Suchergebnisse

We examine the Thai government's politicised COVID-19 containment strategies, which have been challenged by Thai protesters. Although we use securitisation theory as an explanatory framework, we argue that researchers using this theory can explain the issues only if they simultaneously use social-conflict theory to explain the interactions between securitising actors and their audiences. By supplementing securitisation theory with social-conflict theory, we have found that the roles of securitising actors and audiences are not fixed. In our case study of Thailand, the Thai government and protesters have played two roles simultaneously: the role of a securitising actor and the role of an audience. This finding suggests that successful securitisation is impermanent; that is, it is subject to change over time. Securitisation may be successful, but the success can only be temporary because as new actors or resources enter the picture, the previously successful securitisation will, at some point, diminish.

We examine the Thai government's politicised COVID-19 containment strategies, which have been challenged by Thai protesters. Although we use securitisation theory as an explanatory framework, we argue that researchers using this theory can explain the issues only if they simultaneously use social-conflict theory to explain the interactions between securitising actors and their audiences. By supplementing securitisation theory with social-conflict theory, we have found that the roles of securitising actors and audiences are not fixed. In our case study of Thailand, the Thai government and protesters have played two roles simultaneously: the role of a securitising actor and the role of an audience. This finding suggests that successful securitisation is impermanent; that is, it is subject to change over time. Securitisation may be successful, but the success can only be temporary because as new actors or resources enter the picture, the previously successful securitisation will, at some point, diminish. (JCSA/GIGA)

We examine the Thai government's politicised COVID-19 containment strategies, which have been challenged by Thai protesters. Although we use securitisation theory as an explanatory framework, we argue that researchers using this theory can explain the issues only if they simultaneously use social-conflict theory to explain the interactions between securitising actors and their audiences. By supplementing securitisation theory with social-conflict theory, we have found that the roles of securitising actors and audiences are not fixed. In our case study of Thailand, the Thai government and protesters have played two roles simultaneously: the role of a securitising actor and the role of an audience. This finding suggests that successful securitisation is impermanent; that is, it is subject to change over time. Securitisation may be successful, but the success can only be temporary because as new actors or resources enter the picture, the previously successful securitisation will, at some point, diminish.

We aimed to examine the biophysical and psychological effects of two different types of forests on women with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Seventy-one middle-aged Korean women participated in a half-day healing program at either Saneum Recreational Forest (a wild forest) or Seoul Forest (a tended forest) depending on their preference. The participants' biophysical parameters and Profile of Mood States (POMS) were measured before and after the healing program. The two groups differed significantly in acute insulin responses, pulse rate, oxidative stress markers, and stress hormone level, suggesting better homeostasis in the wild forest. The POMS suggested that the mean vigor and confusion scores significantly decreased in the wild forest. Considering the significantly more favorable acute insulin reaction and levels of oxidative stress and the trend toward positive mood state in the wild forest, we recommend that middle-aged patients with MetS participate in healing programs in wild forests.

Abstract

Background
To slow the spread of the COVID-19 virus, governments across the globe instituted stay-at-home orders leading to increased stress and social isolation. Not surprisingly, alcohol sales increased during this period. While most studies primarily focused on alcohol consumption among college students or adults, this study investigates alcohol misuse among marginalized youth in the USA. We examined risk factors associated with hazardous alcohol use and binge drinking including risk behaviors, life stressors and demographic characteristics.


Methods
In October 2020, youth living with or at high risk for acquiring human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), participating in community-based research to improve HIV prevention and care, were invited to complete an online survey to assess the impact of the stay-at-home orders on multiple aspects of their daily life.


Results
Respondents (n = 478) were on average 23 years old; cisgender (84%), not-heterosexual (86.6%), Latino or Black/African American (73%) and assigned male at birth (83%); 52% reported being employed and 14% reported living with HIV. White participants and those who use drugs had higher odds of hazardous alcohol use and binge drinking, compared with other race categories and non-drug users, respectively.


Conclusion
Contrary to findings from adult studies, we did not observe an increase in hazardous or binge drinking among youth at risk for HIV. Hazardous alcohol use and binge drinking was more likely among White participants, those who use drugs and those who were hazardous/binge drinkers prior to the COVID-19 lockdown, which points to the importance of identifying and treating youth who misuse alcohol early to prevent future alcohol misuse.

We conducted a records-based cohort study of patients who initiated pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) at a large federally qualified health center in Los Angeles, CA to characterize patterns of PrEP use, identify correlates of PrEP discontinuation, and calculate HIV incidence. Of 3,121 individuals initiating PrEP between 2014–2017, 42% (n=1,314) were active (i.e., had a current PrEP prescription) in April 2018. HIV incidence was 0.1/100 person-years among active PrEP patients, compared to 2.1/100 person-years among patients who discontinued. Compared to patients accessing PrEP through government programs with no prescription copay, risk of discontinuation was higher among those with private insurance (ARR = 1.4, 95% CI: 1.2, 1.7), or no insurance (ARR = 4.5, 95% CI 3.2, 6.4). Sixty-three percent of active PrEP patients had gaps between PrEP prescriptions, averaging one gap per year (median length = 65 days). Increasing access to free or low-cost PrEP can improve PrEP continuity.