Perceived need of, and interest in, HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis amongst men who have sex with men attending three sexual health clinics in London, UK

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has proven efficacy in reducing the risk of HIV infection in men who have sex with men (MSM), but has not yet been commissioned in the UK. The aim of this study was to investigate perceived need and benefit (or experience of) PrEP among HIV-negative MSM attending sexual health clinics. HIV-negative MSM attending three sexual health centres in London, UK were opportunistically invited to complete a questionnaire. Data collected comprised demographic data and sexual and drug use behaviours as well as questions regarding perceptions of risk and need for PrEP. Logistic regression analysis was undertaken to identify variables predicting acceptability of, and intention to use, PrEP. In addition, data were gathered in respondents already taking PrEP. Eight hundred and thirty-nine questionnaires were analysed. The median age of respondents was 35 years (IQR 28–41, range 18–78), 650 (77%) were of white ethnicity and 649 (77%) had a university education. Four hundred and fifty-six (54%) reported at least one episode of condomless anal sex in the preceding three months, 437 (52%) reported recreational drug use in the preceding three months and 311 (37%) had been diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection within the preceding six months. Four hundred and sixty-three (64%) of 726 strongly agreed with the statement ‘I think I would benefit from PrEP’. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that having receptive anal intercourse (RAI) without condoms, having an awareness of the risk of unprotected RAI and having belief in the effectiveness of PrEP were independent predictors for someone thinking they would benefit from taking PrEP. Eight percent of respondents (59/724) had already taken or were currently taking PrEP. The results suggest that individuals at risk are likely to perceive themselves as benefiting from PrEP. The majority perceived their risk of acquiring HIV and benefit from PrEP accurately. Overall they appeared to have little concern over the use of PrEP and generally positive attitudes. Further investigation is warranted to understand why those at risk do not perceive benefit from PrEP

Systematic review and meta-analysis of reduction in all-cause mortality from walking and cycling and shape of dose response relationship

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Walking and cycling have shown beneficial effects on population risk of all-cause mortality (ACM). This paper aims to review the evidence and quantify these effects, adjusted for other physical activity (PA). DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic review to identify relevant studies. Searches were conducted in November 2013 using the following health databases of publications: Embase (OvidSP); Medline (OvidSP); Web of Knowledge; CINAHL; SCOPUS; SPORTDiscus. We also searched reference lists of relevant texts and reviews. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA AND PARTICIPANTS: Eligible studies were prospective cohort design and reporting walking or cycling exposure and mortality as an outcome. Only cohorts of individuals healthy at baseline were considered eligible. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Extracted data included study population and location, sample size, population characteristics (age and sex), follow-up in years, walking or cycling exposure, mortality outcome, and adjustment for other co-variables. We used random-effects meta-analyses to investigate the beneficial effects of regular walking and cycling. RESULTS: Walking (18 results from 14 studies) and cycling (8 results from 7 studies) were shown to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, adjusted for other PA. For a standardised dose of 11.25 MET.hours per week (or 675 MET.minutes per week), the reduction in risk for ACM was 11% (95% CI = 4 to 17%) for walking and 10% (95% CI = 6 to 13%) for cycling. The estimates for walking are based on 280,000 participants and 2.6 million person-years and for cycling they are based on 187,000 individuals and 2.1 million person-years. The shape of the dose-response relationship was modelled through meta-analysis of pooled relative risks within three exposure intervals. The dose-response analysis showed that walking or cycling had the greatest effect on risk for ACM in the first (lowest) exposure interval. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The analysis shows that walking and cycling have population-level health benefits even after adjustment for other PA. Public health approaches would have the biggest impact if they are able to increase walking and cycling levels in the groups that have the lowest levels of these activities. REVIEW REGISTRATION: The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (International database of prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care) PROSPERO 2013: CRD42013004266

Modelling Future Coronary Heart Disease Mortality to 2030 in the British Isles.

OBJECTIVE: Despite rapid declines over the last two decades, coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality rates in the British Isles are still amongst the highest in Europe. This study uses a modelling approach to compare the potential impact of future risk factor scenarios relating to smoking and physical activity levels, dietary salt and saturated fat intakes on future CHD mortality in three countries: Northern Ireland (NI), Republic of Ireland (RoI) and Scotland. METHODS: CHD mortality models previously developed and validated in each country were extended to predict potential reductions in CHD mortality from 2010 (baseline year) to 2030. Risk factor trends data from recent surveys at baseline were used to model alternative future risk factor scenarios: Absolute decreases in (i) smoking prevalence and (ii) physical inactivity rates of up to 15% by 2030; relative decreases in (iii) dietary salt intake of up to 30% by 2030 and (iv) dietary saturated fat of up to 6% by 2030. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were then conducted. RESULTS: Projected populations in 2030 were 1.3, 3.4 and 3.9 million in NI, RoI and Scotland respectively (adults aged 25-84). In 2030: assuming recent declining mortality trends continue: 15% absolute reductions in smoking could decrease CHD deaths by 5.8-7.2%. 15% absolute reductions in physical inactivity levels could decrease CHD deaths by 3.1-3.6%. Relative reductions in salt intake of 30% could decrease CHD deaths by 5.2-5.6% and a 6% reduction in saturated fat intake might decrease CHD deaths by some 7.8-9.0%. These projections remained stable under a wide range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Feasible reductions in four cardiovascular risk factors (already achieved elsewhere) could substantially reduce future coronary deaths. More aggressive polices are therefore needed in the British Isles to control tobacco, promote healthy food and increase physical activity

To what extent can decommissioning options for marine artificial structures move us toward environmental targets?

Switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy is key to international energy transition efforts and the move toward net zero. For many nations, this requires decommissioning of hundreds of oil and gas infrastructure in the marine environment. Current international, regional and national legislation largely dictates that structures must be completely removed at end-of-life although, increasingly, alternative decommissioning options are being promoted and implemented. Yet, a paucity of real-world case studies describing the impacts of decommissioning on the environment make decision-making with respect to which option(s) might be optimal for meeting international and regional strategic environmental targets challenging. To address this gap, we draw together international expertise and judgment from marine environmental scientists on marine artificial structures as an alternative source of evidence that explores how different decommissioning options might ameliorate pressures that drive environmental status toward (or away) from environmental objectives. Synthesis reveals that for 37 United Nations and Oslo-Paris Commissions (OSPAR) global and regional environmental targets, experts consider repurposing or abandoning individual structures, or abandoning multiple structures across a region, as the options that would most strongly contribute toward targets. This collective view suggests complete removal may not be best for the environment or society. However, different decommissioning options act in different ways and make variable contributions toward environmental targets, such that policy makers and managers would likely need to prioritise some targets over others considering political, social, economic, and ecological contexts. Current policy may not result in optimal outcomes for the environment or society

Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning

This work was supported by the UK Natural Environment Research Council and the INSITE programme [INSITE SYNTHESIS project, grant number NE/W009889/1].Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning

Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level