Tara C. Smith

Background: Future expectations have been identified as a strong predictor of positive youth development and behavior. Adolescents who anticipate a negative future are more likely to engage in problem behaviors like delinquency, substance use, and risky sexual behavior. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate hopeful future expectations (HFE) of adolescents and young adults (AYA) post COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional online survey was sent to AYA aged 16-21 years in 2022, living in Ohio. Hopeful future expectations, Revised Life Orientation Test (LOT-R), and the 2-item version of the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC2) were used to provide overall HFE, resilience, and dispositional optimism scores. Hierarchical clustering and regression models were employed. Results: A 30% response rate was achieved (468 participants) with 69% (324) Caucasian/White and 51% (239) female. Prior diagnosis with a chronic disease was reported in 20% (96) of participants, and 16% (77) were former or current e-cigarette users. Three clusters were identified in the hierarchical analysis. The low HFE level contained 14.7% (62) of participants, while the moderate and high HFE levels contained 39.2% (166) and 46.8% (198) of participants, respectively. Regression analysis results indicated a collective significant effect of resilience, dispositional optimism, sex, participant educational level, religion, general health, e-cigarette use, and COVID-19 testing on HFE. At the end of the questionnaire, 32 participants provided comments on aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic that were not addressed in the survey. Conclusion: Our findings provided HFE estimates among AYA, including minority groups, providing insights of the effect of a public health crisis on this population. The development of preventive programs and early interventions are warranted during a public health crisis. Cultural differences with respect to parenting and future orientation, participation in sport activities, mentorship, and social engagement in the local community may yield different levels of HFE.

The pros and cons of alternative antimicrobial therapies are worth considering in an age of antibiotic resistance

Though scientific consensus regarding HIV causation of AIDS was reached decades ago, denial of this conclusion remains. The popularity of such denial has waxed and waned over the years, ebbing as evidence supporting HIV causation mounted, building again as the internet facilitated connection between denial groups and the general public, and waning following media attention to the death of a prominent denier and her child and data showing the cost of human life in South Africa. Decades removed from these phenomena, HIV denial is experiencing another resurgence, coupled to mounting distrust of public health, pharmaceutical companies, and mainstream medicine. This paper examines the history and current state of HIV denial in the context of the COVID pandemic and its consequences. An understanding of the effect of this phenomenon and evidence-based ways to counter it are lacking. Community-based interventions and motivational interviewing may serve to contain such misinformation in high-risk communities.

Despite over a century of research on the link between infection and chronic diseases, we again find ourselves flummoxed by a new pathogen that causes long-term impairment. Patients have reported being ignored or minimized, resources are lacking for diagnosis and treatment, and frustrated individuals are turning outside of the scientific profession for answers. The experience mirrors that of American Society for Microbiology past president, Alice C. Evans. Accidentally infected with Brucella melitensis during her laboratory research, Evans was chronically ill for more than 20 years, during which time friends, colleagues, and physicians cast doubt on her illness. As a result, she argued passionately for improved diagnostics, and for those who reported chronic infection to be taken seriously rather than presumed to be “malingering” or using their illness for financial benefit. Lessons from Evans’ experience are useful as we work toward understanding long COVID and patients suffering from the condition.

The distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine represents a path towards global health after a worldwide pandemic. Yet, the U.S. response to the vaccination rollout has been politically polarized. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of the contextual factors that influence parents’ attitudes towards health officials and their intention to vaccinate children, focusing on communication behaviors, personal factors, and geographic locations. We use Bandura’s triadic reciprocal determinism (TRD) model which posits reciprocal influence between personal factors, environmental factors, and behaviors. We found that personal factors (having younger children and identifying as Republican partisans), and the behavioral factor of conservative news use were significantly related to more negative attitudes towards health officials and lower vaccination intentions. Conversely, Democrats and liberal news use were significantly related to warmer attitudes and greater vaccination intentions. The environmental factor of geographic location across four states with different partisan dynamics was not significantly related to attitudes and behavioral intentions. Results from a post-hoc analysis show that news media use and partisanship were the strongest correlates of parents’ attitudes towards health officials. This evidence points to the politicization of the COVID-19 vaccine being a key consideration regarding vaccine uptake.