Kempsey, New South Wales : How social and political divisions in Kempsey’s early history impacted the town’s economic and environmental development to 1865, and its ongoing susceptibility to disaster

This study addresses the question: how did social and political divisions influence the
 economic and environmental development of Kempsey during the colonial period up
 to 1865? Primary documents including personal letters, journals, memoirs, political
 and governmental papers, along with a range of colonial newspapers have been
 studied and interpreted to form a social historical solution to the question. Due to the
 range of sources available for this investigation, a variation of methodologies has been
 employed, with particular emphasis on an empirical qualitative analysis. In addition to
 considering existing non-scholarly thematic histories of the Macleay Valley, this
 thesis draws existing scholarly investigations together and builds upon them, looking
 into the interdependence between society and environment, politics and geographical
 developments, culture and social movements to piece together the story of Kempsey
 and uncover the key events which have led to long lasting impacts on the town. No
 other scholarly study of this kind has been undertaken to bring the entire complex and
 multifaceted story of Kempsey’s early years into one scholarly investigation.
 Implications for this study highlight the important factor that powerful social and
 political divisions in a community have when important decisions about town
 planning, environmental protection, and issues of social justice need to be addressed.
 These divisions can lead to catastrophic outcomes that could impact generations to
 follow, as shown in the tumultuous history of Kempsey, New South Wales

Antidepressants and youth suicide in New York City, 1999-2002

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/41247/1/leon_antidepressants and youth suicide_2006.pd

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Butchery Analysis in Australian Historical Archaeology

This thesis is concerned with testing one aspect of faunal analysis in Australian historical archaeology. This is butchery analysis. The thesis critically evaluates Lee Lyman's 1979 butchering unit method as a means of quantifying faunal remains. It is concluded that Lyman's method has several theoretical flaws, the most serious being the failure of the basic premise of the method, that archaeological bone from domestic animals can be equated to meat. A new approach to analysing faunal remains using butchery analysis is suggested. This new method is tested using archaeological bone specimens from a nineteenth-century European midden. The results of this testing of the method proved most rewarding in the interpretation of fauna from this site. It is concluded that the current methodologies available for quantifying faunal remains suffer from many difficulties and that more behavioural information might be gained from the study of archaeological bone using a butchery analysis approach

The Role of Social Capital Among German Lutheran Settlers in the Colonisation of the Barossa, 1836-1856

South Australian historical scholarship has, until the 1970s, focussed on political and economic factors at the macro level while social and cultural determinants have often been overlooked. From the establishment of the new colony of South Australia in 1836, some 11,000 German Lutherans emigrated to South Australia over the next twenty years and many settled in the Barossa Valley. The thesis investigates the context of their decision to emigrate, for choosing South Australia and colonising the Barossa. Rather than relying on government support, I argue that it was the social capital of these pioneers that contributed to achieving their aspirations. The private records of the emigrants and their family histories have been examined to reveal a more nuanced view of their colonisation of the Barossa. Today, there is a growing awareness and interest by local descendants into how their ancestors were able to create a viable, peaceful and long-lasting Lutheran community far from their original home. As such, this thesis adds to the historiography of early South Australian colonisation

'Forming a Circular Wharf’: The Economic, Political, and Technical Challenges of Constructing Circular Quay, 1836-1860

This dissertation examines why it was important to build a quay in Sydney Cove between 1839 and 1855 despite recurring market and financial distress, the topographical difficulties of the site and the technological constraints of the times. The history of construction of a masonry quay at the head of the cove, and a timber wharf on the cove’s western shore — collectively known as ‘Circular Quay’ — has received only limited research attention since its completion in the mid-nineteenth century. Yet, building the eastern masonry quay was a major engineering work, which involved extensive quarrying on the interface of the cove itself, and the reclamation of tidal flats and marshland at its head. There were urgent incentives for the replacement of the primitive and decaying public wharves in the cove. The new quay had to complement the viable competitive environment that grew out of the colony’s advancement from a penal settlement to a “free” society. Therefore, in writing the narrative of the Quay, attention is paid to the development of trade in the colony and the search for a reliable and sustainable staple to support it economically. Authorising, influencing, and sometimes obstructing the construction of both the masonry quay and the timber wharf, was an often restive and troublesome Legislative Council. The political manoeuvrings of its members around the inclusion of elected representatives in 1843, and at the approach of responsible government in 1856, meant that ‘Quay questions’ were raised during the construction of firstly the masonry quay, and then the western timber wharf, which consequently fed into the general murk of condemnation, by political factions, of expenditure, contractors and government officials, and design quality. A year after the shoddily constructed western wharf was completed in 1855, it was sinking in parts, leaving the newly formed government undecided about what to do with a ramshackle timber structure that had cost far too much to construct

Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions: effects on child development in low- and middle-income countries

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: Main objective: The main objective is to assess the effect of interventions to improve sanitation, hygiene, water quality and supply within low- and middle-income countries on child development. Secondary objectives: The secondary objectives are to: analyse any measured effect of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions on school or preschool enrolment and attendance; examine the feasibility of WASH interventions with regard to their implementation fidelity and participant compliance; evaluate the effect of WASH interventions on intermediary outcomes of environmental contamination, gastrointestinal diseases and reduction in the burden of water collection and water costs; and identify any adverse impact that WASH interventions may have for participants

Antidepressants in adult suicides in New York City: 2001-2004

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/56240/1/leon_antidepressants in adult suicides_2007.pd