Background: The adverse events reported from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have varied from very mild, such as pain near the vaccination site, to more severe, with occasional anaphylaxis. Details of age-specific gender differences for the adverse effects are not well documented. Methods: Age and gender disaggregated data on reports of adverse events following two or three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were obtained from four cross-sectional studies. The first was from reports submitted to the Israel Ministry of Health national adverse events database (for ages 16 and above). The second was from a national cross-sectional survey based on an internet panel (for ages 30 and above), and the third and fourth were from cross-sectional surveys among employees of a large company (for ages 20–65) using links to a self-completed questionnaire. Results: In all studies, the risks of adverse events were higher following the second dose and consistently higher in females at all ages. The increased risk among females at all ages included local events such as pain at the injection site, systemic events such as fever, and sensory events such as paresthesia in the hands and face. For the combined adverse reactions, for the panel survey the female-to-male risk ratios (RRs) were 1.89 for the first vaccine dose and 1.82 for the second dose. In the cross-sectional workplace studies, the female-to-male RRs for the first, second and third doses exceeded 3.0 for adverse events, such as shivering, muscle pain, fatigue and headaches. Conclusions: The consistent excess in adverse events among females for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine indicates the need to assess and report vaccine adverse events by gender. Gender differences in adverse events should be taken into account when determining dosing schedules.

Background A standardized global nutritional index (GNI) would provide a single statistic for each country according to its overall level of nutrition, which could then guide national policies. Objectives and methods We have developed a GNI modeled on the human development index (HDI), based on three indicators of nutritional status: deficits, excess, and food security. Calculations were made within four groups of countries (GNI) (32 developed countries, 26 countries in transition, 64 low-mortality developing countries, and 70 high-mortality developing countries) as well as between them—the Global Nutrition Index World wide (GNIg). Results Complete data were available for 192 countries. The ranking of the highest and lowest countries in the four groups (with their GNIg values) is as follows: developed countries—Japan 1 (0.989), United States 99 (0.806); countries in transition—Estonia 10 (0.943), Tajikistan 173 (0.629); low-mortality developing countries—Republic of Korea 12 (0.939), Nauru 185 (0.565); high-mortality developing countries— Algeria 47 (0.876), Sierra Leone 192 (0.420). A “double burden,” in which nutrient deficits and excesses coexist in the same country, was seen in Mauritania (rank 139), South Africa (rank 146), Samoa (rank 157), Lesotho (rank 160), and Fiji (rank 169). The correlation between GNIg and HDI was intermediate (0.74, 55% of variance explained), demonstrating that good nutrition and development are not necessarily synonymous. Countries may be developed yet have a low GNIg (e. g., Australia, Canada, and the United States) and vice versa (e. g., Indonesia and China). Conclusions Since nutrition is fundamental to a nation's health and productivity, the GNI and GNIg should be used alongside the HDI to obtain an optimal index of a country's overall well-being.

The recent vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (cVDPV2) outbreak in Gaza, linked to strains circulating in Egypt, highlights the challenges of maintaining vaccination efforts in conflict zones. Amid prolonged hostilities and a deteriorating healthcare system, vaccination coverage has significantly declined, leaving many children vulnerable to poliovirus and other preventable diseases. This report analysed the outbreak's context, vaccination strategies, and outcomes by reviewing vaccination coverage data, environmental surveillance reports, and public health interventions. It focused on the novel oral polio vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) campaigns and their effectiveness in mitigating transmission. The outbreak, detected in June 2024, included six environmental samples and one confirmed case of poliomyelitis in a 10-month-old child. Despite operational challenges, a vaccination campaign immunised 560,000 children under 10 years by September 2024. However, ongoing violence delayed subsequent rounds of vaccination, particularly in northern Gaza. Contributing factors included vaccine hesitancy, logistical hurdles, and the safety risks healthcare workers face. Regional collaboration remains limited despite cross-border transmission risks. The Gaza outbreak illustrates the critical need for robust vaccination programs, enhanced surveillance, and international cooperation to prevent poliovirus resurgence. Addressing vaccine hesitancy and logistical challenges is vital. Sustained funding and innovative strategies, including nOPV2 use, are essential to combat outbreaks in fragile settings and advance global eradication efforts. No additional funding was used in the preparation of this report.

On October 7, 2023, Hamas terrorists attacked people in their homes, fields, and at a music festival in Israeli communities near the border with Gaza. More than 1,145 men, women, and children were killed, about 1,800 wounded were evacuated to hospitals in the country, and 253 infants, children, women, elderly, and men were abducted. This mass casualty incident (MCI) was the start of a war that is still ongoing. The Israeli medical system, which faced an overwhelming first 24 h, continues to take care of casualties, including those who are injured by missiles that target Israeli residential areas.Israel has a well-established trauma system, and as a result of the experience gained in this war, the system merited review. This was the topic of a meeting of leaders of the Israeli healthcare system, and it forms the basis of this report. The meeting and report provide a platform for presenting the trauma system management during the war, highlighting the strengths of the system as well as its challenges and lessons learned. The participants also brainstormed and discussed possibilities for future improvements.

Background and Objectives: Patient satisfaction with health care can influence health care-seeking behavior in relation to both minor or major health problems or influence communication and compliance with medical advice, which is especially important in emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, it is important to continually monitor patient satisfaction with provided care and their dynamics. The aim of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with health care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the adult population of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FB&H) and compare it with levels of satisfaction in the same population before the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: A representative, population-based survey was implemented in the adult population of the FB&H using the EUROPEP instrument, which measures satisfaction with health care using 23 items. The sample included 740 respondents who were 18 years or older residing in the FB&H and was implemented in December 2020. All data were collected using a system of online panels. The survey questions targeted the nine months from the beginning of the pandemic to the time of data collection, i.e., the period of March to December 2020. Results: The mean composite satisfaction score across all 23 items of the EUROPEP tool was 3.2 points in all age groups; the ceiling effect was 22% for the youngest respondents (18–34 years old), 23% for 35–54 years old, and 26% for the oldest group (55+), showing increasing satisfaction by age. The overall composite score for both females and males was 3.2. The ceiling effect was higher in those with chronic disease (29% vs. 23% in those without chronic disease). The composite mean score for respondents residing in rural vs. urban areas was 3.2 with a ceiling effect of 22% in rural and 24% in urban residents. When comparing mean composite scores surveyed at various points in time in the FB&H, it was found that the score increased from 3.3 to 3.5 between 2011 and 2017 and dropped again to 3.3 in this study. Despite these observations in the overall trends of satisfaction scores, we note that no statistically significant differences were observed between most of the single-item scores in the stratified analysis, pointing to the relative uniformity of satisfaction among the analyzed population subgroups. Conclusions: The rate of satisfaction with health care services in the FB&H was lower during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 2011 and 2017. Furthermore, while an increasing trend in satisfaction with health care was observed in the FB&H during the years prior to 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to the reversal of this trend. It is important to further monitor the dynamics of patient satisfaction with health care, which could serve as a basis for planning, delivering, and maintaining quality services during the COVID-19 pandemic and other emergencies.

The COVID-19 pandemic, adverse effects of climate change, the ongoing war in Ukraine, and other threats have been calling on all relevant stakeholders from varied disciplines to collaborate via the One Health approach, addressing the health of people, animals, plants, and their shared environment. This narrative review examines the need to add two more dimensions to the One Health approach: food systems and resilience, thus laying down the foundation of the Food System, One Health, and Resilience (FOR) approach. By doing so, all FOR approach elements would benefit from collaborative, multisectoral, transdisciplinary, planet-based, and system-focused efforts. Addressing more comprehensive determinants that positively impact resilience and sustainability would upgrade the One Health approach. We share some examples of academic institutions and innovation hubs that use this approach to improve access to adequate, safe, nutritious, and sustainable diets for all on our planet. We call on other FOR stakeholders, including governing institutions, to embrace the FOR approach and join the “FOR-runners”. It is suggested to widen the FOR community by including the doers, the food system’s workers, and consumers and to create the needed common grounds to drive for solutions rooted in equitable, just, locally tailored, inclusive, and sustainable solutions that withstand emergencies.