Remote sensing-based actual evapotranspiration assessment in a data-scarce area of Brazil : a case study of the Urucuia Aquifer System

The large groundwater reserves of the Urucuia Aquifer System (UAS) enabled agricultural development and economic growth in the western Bahia State, in northeastern Brazil. Over the last several years, concern has grown around the aquifer’s diminishing water levels, and water balance (WB) studies are in demand. Considering the lack of measured actual evapotranspiration (ETa), a major component of the water cycle, this work uses the Operational Simplified Surface Energy Balance (SSEBop) model to estimate ETa, and compares it to basin-scale estimates from the Soil Moisture Accounting Procedure (SMAP) monthly model and from an annual WB closure method, based on gridded meteorological data and the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) product. Additionally, a comparative assessment of different versions of the SSEBop parameterization was per-formed. Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) imagery was used to implement eight different versions of the SSEBop algorithm over the UAS between 2000 and 2013. SSEBop and SMAP ETa yielded similar seasonal patterns, with correlation coefficient (r) up to 0.65, mean difference (MD) of 0.8 mm/month and mean absolute difference (MAD) of 18.5 mm/month. Comparison of SSEBop annual ETa estimates to annual SMAP and WB closure estimates yielded low MD (12.1 and 7.3 mm/year, respectively) and MAD (82.5 and 82.8 mm/year, respectively), but also low r values (0.00 and 0.37, respectively). The comparison of the different SSEBop versions indicated the need to incorporate a calibration step of the aerodynamic heat resistance (rah) parameter. SSEBop results were also used for land cover and drought monitoring. Analysis indicates that agri-culture, associated with an increasing trend of atmospheric evaporative demand, is responsible for the decrease in groundwater levels and streamflow in the studied time period

Pandemic detention: life with COVID-19 behind bars in Maryland

BackgroundPeople incarcerated during the COVID-19 pandemic face higher vulnerability to infection due to structural and social factors in carceral settings. Additionally, due to the higher prevalence of chronic health conditions among carceral populations, they are also at risk for more severe COVID-19 disease. This study was designed to explore the experiences of people incarcerated in prisons and jails in Maryland during the height of the pandemic.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured phone interviews between January 2021 and April 2022 with ten individuals incarcerated in Maryland carceral facilities during the height of the U.S. COVID-19 pandemic and were subsequently released from prison or jail. We transcribed the interviews, coded them, and engaged in content analysis, an inductive analytical approach to developing themes and meaning from qualitative data.ResultsFour themes emerged from participants’ descriptions of their experiences: (1) distress from fear, vulnerability, and lack of knowledge about COVID-19 and how to protect themselves, (2) shortcomings of prison and jail administrators and other personnel through lack of transparency and arbitrary and punitive enforcement of COVID-19 protocols, (3) lack of access to programming and communication with others, and (4) absence of preparation for release and access to usual re-entry services.ConclusionParticipants responded that the prison and jails’ response during the COVID-19 pandemic was ill-prepared, inconsistent, and without appropriate measures to mitigate restrictions on liberty and prepare them for release. The lack of information sharing amplified their sense of fear and vulnerability unique to their incarceration status. Study findings have several institutional implications, such as requiring carceral facilities to establish public health preparedness procedures and making plans publicly available

Data_Sheet_1_Pandemic detention: life with COVID-19 behind bars in Maryland.docx

BackgroundPeople incarcerated during the COVID-19 pandemic face higher vulnerability to infection due to structural and social factors in carceral settings. Additionally, due to the higher prevalence of chronic health conditions among carceral populations, they are also at risk for more severe COVID-19 disease. This study was designed to explore the experiences of people incarcerated in prisons and jails in Maryland during the height of the pandemic.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured phone interviews between January 2021 and April 2022 with ten individuals incarcerated in Maryland carceral facilities during the height of the U.S. COVID-19 pandemic and were subsequently released from prison or jail. We transcribed the interviews, coded them, and engaged in content analysis, an inductive analytical approach to developing themes and meaning from qualitative data.ResultsFour themes emerged from participants’ descriptions of their experiences: (1) distress from fear, vulnerability, and lack of knowledge about COVID-19 and how to protect themselves, (2) shortcomings of prison and jail administrators and other personnel through lack of transparency and arbitrary and punitive enforcement of COVID-19 protocols, (3) lack of access to programming and communication with others, and (4) absence of preparation for release and access to usual re-entry services.ConclusionParticipants responded that the prison and jails’ response during the COVID-19 pandemic was ill-prepared, inconsistent, and without appropriate measures to mitigate restrictions on liberty and prepare them for release. The lack of information sharing amplified their sense of fear and vulnerability unique to their incarceration status. Study findings have several institutional implications, such as requiring carceral facilities to establish public health preparedness procedures and making plans publicly available.</p

Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels and the risk of cardiovascular events, but whether the addition of ezetimibe, a nonstatin drug that reduces intestinal cholesterol absorption, can reduce the rate of cardiovascular events further is not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial involving 18,144 patients who had been hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome within the preceding 10 days and had LDL cholesterol levels of 50 to 100 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 2.6 mmol per liter) if they were receiving lipid-lowering therapy or 50 to 125 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 3.2 mmol per liter) if they were not receiving lipid-lowering therapy. The combination of simvastatin (40 mg) and ezetimibe (10 mg) (simvastatin-ezetimibe) was compared with simvastatin (40 mg) and placebo (simvastatin monotherapy). The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring rehospitalization, coronary revascularization ( 6530 days after randomization), or nonfatal stroke. The median follow-up was 6 years. RESULTS: The median time-weighted average LDL cholesterol level during the study was 53.7 mg per deciliter (1.4 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 69.5 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier event rate for the primary end point at 7 years was 32.7% in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 34.7% in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (absolute risk difference, 2.0 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.936; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 0.99; P = 0.016). Rates of pre-specified muscle, gallbladder, and hepatic adverse effects and cancer were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: When added to statin therapy, ezetimibe resulted in incremental lowering of LDL cholesterol levels and improved cardiovascular outcomes. Moreover, lowering LDL cholesterol to levels below previous targets provided additional benefit