ÄR GRÖNT SPRÅK LIKA MED GRÖN VERKLIGHET? En kritisk retorikanalys av H&M’s hållbarhetskommunikation

Executive summary In the 21st century, the environment and sustainability initiatives have become a major focus of attention worldwide. It is increasingly common for the public to hold companies accountable for the impact of their activities on the environment. While many companies are adapting to green production and promoting these initiatives, some companies are instead exploiting the social discourse of environmental responsibility for their own benefit. This can for instance be done by strategically using the increased attention for sustainability to strengthen the own brand, while transparency may be selective and the company still has a huge environmental impact. This study therefore examines the linguistic strategies that the company H&M uses in their communication to investors in their sustainability reports of 2023. The aim is then to see what consequences their statements may have, in relation to the massive criticism they have received regarding greenwashing in their corporate communication. By doing this, I believe one can see if and how any greenwashing is expressed through language. Which could in its turn be a danger to the consumers trust, the legitimacy of the fashion industry and simply the larger discourse of environmental responsibility. This study aims to critically analyze the rhetoric of H&M's linguistic strategies. The scientific discipline of rhetoric plays a prominent role in this study, both as a theoretical framework and as an analytical method. Given the purpose of the study, a qualitative method is therefore best suitable, as the focus of the study will be on analyzing the meaning, content and context of H&M's sustainability communication. The results of the study identified a variety of linguistic strategies used by H&M, including emphasizing partnerships with influential actors, highlighting its own expertise and experience in environmental work and emphasizing strong shared values as the basis for sustainability work. In summation, the study concludes that H&M does not communicate about its sustainability work in an honest way and is thus guilty of a form of greenwashing; selectively disclosing positive things, while excluding any negative information

Effect of anakinra versus usual care in adults in hospital with COVID-19 and mild-to-moderate pneumonia (CORIMUNO-ANA-1): a randomised controlled trial

International audienc

Effect of Tocilizumab vs Usual Care in Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 and Moderate or Severe Pneumonia

International audienceImportance Severe pneumonia with hyperinflammation and elevated interleukin-6 is a common presentation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Objective To determine whether tocilizumab (TCZ) improves outcomes of patients hospitalized with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia.Design, Setting, and Particpants This cohort-embedded, investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, bayesian randomized clinical trial investigating patients with COVID-19 and moderate or severe pneumonia requiring at least 3 L/min of oxygen but without ventilation or admission to the intensive care unit was conducted between March 31, 2020, to April 18, 2020, with follow-up through 28 days. Patients were recruited from 9 university hospitals in France. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis with no correction for multiplicity for secondary outcomes.Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to receive TCZ, 8 mg/kg, intravenously plus usual care on day 1 and on day 3 if clinically indicated (TCZ group) or to receive usual care alone (UC group). Usual care included antibiotic agents, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, vasopressor support, and anticoagulants.Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were scores higher than 5 on the World Health Organization 10-point Clinical Progression Scale (WHO-CPS) on day 4 and survival without need of ventilation (including noninvasive ventilation) at day 14. Secondary outcomes were clinical status assessed with the WHO-CPS scores at day 7 and day 14, overall survival, time to discharge, time to oxygen supply independency, biological factors such as C-reactive protein level, and adverse events.Results Of 131 patients, 64 patients were randomly assigned to the TCZ group and 67 to UC group; 1 patient in the TCZ group withdrew consent and was not included in the analysis. Of the 130 patients, 42 were women (32%), and median (interquartile range) age was 64 (57.1-74.3) years. In the TCZ group, 12 patients had a WHO-CPS score greater than 5 at day 4 vs 19 in the UC group (median posterior absolute risk difference [ARD] −9.0%; 90% credible interval [CrI], −21.0 to 3.1), with a posterior probability of negative ARD of 89.0% not achieving the 95% predefined efficacy threshold. At day 14, 12% (95% CI −28% to 4%) fewer patients needed noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or mechanical ventilation (MV) or died in the TCZ group than in the UC group (24% vs 36%, median posterior hazard ratio [HR] 0.58; 90% CrI, 0.33-1.00), with a posterior probability of HR less than 1 of 95.0%, achieving the predefined efficacy threshold. The HR for MV or death was 0.58 (90% CrI, 0.30 to 1.09). At day 28, 7 patients had died in the TCZ group and 8 in the UC group (adjusted HR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.33-2.53). Serious adverse events occurred in 20 (32%) patients in the TCZ group and 29 (43%) in the UC group (P = .21).Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial of patients with COVID-19 and pneumonia requiring oxygen support but not admitted to the intensive care unit, TCZ did not reduce WHO-CPS scores lower than 5 at day 4 but might have reduced the risk of NIV, MV, or death by day 14. No difference on day 28 mortality was found. Further studies are necessary for confirming these preliminary results.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0433180

Sarilumab in adults hospitalised with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia (CORIMUNO-SARI-1): An open-label randomised controlled trial

International audienc