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of a multi-component smoking cessation intervention among prison inmates. Methods: A prospective study conducted within a maximum-security prison located near Sydney, New South Wales, and housing around 330 men. Participants received a smoking cessation intervention with six-month follow-up to determine abstinence. The smoking cessation intervention consisted of two brief cognitive behavioural therapy sessions, nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion and self-help resources. Point prevalence and continuous abstinence at follow-up were verified with expired carbon monoxide measures. Results: Thirty male inmates participated in the intervention. At six months, the biochemically validated point prevalence and continuous abstinence rates were 26% and 22% respectively. Reasons for relapse to smoking included: transfers to other prisons without notice, boredom, prolonged periods locked in cells, and stress associated with family or legal concerns. Those inmates who relapsed, or continued to smoke following the intervention, smoked less tobacco than at baseline and 95% stated they were willing to try to quit again using our intervention. Conclusions: Prison inmates are able to quit or reduce tobacco consumption while in prison but any smoking cessation intervention in this setting needs to address prison-specific issues such as boredom, stress, transfers to other prisons, court appearances, and isolation from family and friends. Implications: The prevalence of smoking within Australian prisons is alarmingly high. Further work into how to encourage prisoners to quit smoking is required.

In shooting galleries, drug users are able to illegally rent cubicles to inject drugs. Established in Kings Cross, Sydney in the early 1990s, police grudgingly tolerated several such galleries. In 1997, a royal commission recommended that a parliamentary inquiry consider establishing an official medically supervised injecting center (MSIC). Despite strong evidence supporting an MSIC, a majority of the committee voted against a trial facility. As an act of civil disobedience, a group of concerned citizens established an unsanctioned MSIC. However, police soon closed the facility. At a subsequent parliamentary drug summit, delegates voted to support an official trial of an MSIC and invited a congregation of Roman Catholic nuns to establish the facility. When the nuns were instructed to withdraw, the Uniting Church was invited to establish the project. The MSIC opened in May 2001. It can be concluded that public health practitioners wishing to improve appalling outcomes from drug policies sometimes have to resort to civil disobedience in order to achieve their goals.