Habitual Dietary Patterns, Nutrient Intakes, and Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet among New Zealand Adults: The NZ MED Cross-Sectional Study.

There is increasing evidence that adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern reduces the incidence of diet-related diseases. To date, the habitual dietary intake of New Zealand (NZ) adults has not been examined in relation to its alignment with a Mediterranean-style dietary pattern. This study aimed to define the habitual dietary patterns, nutrient intakes, and adherence to the Mediterranean Diet in a sample of 1012 NZ adults (86% female, mean age 48 ± 16 years) who had their diabetes risk defined by the Australian Type 2 Diabetes Risk Assessment Tool (AUSDRISK). Dietary intakes were collected using a validated semi-quantitative NZ food frequency questionnaire, and dietary patterns were identified using principal component analysis. Reported intakes from the FFQ were used in conjunction with the Mediterranean-Style Dietary Pattern Score (MSDPS) to determine adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern. Mixed linear models were used to analyze the association between dietary patterns and MSDPS with demographics, health factors, and nutrient intakes. Two distinct dietary patterns were identified: Discretionary (positive loadings on processed meat, meat/poultry, fast food, sweet drinks, and sugar, sweets, and baked good) and Guideline (positive loadings on vegetables, eggs/beans, and fruits). Adherence to dietary patterns and diet quality was associated with age and ethnicity. Dietary patterns were also associated with sex. Adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern defined by the MSDPS was low, indicating that a significant shift in food choices will be required if the Mediterranean Diet is to be adopted in the NZ population.

Governments' accountability for Canada's pandemic response.

The COVID-19 pandemic-with its wide-reaching social, political, and economic implications-showcases the importance of public health governance. Governmental accountability is at the forefront of societal preoccupations, as state actors attempt to manage the pandemic by using sweeping emergency powers which grant them significant discretion. Though emergency measures have tremendous impacts on citizens' lives, elected officials and civil society have little input in how governments wield these powers. We reviewed available mechanisms in Canadian private, constitutional, and criminal law and found them to be unlikely sources of much-needed accountability. Therefore, we propose that provincial and territorial legislatures modify public health legislation to expand mechanisms to foster public confidence in decision-makers, and bolster accountability to parliaments and citizens.

Harm Reduction Works: Evidence and Inclusion in Drug Policy and Advocacy.

One of harm reduction's most salient features is its pragmatism. Harm reduction purports to distinguish itself from dominant prohibitionist and abstinence-based policy paradigms by being grounded in what is realistic, in contrast with the moralism or puritanism of prohibition and abstention. This is reflected in the meme "harm reduction works", popular both in institutional and grassroots settings. The idea that harm reduction is realistic and effective has meant different things among the main actors who seek to shape harm reduction policy. Drawing on scholarly literature about harm reduction, as well as examples from recent harm reduction advocacy efforts in relation to drug policy in Canada, this paper argues that harm reduction distinguishes itself through a unique "way of knowing". Grassroots harm reduction advocates, particularly as they argue through human rights frameworks, do more than simply make claims for the provision of particular services-like needle exchange, safe consumption sites, safe supply and the like-on the basis that these are realistic paths toward the health and well-being of people who use drugs. Rather, as they marshal lived experience in support of these policy changes through peer-driven initiatives in contexts of prohibition, they make particular claims about what constitute valid, methodologically rigorous evidence bases for action in contexts where policies to date have been driven by ideology and have developed in ways that have excluded and marginalized those most affected from policymaking. In doing so, they advocate for the centrality of people who use drugs not only in policy-making processes, but in evidence production itself.

UK: Court of Appeals upholds deportation orders of four people with HIV.

In November 2005, the UK Court of Appeals upheld deportation orders against four people with HIV who claimed that removal to their home countries, where they would be unable to obtain treatment, violated the rights to privacy and to be free from inhuman treatment under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court of Appeal affirmed that only in exceptional circumstances could persons with HIV rely on the European Convention to avoid deportation. None of the applicants' circumstances were found to be exceptional. The decision reflects the UK courts' narrow approach to interpretation of the Convention, an interpretation that makes it unlikely that the vast majority of persons living with HIV/AIDS will be able to successfully challenge deportation orders even when they face illness and death if expelled.

Australia: Court recognizes that HIV-positive people face special challenges in prison.

An Australian appellate court granted bail to a man charged with two separate counts of endangering life for allegedly having unprotected sex with two partners without disclosing that he was HIV positive. The man, who has pleaded not guilty to both charges, is accused of having committed the second offence while he was released on bail awaiting trial for the first. In deciding to release him, the Court considered, among other things, the unique difficulties that people living with HIV/AIDS face in prisons.

US: Kansas court strikes down harsher penalty for gay underage sex.

In October 2005, the Kansas Supreme Court struck down a law that would impose harsher penalties for same-sex statutory rape cases than for heterosexual cases. In arriving at its conclusion that the distinction had no rational basis, the Court noted that gay teenage sex is no more likely than adult or heterosexual sex to result in HIV transmission.

Cameroon: UN group finds detention of gay men a violation of human rights.

In an opinion issued on 11 October 2006, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention declared that the detention of 11 men in Cameroon on the basis of their presumed sexual orientation constituted an arbitrary deprivation of liberty and a violation of the principle of equal protection of the law. The Working Group called on the Cameroonian government to "examine the possibility of amending the legislation" criminalizing homosexual sex.

U.S.: sexual history must be disclosed in lawsuit for negligent HIV transmission, California Supreme Court rules.

In July 2006, the Supreme Court of California ruled that a man being sued for allegedly transmitting HIV to his partner was required to disclose information about his sexual history. The court also decided that in order to sue for negligent transmission of HIV, a plaintiff need not prove that the defendant actually knew he was HIV-positive at the time of sexual relations. Rather, it would be enough for the plaintiff to show that the defendant had reason to know he was living with HIV at the time of the alleged transmission.

U.K. Court rejects prisoner's application for needle exchange.

The U.K. Court of Appeal has ruled against prisoner John Shelley's challenge to the Prison Service refusal to provide needle exchange in prison.

New immigration law comes into effect as regulations finalized.

The new regulations make it easier for same-sex partners to immigrate to Canada. However, the government has rejected suggestions to change the way it determines whether potential immigrants living with HIV/AIDS or other health conditions would place excessive demands on Canada's health and social services.

Canadian news. Concerns raised about new immigration rules.

A new immigration law has been passed and will come into force in the near future. Community organizations have been critical of the proposed Regulations that will accompany the new law. Meanwhile, the federal government has instituted mandatory HIV testing of potential immigrants. Concerns have been voiced about how this testing will be carried out.