They have already met with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and on 10 October met with Opposition leader Chris Hipkins and several senior members of the Labour Party.

Specific concerns

The ethnic leaders told Hipkins and his cohorts they are particularly concerned about immigration, health inequalities and crime policies.

"We had a good opportunity to discuss some of the priority immigration issues impacting our collective ethnic and faith communities" said Daljit Singh, representing the Sikh associations in New Zealand.

Another leader at the meeting said hate crimes against ethnic and faith communities had increased.

"The changes recommended by Royal Commission on 15 March have yet to be completed and this is important for all our communities" Wellington Indian Association President Manisha Morar said.

"There are significant lessons learned which have not yet been implemented, especially in the area of hate speech and hate crime."

Data paints an ugly picture

New Zealand Police data shows that almost three-quarters of all hate crime offences reported since 2020 were motivated by race or ethnicity.

Their records show that between 1 January 2020 and 30 June, 19,589 hate-motivated offences were reported to police, with 14,285 - or 73 percent - being motivated by the victim's race or ethnicity.

Additionally, 1563 offences were based on the victim's sexual orientation. Another 1069 were related to religion or faith.

Possible solutions

Paul Patel of the Indian Central Association and Anwar Ghani from the Federation of Islamic Associations voiced concern over rising crime.

Community-led crime prevention efforts are needed urgently, they said.

The New Zealand Chinese Association is also concerned that ethic communities are not suitably catered for.

Richard Leung and Debbie Chen told Hipkins that health disparities negatively affect ethnic communities. Community-led solutions are crucial to address these challenges, they said.

That call was underlined by Gregory Fortuin of the African Leaders Group.

"We also need to have effective and on-going engagement to uplift our communities" Fortuin said.

Robert Hunt, chair of the New Zealand Buddhist Council, says the country's education system should better reflect New Zealand's ethnic diversity.

Point taken

"It was excellent to meet with representatives from our many ethnic and faith communities to discuss their priorities and the issues that we can work through alongside each other" Chris Hipkins said on social media after the meeting.

"It's important that the voices of ethnic communities are heard and embedded into the decisions we make to take our country forward, as we prepare to be the next government."

Source

• RNZ

Doctors tell us. Medicare tells us. Our insurance companies tell us.

Watch your waistline, exercise, keep your mind active, socialise, go for your medical checkups.

But there's something else, less cited, that apparently can add years to our lives: our attitude.

Attitude counts

A couple of Harvard publications suggest that practicing gratitude and optimism might benefit us about as dramatically as taking our blood pressure pills or joining a water aerobics class.

The first publication, a press release from Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health, tells how researchers from the school found gratitude was associated with greater longevity among seniors.

Harvard scientist Ying Chen, the lead researcher, said earlier studies had already shown an association between gratitude and a lower risk for mental distress, as well as greater emotional and social well-being.

A new study, published in JAMA Psychiatry in July, demonstrated a positive link to physical health.

"Our study provides the first empirical evidence on this topic," Chen is quoted as saying.

Chen and colleagues used data from the Nurses' Health Study to assess levels of gratitude and mortality among almost 50,000 older women, whose average age was 79.

The women completed a gratitude questionnaire measuring their agreement or disagreement with statements such as, "I have so much in life to be thankful for," and, "If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list."

Four years later, the researchers followed up, looking at deaths from all causes among the women. Participants whose gratitude scores were in the highest one-third of the group had a 9 percent lower incidence of death than those who scored in the bottom one-third.

Gratitude, the scholars said, appeared to protect against every cause of mortality. The results were controlled for demographics, prior health issues and lifestyle factors such as social participation, religion and even optimism, which is closely related to gratitude.

The other piece I saw was a 2019 Harvard Medical School blog by David R. Topor, then a clinical psychologist on the medical school's faculty.

"Plenty of research suggests optimistic people have a reduced risk of heart disease, stroke, and declines in lung capacity and function," his blog entry began. "Optimism is also associated with a lower risk of early death from cancer and infection. And now a new study links optimism to living a longer life."

That study found highly optimistic people had longer lives and also a greater chance of achieving "exceptional longevity" — living past 85.

It controlled for diseases such as high blood pressure or high cholesterol and for health behaviors such as smoking or alcohol use.

Granted, the first thing I learned in my graduate-school courses in research methods is that correlation is not causation. The fact that two things are linked doesn't automatically mean one caused the other.

We might find — I'm making this up — that 97 percent of drivers involved in fatal car wrecks are wearing shoes at the time of their accidents. That wouldn't mean shoes cause car crashes.

Similarly, discovering that grateful and/or optimistic people often live longer than ungrateful and/or sour people doesn't necessarily prove either group's attitudes are causing their outcomes.

Still. These studies and basic common sense suggest that our attitudes do play a role in our physical and mental health, not to mention our very will to live.

Fortunately, as Topor said, all of us can take steps to improve our disposition and with it, perhaps our long-term health.

Among other things, he suggested practicing the half-smile, a technique to cope with sad feelings. You practice smiling a few minutes each day. If you can't force a full smile, a half-smile will do. Then you note how your thoughts and mood change.

He suggested setting aside time to focus on the positive. At a set time each day, think about the day's positive aspects. What went well? What made you happy or proud?

Self-help tactics

I'm not naturally a Dr. Pangloss. But as I've aged I've worked on myself.

A trick I do when I'm experiencing what my dad used to call "the mulligrubs": I force myself to make a mental list of things I'm grateful for. It's like the old hymn said, "Count your blessings, name them one by one." I do that and, hey, it works. I feel better despite myself.

Another tactic: I remind myself that everybody has setbacks, failures, fears. Often it's not so much what happens to us that determines our lot, but what we do with what happens. We can be discouraged or we can look for opportunities to grow and conquer.

As Hamlet put it, "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Will my efforts to focus on the positive earn me bonus years? Who knows?

But this I do know. I feel better when I count my blessings instead of cursing my woes, and when I expect the best instead of assuming the worst.

• First published in the Herald Leader; republished by Religion Unplugged
• Paul Prather is a rural Pentecostal pastor in Kentucky and writes a regular column about faith and religion for the Herald-Leader

But not everyone is getting the same vaccine.

When you sign up for vaccination, you are sent a vial with instructions to send a sample of your saliva to the nearest laboratory. Just a few hours later you receive a message telling you which vaccine you should get.

Your neighbour also signed up for vaccination. But their vaccine is different from yours.

Both of you are now vaccinated and protected, although each of you received your vaccines depending on "who you are".

Your genetics, age, gender, and myriad of other factors are captured in a "model" that predicts and determines the best option to protect you from the virus.

It all sounds a bit like science fiction. But since the decoding of the human genome in 2003, we have entered the age of precision prevention.

New Zealand has a long-standing newborn screening programme.

This includes genome sequencing machines available nationwide and a genetic health service.

Programmes such as these open up the possibilities of public health genomics and precision public health for everyone.

The further expansion of these programmes, as well as the expansion of the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning to enable a shift to more personalised preventive care, will change how public health care is delivered.

At the same time, these developments raise wider concerns over individual choice versus the greater good, personal privacy, and who is responsible for the protection of New Zealanders and their health information.

What is precision prevention?

Think of precision prevention (also known as personalised prevention) as public health action tailored to the individual rather than broader groups of society.

This targeted healthcare is achieved by balancing a range of variables (including your genes, life history and environment) with your risks (including everything that changes within you as you grow older).

While advances in genomics are making precision prevention possible, machine learning algorithms fuelled by our personal data have made it closer to a reality.

We generate data about ourselves every day - via social media, smartwatches and other wearable devices - helping to train algorithms to match medical prevention measures with individuals.

Combine all of these with AI-driven predictive modelling, and you have a system that can predict the current and future state of your health with an eerie level of accuracy, and help you take steps to prevent disease.

Safety and delay

The Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor recently published a report mapping out the landscape of artificial intelligence and machine learning in New Zealand over the next five years.

While the report authors didn't specifically reference "precision prevention", they did include examples of this approach, such as computer vision augmented mammography.

But as the report suggests, adoption tends to fall behind the pace of innovation in AI.

Te Whatu Ora-Health New Zealand has also not approved emerging large language models and generative artificial intelligence tools as safe and effective for use in healthcare.

This means generative AI-driven precision prevention practices, such as conversational AI for public health messaging, may have to wait before they can be deemed safe to use.

Move forward with caution

There is much to be excited about the prospects of the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in ushering in a new age of precision prevention and preventive health. But at the same time, we must temper this with caution.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning may increase access and utilisation of healthcare by lowering barriers to medical knowledge and reducing human bias.

But government and medical agencies need to reduce barriers related to digital literacy and access to online platforms.

For those with limited access to online resources or who have limited digital literacy, the already existent inequity of access to care and health could worsen.

Artificial intelligence also has a significant environmental impact. One study found several common large AI models can emit over 270,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide during their life cycle.

Finally, technology is a shifting landscape. Proponents of precision healthcare must be careful with children and marginalised communities and their access to resources.

Maintaining privacy and choice is essential - everyone should be in a position to control what they share with the AI agents.

In the end, each of us is different, and we all have our different needs for our health and for our lives. Moving more people to preventive care through precision healthcare will reduce the financial burden on the health system.

But as the report from the prime minister's chief science officer emphasises, machine learning algorithms are a nascent field.

We need more public education and awareness before the technology becomes part of our everyday lives.

• First published in The Conversation
• Finlay Macdonald is a New Zealand journalist, editor, publisher and broadcaster.

The autobiography, co-authored with Italian journalist Fabio Marchese Ragona, delves into key moments of his life and papacy, shedding light on his stance amidst controversies surrounding his leadership.

At 87, Francis addresses speculation regarding his health, emphasising his commitment to his papal duties. Despite battling bronchitis and other ailments, he maintains his resolve to continue serving, stating "the papacy is a job for life".

Referring to his critics, he says "some people may have hoped that sooner or later, perhaps after a stay in the hospital, I might make an announcement of that kind, but there is no risk of it".

Like all popes, he writes, he has made certain arrangements. But "I believe the pope's ministry is ad vitam, for life, and I therefore see no justification for giving it up".

And yet Francis ventures to imagine his life, should he be forced to hang up the white hat due to "serious physical impediment". He says he would want to be known as "bishop of Rome emeritus" avoiding the "pope emeritus" title that Benedict chose.

"I would move to the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore to serve as confessor and give Communion to the sick" he writes. Yet he reaffirms he has no plans to retire.

Unity and reform

In the memoir, Francis reflects on the transition of power from Pope Benedict XVI and his own vision for the future of the church, advocating for unity and reform.

Pope Francis confronts criticisms from both within and outside the Vatican, particularly regarding his progressive stance on issues such as same-sex blessings. He reaffirms his support for civil unions while remaining firm on the distinction between these unions and traditional marriage.

Addressing concerns over potential schisms within the Church, Francis asserts the importance of inclusivity, urging acceptance and understanding towards marginalised communities, including LGBTQ+ individuals.

Francis hits topical issues in his book, defending his call for rapid action on climate change and decrying the outbreak of conflicts that he calls a dispersed "third world war".

The autobiography also provides insights into Francis's personal journey, from his upbringing in Argentina to his tenure as the first Latin American pontiff. He highlights formative experiences including encounters with world events such as World War II and Argentina's military dictatorship.

Sources

AP News

The Washington Post

CathNews New Zealand

They recorded pain-related data inside the brains of individuals with chronic pain disorders caused by stroke or amputation.

Scientists have long sought to understand how pain is represented by brain activity. With electrodes implanted in the heads of the patients, the researchers could record neural activity over the course of months. Then with machine learning, they could predict the pain severity scores from neural activity.

The researchers said the findings, published in Nature Neuroscience, could provide a way forward for developing treatments for chronic pain, which is one of the largest contributors to disability worldwide.

The research was funded by two initiatives - the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) and the Helping to End Addiction Long-term Initiative.

"This is a great example of how tools for measuring brain activity originating from the e have been applied to the significant public health problem of relieving persistent, severe chronic pain," Walter Koroshetz, director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, said in a statement.

"We are hopeful that building from these preliminary findings could lead to effective, non-addictive pain treatments".

Researchers have typically gathered data about chronic pain through patients self-reporting using questionnaires about the intensity and emotional impact of pain.

This study looked directly at changes in brain activity in two brain regions - the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) - where pain responses are thought to occur, while patients self-reported their levels of pain.

Read more

• Luke Hurst is a Euro News technology journalist from Edinburgh, Scotland.

It is one of the last COVID rules to be scrapped following two years of restrictions lead by health advice.

Masks, too, seem to be being left behind. Once mandatory in public places, as the rule have loosened, fewer people are choosing to wear one.

So what does that mean for people who are still masking up? Are you still protected if others aren't wearing one?

Here's what you need to know:

Do I still have to wear a mask?

In some places, yes. Across Australia masks are still required in hospitals and healthcare facilities.

This rule applies to anyone aged over 12 except in Victoria where it applies to anyone older than 8.

Masks are also required in indoor areas for anyone who tests positive to COVID-19 or is a close contact, with the exception of your own home.

In most states masks are also required in correctional facilities and justice centres.

However, mask wearing is still encouraged by the states on public transport, in settings where you can't physically distance and when around people who may be vulnerable to COVID-19.

Will wearing a mask stop you getting COVID if not one else is wearing one?

Wearing a mask will provide some protection, but is unlikely to be completely effective, explains the head of epidemiological modelling at Monash University's School of Public Health, James Trauer.

"It is also quite dependent on how the mask is worn and many other factors, such as the amount of COVID around in the community and the setting you visit," he says.

He says wearing a mask is still considerably better than nothing.

"However, it is likely that the greatest effect is when the infector [the person with COVID] is wearing one," he says.

"This is because wearing any sort of mask should markedly reduce the number of larger droplets they expel.

"This is one of the strongest justifications for requiring everyone in the population to wear a mask — particularly indoors where most transmission occurs."

He says in Victoria multiple investigators were able to show a considerable reduction in transmission when the state-mandated face coverings in most settings in July 2020.

"We likely saw that effect because even people who didn't have symptoms and so didn't know they had COVID were still wearing masks and so reducing their risk of transmitting the infection to others," he says.

"A review of population-wide studies found that if everyone in the population wears a mask, the overall infectiousness of COVID can be reduced by about 15-20 per cent."

Deakin University Professor and Chair in Epidemiology at the School of Health and Social Development Dr Catherine Bennett agrees there's evidence which proves masks reduce COVID transmission rates.

"A US study of close contacts of cases from a year ago found the infection rate in contacts was about 26 per cent if the infected person, their contact, or both were unmasked, but dropped to about 13 per cent if both were masked," she says.

"However, an large population-based study in the UK when Omicron had taken over [in February 2022] did not find a difference in infections rates based on whether masks were worn indoors always, or less frequently.

"But this can also be complicated as those wearing masks might do that because they are at higher risk anyway, and might have had even higher rates of infection without them.

"So the advice remains that wearing masks is still a useful way to reduce your risk of picking up or spreading the virus."

What's the science of mask-wearing?

COVID is primarily transmitted by the respiratory route, meaning that breathing, coughing, speaking, laughing and singing can create particles that contain the virus and can be transmitted, Professor Trauer says.

"We divide respiratory transmission into the transmission with larger and smaller particles.

"Larger particles are called droplets, whereas smaller ones (called aerosols) can travel longer distances because they can be suspended in the air.

"In reality, there is no definite cut-off between these two processes, and both are likely important.

"In 2020, many policymakers and experts were too slow to recognise the importance of the smaller particles.

"We now have several lines of evidence to indicate that the smaller particles are important, even though it's impossible to define this exactly."

Dr Bennett says the finer the mask fibre and the better the fit, the better the mask works.

"This is why N95 masks are recommended, as they can even filter very small aerosol particles," she says.

"Any mask that doesn't fit properly doesn't offer as good level of protection, the air can still pass between the mask and your skin, and fewer virus particles will be filtered out." Continue reading

A bag of Homebrand potato chips is $1.50, and a litre of soft drink is $0.90.

For many families, the choice is obvious. Why get a bag of vegetables, when you could get 10 bags of chips or 16 litres of fizzy?

The cost of food increased by 8.3 percent since last August, according to Stats NZ's food price index.

Auckland University of Technology emeritus professor of nutrition Elaine Rush said the issue was a compounding disaster.

"It's not just food that's going up, it's petrol, and mortgages," she said. "Other influences, such as climate change and the war in Ukraine are affecting our food supply. It could be the beginning of a downward spiral." Read more

Michael Rozier, a Jesuit professor of health management and policy, has reflected on the importance of commitment to health care and identified three significant areas: traditional health care practice; public health; and global health.[1]

We will follow this tripartite approach here.

Traditional health care practice

Throughout Christian history, beginning with Jesus, accompanying the sick and caring for them has been an integral part of the personal and ecclesial life of faith.

Individual believers, confraternities, congregations, and countless women and men religious have made their mark in Christian history with their generosity in the service of those who are sick and in need of help. On every continent and in different ways Christianity has permitted and encouraged the development of hospices, hospitals and clinics, that is to say, of structures and institutions that serve the practice of health care.

In this way, over the centuries, the relationship between healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses, technicians and administrators) and citizens has characterized and guided Christian involvement in promoting health.

Public health

However, when we look at other areas of health, it is more difficult to identify and recognize examples of how we have been involved in promoting other essential and no less important aspects of health promotion, including prevention, hygiene and public health at local, regional and state level, as well as global health.[2]

Promoting each of these additional aspects brings significant benefits to individual and collective health.

Preventing the onset of disease benefits the well-being of individuals, families and society as a whole.

This is done, for example, with vaccinations and regular health checks (from mammograms to weight checks, from growth checks in children and adolescents to checks on blood sugar, lipid levels and blood pressure monitoring).

Promoting public health improves the quality of life in working environments by requiring compliance with regulations that protect workers' conditions, as well as in educational settings and society as a whole.

For example, thanks to regulations aimed at protecting public health, travellers can count on airbags in cars, seatbelts and, in the case of motorcyclists, protective helmets, all of which reduce the consequences of injuries in the event of accidents.

• The regular verification of the quality and freshness of food sold and consumed,
• the purification and ionization of water,
• the control of fine suspended particles and the quality of the air we breathe,
• the standards required in the case of vehicle emissions,
• the ban on smoking in public places and campaigns to limit smoking, the supervision of chemicals used in industry,
• agriculture and the home

are some examples that show how important the protection and promotion of public health is and how it has positive repercussions on traditional health practice, to the benefit of citizens, health professionals and institutions (hospitals and clinics).

One can therefore ask whether the Catholic tradition has become sufficiently involved in promoting public health and, if the answer is uncertain or negative, what needs to be done to ensure further involvement.

Recognizing the importance of public health and working to promote it have positive implications for individuals, for the health system and for society as a whole.[3]

Reflecting on health implies considering injustices, inequalities, leading to striving for greater social justice through concrete forms of solidarity, as the Church's social doctrine teaches and reminds us.[4]

Global health

Along with traditional health and public health, global health is the third approach to expand and complete our commitment.

The Covid-19 pandemic shows how vulnerable humanity is and how much needs to be done to protect citizens.

Global health depends on a combination of social and political factors that affect the quality of life of individuals and communities.

In other words

• how we live,
• how we build our cities, how we educate ourselves and work,
• how we cultivate the land and prepare food,
• how we monitor the outbreak of infectious diseases,
• how we deal with the non-infectious diseases that continue to spread around the world (e.g., the multiple types of cancer),
• how we reduce and strive to eliminate hunger and thirst in the world, and
• how we protect the most vulnerable from the devastating consequences of climate change on the planet.

All of these point to both the urgency and complexity of efforts to promote global health.

Health is a fragile, finite and shared good.

Caring for one's own health and for the health of others - of my neighbour and also of those living in other countries and continents, as well as for the health of the entire planet with its trees, rivers, mountains, oceans and atmosphere - is an urgent necessity that requires generous commitments at the systemic and structural level.

Health practice, public health and global health: there is no conflict between these three approaches; each aims to secure the good health of individuals, nations, humanity and the planet.

With his prophetic voice and his focused and humble actions, Pope Francis is showing how it is possible to be at the service of the health of people, populations, all humanity and the planet.[5]

Pope Francis and vaccinations against Covid-19

From the very beginning of the pandemic, the pope recognized the need for integrated and global responses to deal with what humanity was experiencing.

In multiple instances in national and international ecclesial and political settings, he has called for recognition of the global dimension of the pandemic and, faithful to the biblical, Gospel-based Catholic magisterial experience, has called for special care for the poorest, those with fewer social, political, financial and health resources.

Francis has reaffirmed and supported the generous and heroic commitment of so many healthcare professionals at the service of their patients in the many medical facilities across various continents.

At the same time, he has been attentive to what concerns the health of populations and the complexity of improving global health.

The pope asked that research for a vaccine be supported and facilitated in order to obtain effective vaccines while controlling the spread of the infection with the necessary public health measures (hygiene, protective masks, social distancing, quarantine for infected persons, targeted reduction of free movement and of the various social activities: educational, work and recreational).

In addition to demanding availability and access for all to the necessary diagnostic tests, Francis has not ceased to demand that vaccines, after the necessary scientific verification of their efficacy and safety, be made available to all, everywhere, without patent constraints and, once again, with a preferential option for the poorest and neediest.[6]

To promote vaccination globally, thus showing his commitment to promoting the health of all humanity, the pope appeals to the characteristic element of the Christian life: love.

For Francis, "being vaccinated, with vaccines authorized by the competent authorities, is an act of love.

And contributing to ensure the majority of people are vaccinated is an act of love, love for oneself, love for family and friends, love for all peoples. […]

Vaccination is a simple but profound way of promoting the common good and caring for one another, especially the most vulnerable." [7]

Love is always inclusive and all-embracing, as the Gospel commandment reminds us.[8]

Vaccination is an act of love for oneself and for others, especially for the benefit of the weakest, whose health is more fragile because of pre-existing diseases or conditions or because of age or occupation.

Furthermore, every act of love depends on the love of God, given freely, forever and unconditionally, to everyone everywhere.

Finally, every act of love makes us capable of loving, of living out God's love here and now, in our daily life in its ordinariness.

From the beginning of his pontificate, Francis has continually exhorted us to live our reality as disciples, enlightened, inspired, nourished and strengthened by God's love, which we experience in multiple ways in Jesus, in the Church and in the world, thanks to the Spirit and his countless gifts.

In doing so, the pope encouraged and inspired scientists, health workers, leaders, national and international organizations, and people of goodwill around the world who are urging people to get vaccinated and working to make vaccination possible everywhere.

Global vaccination is proceeding at different rates: in the global North at a faster pace, and in the South at a slower pace.

The causes of this difference are multiple and include the availability of vaccines, distribution strategies, the presence and efficiency of health structures, information processes, involving local communities, as well as the authorities who need to responsibly put themselves at the service of citizens, ecclesial communities and the various religious denominations present in the territory.

Addressing the issue of global vaccination, the Holy Father has called for this procedural outreach to be respectful and to take place in the context of the growth of a local health culture: "Knowledge must be shared, expertise must be shared, science must be pooled.

Science, I say, not just the products of science which, if offered on their own, remain band-aids that can dress the wound but not cure it in depth.

This applies to vaccines, for example.

There is an urgent need to help countries that have fewer of them, but this must be done with far-sighted plans, not just motivated by the haste of wealthy nations to become safer.

Remedies must be distributed with dignity, not as alms on a pitiful scale.

To truly do good, we need to promote science and its integral implementation: understanding the contexts, identifying treatment, nurturing the healthcare culture."[9]

Undoubtedly, trust in scientific research and medical practices in general, and vaccination in particular has and continues to play an important role, affecting individuals and communities.

Anyone who has suffered as a result of scientific research projects or health practices - for example, in the case of ethnic, racial, cultural, religious and linguistic minorities - will rightly be alert to and critically examine what is being proposed, including the case of Covid-19 vaccination.

However, in ways that continue to surprise, and even scandalize, there is now worldwide resistance, even aggressive and violent resistance, to the vaccines now available and to the possibility of being vaccinated, and thus protecting oneself against the infection caused by Covid-19 or, if one contracts the infection, of having reduced symptoms.[10]

The repeated interventions by the pope as well as by authoritative ecclesial, social, cultural, political and scientific voices do not seem to be able to promote a completely positive reception of available vaccines, as well as to invite a critical reflection on the positions taken.

Too often, disinformation campaigns and false information seduce us into thinking that we are experiencing a global conspiracy, that Covid does not exist, that vaccines introduce computer chips into our bodies.

Families in which some members are vaccinated and others have no intention of vaccinating are not uncommon, with individuals citing various reasons, creating divisions and separations and making dialogue and critical reflection difficult.

In these situations, health and what can protect it seem to have become a personal, subjective and individual good, which is threatened by what aims to promote global health.

It seems that individuals worry about their own health - and only about their own - autonomously and independently as if their health did not depend on the health of others and of the entire planet.

In addition, the search for truth, for prudent and wise decisions, together with self-critical reflection and careful examination of information sources no longer seem in many cases to be shared values.

Regretfully, it is observed that those who try to live these values are attacked verbally on social media and even physically. Finally, in many cases health is politicized.

Thus protecting and promoting the health of individuals, of populations, and of the most vulnerable, indeed humanity as a whole is reduced to a partisan choice, informed by party strategies, confusing health choices with approaches proposed by ideologically motivated parties or pressure groups.

Global health as a common good

In the ecclesial sphere, calling for the production and availability of vaccines capable of stimulating the immune defences of citizens in order to achieve worldwide immunity does not imply superficiality or lack of attention to consider and deal with possible ethical problems associated with the production of vaccines.

With clarity and competence, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has repeatedly reaffirmed the theological-moral approach previously developed with regard to the production and administration of vaccines. In particular, it has helped to reflect on the ways in which some vaccines had been tested in laboratories, with the intention of reassuring the scrupulous, the doubters and the skeptics in the Catholic Church and in wider society.[11]

Unfortunately, on a global level, this has not been enough.

In the present social, cultural, political and ecclesial context, it is necessary to reflect on how global health can be promoted by re-establishing a serious, respectful, informed and civil dialogue.

Obviously, authentic dialogue implies generous, shared and benevolent listening, enabling us to seek the truth together in a rigorous and demanding way, verifying what we consider to be our own truth.

The Gospel, by reminding us that truth is a person - Jesus Christ - makes us understand that no one can control or possess it.[12] For the Gospel, the only access to truth is relational, interacting with Jesus, living a dynamic of encounter, discovery and conversion in our incarnate reality.

The social doctrine of the Church affirms the importance of dialogue and, through it, fosters the commitment of every person of goodwill to achieve the common good in inclusive ways and with a preference for the weakest, the frailest, the poorest and the most vulnerable.[13]

Moreover, for Francis, "underlying the principle of the common good is respect for the human person as such, endowed with basic and inalienable rights ordered to his or her integral development.

It has also to do with the overall welfare of society and the development of a variety of intermediate groups, applying the principle of subsidiarity. […]

Finally, the common good calls for social peace, the stability and security provided by a certain order which cannot be achieved without particular concern for distributive justice; whenever this is violated, violence always ensues. Society as a whole, and the state in particular, are obliged to defend and promote the common good" (LS 157).

Global health is an emblematic example of the "universal common good,"[14] for humanity and for the planet.[15] Following the example of the pope and his "concern for integral human development" (FT 276), many seek to remain in an attitude that welcomes and listens to those who do not recognize the vaccines against Covid-19 as a means - limited, like any means - to protect and promote health together as a common good of humanity. One hopes that it is possible to seek together and promote what serves the good of all.

Science in the service of global health

During the Covid-19 pandemic, Pope Francis' commitment to the service of global health also prompts reflection on how to evaluate the role of science, pointing out when and how it can be at the service of the common good.

In this regard, in the recent magisterium we note another circumstance in which a pontiff reflected on scientific progress in the service of humanity and global health and considered it an act of love.

On August 29, 2000, Pope John Paul II, addressing the participants at the 18th International Congress of the Transplantation Society, affirmed that "every organ transplant has its source in a decision of great ethical value: ‘the decision to offer without reward a part of one's own body for the health and well-being of another person.'

"Here precisely lies the nobility of the gesture, a gesture that is a genuine act of love. It is not just a matter of giving away something that belongs to us but of giving something of ourselves."[16]

Moreover, in the same speech, John Paul II showed how a prudent reception of specific contributions of science is possible in situations where they are not in accord with an anthropological vision that manifests respect for human dignity. In considering the evaluation offered by neurology concerning the "complete and irreversible cessation of all brain activity (in the cerebrum, cerebellum and the brain stem).

This is then considered the sign that the individual organism has lost its integrative capacity."[17]

John Paul II specifies that "with regard to the parameters used today for ascertaining death - whether the ‘encephalic' signs or the more traditional cardio-respiratory signs - the Church does not make technical decisions.

"She limits herself to the Gospel duty of comparing the data offered by medical science with the Christian understanding of the person, bringing out the similarities and the possible conflicts capable of endangering respect for human dignity.

"Here it can be said that the criterion adopted in more recent times for ascertaining the fact of death, namely, the complete and irreversible cessation of all brain activity if rigorously applied, does not seem to conflict with the essential elements of a sound anthropology."[18]

We can add that in the current pandemic, in the light of the global social situation, as well as on anthropological criteria, Pope Francis manifests a welcoming and constructive approach to science, making use of the richness of the Church's social doctrine.

Thus he shows that the contribution of scientific research in the field of health - which has made it possible to develop safe, effective vaccines with minimal and identifiable undesirable effects, tested clinically in an extensive and rigorous way - can be at the service of health as a common and global good.

In this way, the pope articulates a moral perspective that, in addition to being anthropological, is also social, at the service of the common good of all humanity.

Thus, both anthropological criteria and those inspired by Catholic social morality indicate fruitful and ethically significant ways of discerning and acting in the service of humanity, both in the case of healthcare practice and in the sphere of public and global health.

• Andrea Vicini, SJ is Professor of Moral Theology and Bioethics at Boston College, MA, USA
• First published in La Civilta Cattolica; reflecting the mind of the Vatican since 1850.
• Republished with permission.

DOI: La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 5, no.12 art. 8, 1221: 10.32009/22072446.1121.8

[1]. See M. Rozier, "Religion and Public Health: Moral Tradition as Both Problem and Solution", in Journal of Religion and Health 56 (2017/3) 1052-1063; Id., "When Populations Become the Patient", in Health Progress 98 (2017/1) 5-8; Id., "Collective Action on Determinants of Health: A Catholic Contribution", in Health Progress 100 (2019/5) 5-8; Id, "A Catholic Contribution to Global Public Health", in Annals of Global Health 86 (2020/1) 1-5; Id., "Global Public Health and Catholic Insights: Collaboration on Enduring Challenges", in P. J. Landrigan - A. Vicini (eds), Ethical Challenges in Global Public Health: Climate Change, Pollution, and the Health of the Poor, Eugene, OR, Wipf & Stock, 2021, 63-74.

[2]. Cf. M. Rozier, "A Catholic Contribution to Global Public Health", op. cit.

[3]. A specific example can help us. In the United States, one of Boston's hospitals, the Boston Medical Center with its 514 beds, is a "safety-net" hospital, whose mission is to provide health care to people regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay. Thus this healthcare facility serves all citizens, especially those most in need. In reflecting on the services offered to patients, the health care staff realized that most of the costs incurred by the hospital were for emergency medical services. In particular, homeless individuals and families repeatedly used the emergency department for necessary treatment. It turned out that lack of stable housing increases the risk of health problems and burdens the entire healthcare system. Through dedicated funding and local partnerships, Boston Medical Center has taken action to reduce housing instability and homelessness. In 2017, the hospital invested 6.5 million in housing, creating housing for individuals and families in need. In doing so, it promoted the well-being and health of a substantial number of individuals and families in need, making work and school engagement possible and reducing the number of emergency room visits of those citizens. See www.bmc.org/mission/social-determinants-health/housing-security

[4]. "In the present condition of global society, where injustices abound and growing numbers of people are deprived of basic human rights and considered expendable, the principle of the common good immediately becomes, logically and inevitably, a summons to solidarity and a preferential option for the poorest of our brothers and sisters" (Francis, Laudato Si' [LS], No. 158).

[5]. For reflections on Pope Francis' thinking about health care practice, see T. A. Salzman - M. G. Lawler, Pope Francis and the Transformation of Health Care Ethics, Washington, DC, Georgetown University Press, 2021; C. Kaveny, "Pope Francis and Catholic Healthcare Ethics", in Theological Studies 80 (2019/1) 186-201.

[6]. Cf. Francis, General Audience, August 19, 2020; Id., Address to the Members of the "Banco farmaceutico" Foundation, September 19, 2020; Id., Message to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 7, 2020; Id., Message for the 54th World Day of Peace 2021, No. 1; Id., Message "Urbi et Orbi", Christmas 2020; Id., Address to the Members of the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See, February 8, 2021; Id., Apostolic Journey to Iraq (March 5-8, 2021): Meeting with Authorities, Civil Society and the Diplomatic Corps, March 5, 2021; Id., Message "Urbi et Orbi," Easter 2021; Id., Video message on the occasion of the 75th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, September 25, 2020. All these documents can be found at www.vatican.va.

[7]. Id., Video message to the Peoples on the Covid-19 Vaccination Campaign, August 18, 2021.

[8]. Cf. Matt 22:37-40.

[9] . Francis, Audience to the Members of the Biomedical University Foundation of the University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, October 18, 2021.

[10]. Cf. C. Fino, "Les vaccins: questions éthiques", in Revue d'éthique et de théologie morale 311 (2021/3) 61-71.

[11]. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Note on the Morality of the Use of Certain Covid-19 Vaccines (2020), at
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20201221_nota-vaccini-anticovid_en.html /. Cf. also Vatican Covid-19 Commission - Pontifical Academy for Life, Vaccine for All: 20 Points for a More Just and Healthy World (2020), C. Casalone, "Vaccines: Making Responsible Decisions", in Civ. Catt. En March 2021: For earlier documents, see Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction "Dignitas Personae": on Some Questions of Bioethics (2008), Nos. 34-35, Pontifical Academy for Life, Note about the Use of Vaccines (2017).

[12]. Cf. John 14:6: "I am the way, the truth and the life."

[13]. " It follows from this ever closer interdependence, which is gradually being extended to the whole world, that the common good - that is, the sum total of those conditions of social life which enable both groups and individual members to attain their own perfection more fully and more rapidly - is today increasingly becoming universal, involving rights and duties which concern the whole human race" (Gaudium et Spes, No. 26). See also D. Hollenbach, The Common Good and Christian Ethics, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2002.

[14]. John XXIII, Mater et Magistra (1961), No. 57; Francis, Fratelli Tutti (FT) (2020), No. 260.

[15]. Pope Francis reminds us that the climate is also a common good: cf. LS 23.

[16]. John Paul II, Address to the 18th International Congress of the Transplantation Society (August 29, 2000), No. 3. Italics in the original. About the quotation, cf. Id., Address to Participants at a Congress on Organ Transplant (June 20, 1991), No. 3.

[17]. Id., Address to the 18th International Congress of the Transplantation Society, op. cit., No. 5. Italics in the original.

[18]. Ibid. Italics in the original.

The study covered eight types of childhood adversity: Emotional, physical or sexual abuse, and growing up in a household where there was violence, substance abuse, mental illness, divorce, or a household member behind bars.

"Toxic stressors in childhood can take a lifelong toll on many aspects of our health," says Associate Professor Janet Fanslow, of the School of Population Health in the Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences. "The effects ripple across society to create a huge burden on family and whanau, our health service and the economy." Read more

One couple said they had immediate suspicions that the girl she gave birth to in late 2019 was not theirs, due to the child's darker complexion.

However, they fell in love with the baby and trusted the in vitro fertilisation process and their doctors - only to find they has another couple's baby. The other mother gave birth to her child - also a daughter and she and her husband took her home.

"I was overwhelmed by feelings of fear, betrayal, anger and heartbreak," said one of the mothers.

"I was robbed of the ability to carry my own child. I never had the opportunity to grow and bond with her during pregnancy, to feel her kick."

She and her husband, who have filed the lawsuit, are accusing the California Center for Reproductive Health (CCRH) and its owner, Dr Eliran Mor, of medical malpractice, breach of contract, negligence and fraud. It demands a jury trial and seeks unspecified damages.

The two other parents involved in the alleged mix-up plan a similar lawsuit in the coming days, according to the attorney representing all four parents.

The girls were born a week apart in September 2019. Both couples unwittingly raised the wrong child for nearly three months before DNA tests confirmed that the embryos were swapped, according to the filing.

They were swapped back in January 2020.

The couples' lawyer, whose firm specialises in fertility cases, is calling for greater oversight for IVF clinics. "This case highlights an industry in desperate need of federal regulation," he says.

Breaking the news to their older daughter, now seven, that doctors made a mistake and that the baby was not actually her sister "was the hardest thing in my life," one of the affected parents says.

"My heart breaks for her, perhaps the most."

Since the mix-up came to light and the babies returned to their biological families, all four parents have made an effort to stay in each others' lives and "forge a larger family,".

Source

• The Guardian
• Image: The Today Show

In the midst of what can be a confusing scene, the leaders of some church groups have made their views abundantly clear, as they have railed against any mandates that would prevent people from attending their churches.

In their eyes vaccine mandates would represent placing the authority of the Government over the authority of God.

Claims like these, coming from a minority of largely conservative Christians, are never as straightforward as they seem since they stem from vaccine hesitancy and on occasion explicit anti-vaccine sentiments.

Nevertheless, they touch on important issues for churches in general as all will have to decide whether or not to allow the unvaccinated into services.

To turn people away from services goes against all that most churches stand for.

But it is unfortunate that much of the well-publicised opposition to vaccine mandates is based on the rights of individuals and the freedom to express themselves as they wish.

An emphasis far more congenial to Christian thinking is the opposite, and that is to protect the health and wellbeing of all within the community — both within the church and in wider society.

There is no hint in Christian thinking that the authority of the church is superior to the authority of government.

Ideally, they work alongside one another respecting each other and endeavouring to achieve what is best for all within society.

Biblical values emphasise the love of neighbour; service of others; support for widows and orphans — in our society this translates into support for the vulnerable, those unable to fend for themselves, those with compromised immune systems, the elderly and the very young, and especially those with chronic health conditions.

There is a communitarian thrust to Christian teaching, pointing towards the welfare of others, inside and outside the church.

In the midst of a serious pandemic, individual churches have to determine their own policies regarding vaccine mandates.

Since Covid-19 is a serious public health problem, the vaccinated/non-vaccinated dichotomy cannot be ignored by allowing everyone to act as they wish.

In public health terms, everyone in a church community is affected by the actions of everyone else.

No one is an island and so the decisions of each person have an influence on everyone else.

Individual interests are never to dominate, as clearly brought out by core biblical teaching to love God and one's neighbour and each of us is responsible for looking after those around us, in health terms as well as in spiritual terms.

If a government were to impose vaccine mandates on churches, churches should find alternative ways of meeting together, including in people's homes and on occasion in the open air.

Meeting as the people of God extends far beyond physical meeting together in a formal church setting, normal and healthy as that may be under most circumstances.

Vaccination is not a private matter since it impacts everyone else within a community.

In this sense, it is of considerable interest to the church as a whole. However, all are to respect each individual's position, no matter how much they disagree with it.

All are members of the body of Christ, and judgement belongs to God alone.

Not only this, we are all flawed, and from time to time we all make unwise decisions.

Since this is a public health emergency, people cannot act entirely as they wish; they are to act responsibly by public health standards.

Hence, if the church is prepared to allow the non-vaccinated into church services, the non-vaccinated have an obligation to be able to demonstrate that they are not infected, that is, to have negative Covid tests.

This should be possible once rapid antigen tests become available.

In fact, a large church may wish to insist on this for everyone, including the vaccinated if the infection rate in their area is very high.

All are to think of how their views and attitudes affect others, particularly those with a different position from their own.

Pay regard to the ‘‘weaker'' members of the church community, no matter how the weaker member is defined within the context of vaccination.

Who are those most in need of support?

A good deal of trust is required all around, showing ample grace and love towards each other.

In the final analysis, the church leaders have responsibility for the health and safety, and the welfare of all within a church building.

This is a general principle, extending far beyond Covid-19 considerations.

• Gareth Jones is Emeritus Professor in the anatomy department at the University of Otago.
• First published in the ODT. Republished with permission of the author.

Its national waitlist figures indicate failed attempts by sex abuse survivors to get mental health help increased by 387 percent and reaching 4131 in the most recent quarter from 847.

ACC says the waits are a result of a lack of capacity among its sensitive claims mental health service suppliers.

One applicant says she contacted every Wellington mental health supplier and dozens of therapists on ACC's accredited list this year and got rejection after rejection.

"It makes you want to cry ... knowing that even if you want help there's no one out there that can because their load's already too big."

Her choices were an appointment in about a year, or sooner with a trainee psychologist sitting in on the sessions. Then, when she managed to get an appointment, it was cancelled because of COVID lockdowns.

Wellington Rape Crisis general manager Kyla Rayner says demand is the highest Rape Crisis has ever seen.

Many sensitive claim mental health support suppliers simply do not have room on their books to take more people on.

Waitlist times are far longer in some places. In the three months to May they averaged up to 25 weeks in Lower Hutt, 22 in Nelson and 20 in Masterton.

The size of waitlists have also grown. The number of spots claimed by people has more than doubled, up 124 percent in the past 15 months - from 656 to 1473.

Green Party ACC spokesperson Jan Logie says delays compound the harm to survivors.

"It's an absolute failure of our system."

ACC says the figures are a snapshot provided by services as part of a quarterly survey. They don't include people who get immediate treatment, so avoid waitlists.

Only a third of suppliers offer a waitlist.

ACC also says annual sensitive claims have more than doubled in five years to nearly 13,000, jumping 20 percent each year since 2014.

It has more than doubled the number of sensitive claims therapists in that time to 1990, with nearly 500 coming onboard in the past three years. It has also made it easier and faster for suppliers to bring on new therapists.

ACC says it has not been able to close the gap between supply and demand.

"Media coverage, the #metoo movement, the Royal Commission of Inquiry in Abuse in Care investigation, societal trends, and awareness-raising prevention campaigns are changing attitudes towards sexual violence, which we believe is resulting in more survivors of sexual violence feeling they can seek help."

Paul Skirrow from the College of Clinical Psychologists says the mental toll on clinicians from working with sexual assault survivors meant many only worked part time.

"There's actually ACC guidance that says that you shouldn't spend more than 50 percent of your time doing this kind of work. So we're talking about a number there but that might be a very small number of appointments available that it might translate to."

Source

• RNZ
• Image: Barry, Barall & Spinella

In particular, I would argue that many Maori whanau in Auckland do not enjoy the benefits of this supposed "liveability".

This is important, given Maori comprised 11.5% of the Auckland population in the 2018 Census. Roughly one in four Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand are living in the greater Auckland region.

The survey was conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, sister company of The Economist, and looked at 140 world cities. Auckland was ranked 12th in 2019, but took top spot this year for one obvious reason:

Alternative liveability criteria

Each city in the survey was rated on "relative comfort for over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories: stability, healthcare, culture and environment, education and infrastructure".

Overall rankings depended on how those factors were rated on a sliding scale: acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable, intolerable. Quantitative measurements relied on "external data points", but the qualitative ratings were "based on the judgment of our team of expert analysts and in-city contributors".

The methodology, particularly around culture and environment, seems somewhat subjective. It's predicated on the judgement of unnamed experts and contributors, and based on similarly undefined "cultural indicators".

To better understand the living conditions of Maori in Auckland, therefore, we might use more robust "liveability" criteria. The New Zealand Treasury's Living Standards Framework offers a useful model.

This sets out 12 domains of well-being: civic engagement and governance, cultural identity, environment, health, housing, income and consumption, jobs and earnings, knowledge and skills, time use, safety and security, social connections and subjective well-being.

The Maori experience

Applying a small handful of these measures to Maori, we find the following.

Housing: According to recent reports, Auckland house prices increased by about NZ$140,00 on average in the past year. That contributed to Auckland being the fourth-least-affordable housing market, across New Zealand, Singapore, Australia, the US, UK, Ireland, Canada and Hong Kong.

Next to that sobering fact, we can point to estimates that Maori made up more than 40% of the homeless in Auckland in 2019. We can only assume this rapid increase in house prices has made homelessness worse.

Poverty: Alongside housing affordability is the growing concern about poverty in New Zealand, and particularly child poverty. While there has been an overall decline in child poverty, Maori and Pacific poverty rates remain "profoundly disturbing".

Employment: As of March 2021, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment recorded a Maori unemployment rate of 10.8%, well above the national rate (4.9%). This is particularly high for Maori youth (20.4%) and women (12.0%).

Health: Maori life expectancy is considerably lower than for non-Maori, and mortality rates are higher for Maori than non-Maori across nearly all age groups. Maori are also over-represented across a wide range of chronic and infectious diseases, injuries and suicide.

The digital divide: The Digital Government initiative has found Maori and Pasifika are among those less likely to have internet access, thus creating a level of digital poverty that may affect jobs and earnings, knowledge and skills, safety and security, and social connections.

Making Auckland liveable for all

Taken together, these factors show a different and darker picture for far too many Maori than "liveable city" headlines might suggest.

I say this as someone who has lived in Auckland for the majority of the past 60 years. It is a city I love, and I acknowledge the grace and generosity of the mana whenua of Tamaki Makaurau, with whom I share this beautiful whenua and moana.

I am also part of a privileged group of Maori who enjoy job security, a decent income, a secure whanau and strong social networks.

But, until we address and ameliorate the inequities and disadvantages some of our whanau face, we cannot truly celebrate being the "most liveable city in the world".

• Ella Henry Associate Professor, Auckland University of Technology
• First published in The Conversation. Republished with permission.
• Photo by Dan Freeman on Unsplash

"My doctor has recommended it, but my answer is always the same, ‘I don't have time'."

He enjoys siestas, saying: "As soon as I finish lunch, I go to my room, take my shoes off and lie down fully dressed. Read more

Quarantined in a one-bedroom apartment in New York, I would sometimes imagine my fire escape was a creaky porch in the woods somewhere as I sat outside in the early evenings, listening to my neighbours' cheer and bang pots for the essential workers carrying the city on their backs.

Life felt stuck: no way to plan, nowhere to go, nothing to build toward.

The calendar had been emptied of weddings and dinners and reunions; the comforting rhythms of weeks and seasons disappeared.

I found myself alternately plotting wild adventures and pining for a quiet, communal life.

A professor of mine used to call this kind of musing "Jesuit daydreaming," his description of the rich Ignatian tradition of spiritual discernment.

I should pay attention to daydreams, he said, because they can be more revealing than I might first assume.

In this case, I think he is right: My pandemic mind loop was tracing the problem I have come to see as one of the great dilemmas of modern life.

In my work as a religion journalist, I often offer a mental image to explain the importance of the beat to secular colleagues and readers.

While not everyone describes themselves as having faith or even feeling spiritual, everyone has those searching moments in the middle of the night, covers pulled up high as they are lying in bed wondering how to have a good life.

More often than not, people's descriptions of what a good life looks like depends on a single factor: the strength of the community around them.

As a reporter, it is my job to follow along as individuals and communities try to figure out who they want to be and how they want to live.

It is hard to be a man or woman for others in a culture that is dominated by us versus them.

Over the past eight months, however, the path toward a good life has become obscured for many Americans.

As I sat inside my apartment daydreaming about the future, dozens of people

• on my street were getting sick,
• were losing family members or navigating the anxiety of being immunocompromised during a public-health crisis,
• were among many Americans, especially in New York, have spent their last eight months mostly alone, and mostly at home, sometimes unable even to wave hello to loved ones from a distance.
• contributed to the unemployment rate in New York City, which this summer reached 20 percent; many beloved businesses will likely never come back after the shutdown.
• are impacted by the basic ingredients of a good life—decent health, the warmth of family and friends, economic stability—are now out of reach for far more people in our country than at the start of 2020.

But the pandemic has also revealed the extent to which a good life felt elusive for countless Americans far before any of us had heard of Covid-19.

This is not just a matter of money or resources.

In my reporting, I constantly find evidence that Americans feel isolated and unmoored from their communities, unsure of their place in the world.

I am thinking of a Black Southern Baptist-trained pastor who could not stomach taking his kids to church within his denomination anymore because of his fellow church members' reluctance to talk about racism.

A longtime staffer at a major American archdiocese who feels daily rage at the Catholic Church's inability to address the clergy sexual-abuse crisis.

A young woman fired from her job at a conservative Christian advocacy organization because she spoke out against President Trump. A Catholic professor who bitterly wishes the Democratic Party had room for his pro-life views.

These are all examples from the world of religion and politics, but they speak to a deep and expansive truth: In many parts of American life, people feel the institutions that were supposed to guide their lives have failed, and that there is no space for people like them.

The result is a widespread sense of mutual mistrust.

Last year, the Pew Research Center found that fewer than one in five Americans say they can trust the government.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans have a hard time telling the truth from lies when elected officials speak, and even more believe the government unnecessarily withholds important information from the public.

I have encountered plenty of mistrust in the course of reporting stories.

People believe they know my politics, suspect me of bias and assume I will be hostile to religion because of where I work.

Religious leaders may be the most distrusted group of all.

As one influential Catholic businessman in Boston told me a couple of years ago, following the sexual-abuse scandal, "I go to Mass about three or four days a week.

I'm not into Vatican politics. I'm not into Vatican museums. I'm not into people who wear red slippers and fancy robes.

I bought into this as a kid, because of the life of Christ. So I'm in. But I'm not drinking any Kool-Aid."

Nearly two-thirds of Americans have a hard time telling truth from lies when elected officials speak. Continue reading

"Our wards are always full of diabetes cases. Sometimes our surgical wards wouldn't be able to deal with the non-emergency cases because there's all this diabetes surgery to do," says Hawea.

Hawea, a leading non-communicable disease specialist in Fiji, says these figures would be common in major hospitals around the country, which has one of the highest rates of type 2 diabetes in the world.

Surgeons in the Pacific nation describe the amputations they are forced to perform as a "dirty business".

"It became so common and so unattractive I started not feeling anything about the work. I guess that's when I started to have a problem with this way of dealing with diabetes."

While in many countries, diabetes is detected early and can be managed through diet, exercise and medication, in Fiji, the disease is often not caught until amputation, or even death, are imminent.

‘I ate everything and drank everything.'

For Wilisoni Lagi Vuatalevu, this was the reality. Within a month of retiring at 55 years old from his clerical job, Vuatalevu was facing the amputation of one of his legs.

He should have been able to retire to his village where days are spent fishing and foraging for food from organic sources. Most Fijians start and end their active lives this way.

Instead, two years after finishing work, Wilisoni faces the prospect of sitting out the rest of his life in a wheelchair in his home at Delainavesi just outside the capital city, Suva.

"Two years before I retired, I noted a boil on my leg that wouldn't heal. When I had it checked out at the health centre, they did tests but didn't say it was diabetes. They said my blood sugar was fine."

Wilisoni admits he was not too motivated to investigate the wound further and soldiered on for more than a year with the wound. One month after he retired, the pain was unbearable and bled profusely.

"When they checked, the doctor was very kind and pleasant as she told me it was clearly ‘that sugar disease' and told me I'd lose that leg... I was frightened," Wilisoni said.

After an emotional conversation with wife Kelera during which they imagined and planned for a future without a leg, he reluctantly agreed to the surgery.

"We have been looking after each other all our marriage, why should this be different? I told him, I will look after you even if you lose both legs," Kelera said.

Like most indigenous Fijians, Vuatalevu's life story began in an idyllic island village - on Vanuabalavu in the Lau Group, the province bordering Fiji and Tonga. It is far from Suva and far also from processed foods, savoury treats and sugary delights which many Pacific Islanders have turned to in place of their usual diet.

"I was never fat, I'm quite tall so I've always had a good body when I was growing up," Vuatalevu said.

"But I ate everything and drank everything, I didn't really choose food that was good for me or even thought about what was good for me and what wasn't. I didn't have to. Whatever was available and came my way, I ate. It was the same with alcohol."

A call for change

Vuatalevu is far from alone. According to the Fiji government's department of health, 30% of the country's population has diabetes.

And the Pacific, more broadly, is devastatingly over-represented in its proportion of people with the disease. Ten Pacific countries are in the top 20 countries for rates of diabetes, led by the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, and Tuvalu.

The International Diabetes Federation says around 87,000 adult Fijians have diabetes - about 15% of the population - but estimates another 46,000 have the disease undiagnosed.

Diabetes-related amputations accounted for 40% of all hospital operations in the country in 2019, the professor of surgery at Fiji's National University told RNZ.

The top three causes of deaths in Fiji are diabetes, heart disease and stroke. Continue reading

"Either you want to kill Grandma or you want to destroy the economy and leave millions of people unemployed, and people fight and they polarize, but we don't ask, ‘What is the wealth for?'" said Mary Hirschfeld, associate professor of economics and theology at Villanova University.

"And on the health side, it's just a very thin idea about health" that doesn't consider the importance of social interaction, work, productivity and human relationships, she said.

Consensus is absent in liberal, present-day society about what goods to pursue and tends to emphasize "instrumental goods," such as health and wealth, she said.

However, a "thicker conception" of the common good is needed and is precisely what Catholic social teaching can contribute to the public conversation.

The online event was organized by the Lumen Christi Institute at the University of Chicago as a follow-up to an event it held last month that addressed the COVID-19 response mostly from an economic perspective.

Much of the June 2 discussion, moderated by Joseph Capizzi, moral theology professor at The Catholic University of America in Washington, hinged on the principles of Catholic social teaching.

Dr. Daniel Sulmasy, a physician and professor of biomedical ethics at Georgetown University, underlined competing conceptions of the common good that emerged during the public debate, including the utilitarian, neo-liberal and totalitarian perspectives.

He contrasted these views with the Catholic understanding of the common good, which he described as "integral," where the good and flourishing of the individual is in part constituted by the good and flourishing of the whole and vice versa.

This "integral" approach seeks both to protect the vulnerable from COVID-19 and to act in solidarity with the poor, he said.

Kirk Doran, associate professor of economics at the University of Notre Dame, also emphasized that "there is no dichotomy between health and wealth." Rather, health and wealth are "intimately related."

"What we're trying to do is to understand a very subtle set of responses that are rippling through our economy, rippling through people's emotional lives, rippling through everything, and they're all affecting each other at the same time, and that's what makes this super complicated," said Doran.

"If it was simple tradeoffs between health and wealth, it would be easier."

Doran's observation of the social movement that emerged online — what he called "a viral desire" — to protect others by not engaging in usual economic activity, opened the discussion on the principle of solidarity in Catholic social teaching. Continue reading

He has a twitter account and tweeting his memes and a fan base dubbed "Bloomers".

He has had a song written about him; hand towels bearing his image have sold out, but you can still get the T-shirts and tote bags.

Colleagues describe him as "measured, methodical, calm and sensible".

Former health reporter Tess Nichol, writing for the American online magazine Slate, described him as "New Zealand's current obsession, an unlikely heartthrob, a mild-mannered health care hero".

It is Dr Ashley Bloomfield, New Zealand's director-general of health.

At 1 pm each day, offering a steady and sure message for a country in lockdown with a lifetime's worth of experience, skills and training geared towards the crisis we are now experiencing.

"There's an incredible congruity between what he thinks and how he lives his life. He's a person of incredible integrity, with regard for others, and humility," says Damon Plimmer.

Plimmer grew up with Bloomfield in Tawa and went to school with him at Scots College.

More recently had contact with him again when the Bloomfields moved to Eastbourne; Plimmer was the vicar at Eastbourne's Anglican church, St Alban's.

"He was able to balance work life and home life so well for someone whose job makes such demands."

The Bloomfields' connection to the church was a path to faith but also to community.

It's a link both Plimmer and former Presbyterian vicar Reuben Hardie recall.

There's no hidden agenda with Ash," Hardie says. "He's in that role for the right reasons. He's very easy going, gets on with everyone."

Plimmer watches the 1 pm updates and sees the Bloomfield he recognises from Eastbourne, "with a sense of humility and service".

"This isn't about him. It's about the wellbeing of this country".

"I have a huge amount of confidence and trust in Ash".

"I can't think of a better person to be Director-General of Health at this time," Plimmer says.

Bloomfield and wife Libby, who is also a doctor have raised three children. They are either nearing the end of secondary school or studying at university.

The Bloomfield family's faith connection continues through St Alban's Church, where Libby Bloomfield is a member of the vestry.

Source

• nzherald.co.nz
• nzdoctor.co.nz
• stfabiola.co.nz
• thebold.nz
• tvnz.co.nz
• slate.com
• thecoast.net.nz
• Image: thecoast.net.nz

Dunn said the 5 pm Vigil Mass at St Mary's on Saturday and the 8.30 am and 10.30 am Masses on Sunday would go ahead as normal because the risk of transmission was regarded as low for persons without symptoms.

Parishioners would be given advice before they entered, and the choice of whether to attend.

"I am advised by health experts that the risk to others at that Mass of contracting Covid-19 is low," Dunn said on Saturday.

"This is because the risk of Covid-19 being passed on by someone not showing symptoms is regarded as low."

"The wellbeing of our parishioners is our first priority, which is why we started to contact them as soon as we became aware today that a parishioner had been diagnosed with Covid-19," Bishop Dunn said on Saturday.

"Our best advice is that the chance of catching any illness in Mass is very low, especially if you heed the standard health advice to wash your hands, avoid close contact with anyone who is ill, and stay at home if you feel ill yourself."

Measures taken

The parish contacted parishioners, especially those who attended the same Mass as the person.

A particular effort was made to ensure older parishioners and those whose health might not be the best were contacted.

The man is recovering

The man first started feeling unwell at the beginning of the week, but has improved considerably now.

He says he was "back to normal" and that there is "nothing to worry about".

"I'm 100 per cent, I'm back to normal," he told Stuff.

His legs were sore enough to make standing difficult but said the symptoms disappeared quickly.

The Ministry of Health says hospital treatment has not been required.

He will recover at home in self-isolation and will be monitored daily by health services.

The man acted in an exemplary way

The man had returned recently from the United States, where there is local transmission of COVID-19.

It was more than 3 days after he arrived back home before he became unwell and the public health assessment is that no one else on the flight is considered to be a close contact.

His partner who travelled with him is well, and currently also in self-isolation.

Once he became unwell, the man did everything right.

When friends in the USA alerted him to their possible link to a COVID-19 case in the USA, on Wednesday he phoned ahead to the GP and told them of his travel history and his symptoms.

The man was then assessed in his car by his GP, with the GP wearing appropriate protective equipment, and a test swab taken.

Source

• Supplied: David McLoughlin
  Communications Adviser, NZ Catholic Bishops
  Te Huinga o nga Pihopa Katorika o Aotearoa
• catholic.org.nz
• health.govt.nz
• facebook.com
• stuff.co.nz
• nzherald.co.nz

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) today published data linking religion and health in a bid "to understand the circumstances of people of different religious identities".

It found that people aged 16 and over who had no religion were significantly less likely to be satisfied with their health.

The data has divided secular and religious experts. Some claim that people who have faith are more likely "to be hopeful for a better future", while others reject that religion has "any magic explanatory powers" at all.

The ONS found that 66% of Muslims, 68% of Christians, 69% of Sikhs, 71% of Buddhists, 72% of Hindus and 77% of Jews were satisfied with their health between 2016 and 2018.

However, in contrast 64% of people who had no religion reported being satisfied with their health.

Responding to the latest data, Michael Wakelin, head of programmes at Coexist House which works in conjunction with the University of Cambridge and chair of the Religion Media Centre, said: "Well, it's clearly complex!

"But I guess this has something to do with an attitude of gratitude. If you are of the opinion that God loves you and he created you you are more likely to be grateful for what you have."

"Also, if you have faith, you are likely to be more hopeful for a better future so that even if things are a bit tough, now they will improve in God's good time."

"For Christians, there is an understanding that love and suffering are the two great mysteries that cannot be separated - perhaps we endure the one in the knowledge that it is part of the other - leading eventually to a time of no more tears. As Charles Wesley puts it ‘ours the cross, the grave the skies'."

In contrast, Stephen Evans, chief executive officer at the National Secular Society (NSS), said: "Caution must be applied before granting religion any magic explanatory powers based on these findings."

"To do so would oversimplify a much more complex and nuanced picture. More research into the interplay between religion, non-religion, and health is necessary before any potential inequalities can be understood and addressed." Continue reading