A cursory look at Indian prime time news tells us much about the tone and tenor of the people associated with it. Exaggerations, hyperbole, and tempers run wild and news anchors flail in theatrical rage. News channels and news editors display their ideological affiliations subliminally. These affiliations — a factor of personal political stance, funding bodies, and investors — lead to partisan bias in the framing of news and, in some cases, can easily translate into racial prejudice. In this paper, I examine news coverage related to Muslims in India. I study the coverage of two issues specifically– love jihad and triple talaq –in prime time English news of two channels – Times Now and Republic TV. My analysis of the content, tone, and tenor of their coverage shows that these channels propagate associations between Islam and backwardness, ignorance and violence through consistent employment of the following tropes – ‘Muslim women need to be saved from Muslim men’, ‘Hindu women need to be saved from Muslim men’, and ‘Muslims are not fully Indian – they are anti-national’. I place this study of news media within the current political climate in India and briefly touch on the conversations it guides and provokes. This is also a call for further analysis on this subject to examine and evaluate how discourse manipulates public conversations and policy decisions.

Success and impact metrics in science are based on a system that perpetuates sexist and racist ‘rewards’ through prioritizing citations and impact factors. These metrics are flawed and biased against already marginalized groups and fail to accurately capture the breadth of individuals’ meaningful scientific impacts. We advocate shifting this outdated value system to advance science through principles of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. We outline pathways for a paradigm shift in academic values based on multidimensional mentorship and promoting mentee wellbeing. These actions will require collective efforts supported by academic leaders and administrators to drive essential systemic change.

Violence against paramedics is widely recognized as a serious, but underreported, problem. While injurious physical attacks on paramedics are generally reported, non-physical violence is less likely to be documented. Verbal abuse can be very distressing, particularly if the harassment targets personal or cultural identities, such as race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. Leveraging a novel, point-of-event reporting process, our objective was to estimate the prevalence of harassment on identity grounds against paramedics in a single paramedic service in Ontario, Canada, and assess its potentially differential impact on emotional distress. In an analysis of 502 reports filed between February 1, 2021, through February 28, 2022, two paramedic-supervisors independently coded the free-text narrative descriptions of violent encounters for themes suggestive of sexism, racism, and homophobia. We achieved high interrater agreement across the dimensions (k=0.73-0.83), and after resolving discrepant cases, we found that 1 in 4 violent reports documented abuse on at least one of the identity grounds. In these cases, paramedics were 60% more likely to indicate being emotionally distressed than for other forms of violence. Our findings offer unique insight into the type of vitriol paramedics experience in the course of their work and its potential for psychological harm.

The ongoing conflict in Syria and Iraq has caused many residents of these countries to flee. This study explored how these refugees cope with traumatic experiences from pre-migration to post-migration phases and how they develop resilience experiences at the individual, familial, and community levels. Data were collected through individual interviews and analyzed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. A discussion of the findings revealed (1) a cumulative effect of prolonged adversity from pre-migration to resettlement phases; (2) the impacts of post-migration context as it facilitates refugees’ adjustment or leads to re-traumatization through increased marginalization; and (3) finally, an overview of refugees’ ongoing survival. Clinical implications are presented along with policy implications and future directions for research.

Best practices in global health training prioritize leadership and engagement from investigators from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), along with more conscientious community consultation and research that benefits local participants and autochthonous communities. However, well into the 20th century, international research and clinical care were rife with paternalism, extractive practices, and racist ideation, with race presumed to explain both vulnerability or protection from various diseases despite scientific evidence for more precise mechanisms for infectious disease. We highlight experiences in global research on health and illness among indigenous populations in LMICs, seeking to clarify what is both scientifically essential and ethically desirable in research with human subjects; we apply a critical view towards race and racism as historically distorting elements that must be acknowledged and overcome.

People from Black and Asian backgrounds are more likely to die from Covid-19 but less likely to be vaccinated, threatening to exacerbate health inequalities already experienced by ethnic minority groups. Literature suggests that mistrust rooted in structural inequality may be a key barrier to Covid-19 vaccine uptake. We need to better understand how structural inequalities influence vaccine confidence. Understanding and addressing these processes is likely to lead to longer-term impacts than information alone. We draw on health and sociological theories of structure and agency to inform our understanding of structural factors. We conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups with 22 people from London and surrounding areas in December 2021 to March 2022. Fifteen participants were members of the public from ethnic minority backgrounds and 7 were professionals working with the public to address concerns and encourage vaccine uptake. Our findings suggest that people from ethnic minority backgrounds make decisions regarding Covid-19 vaccination based on a combination of how they experience external social structures (including political authority, social positioning and racial inequality) and internal processes (what they believe and understand about Covid-19 vaccines). We may be able to support knowledge accumulation through the provision of reliable and accessible information, particularly through primary and community care. But we recommend a number of changes to research, policy and practice which address structural inequalities. These include working with communities to improve ethnicity data collection, increasing funding allocation to health conditions where ethnic minority communities experience poorer outcomes, greater transparency and public engagement in the vaccine development process, and culturally adapted research recruitment processes.