Increasing food insecurity severity is associated with lower diet quality.

OBJECTIVE: Food insecurity may reduce diet quality, but the relationship between food insecurity severity and diet quality is under-researched. This study aimed to examine the relationship between diet quality and severity of household food insecurity. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, online survey used the United States Department of Agriculture Household Food Security Six-item Short Form to classify respondents as food secure or marginally, moderately or severely food insecure. The Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS; scored 0­73) determined diet quality (ARFS total and sub-scale scores). Survey-weighted linear regression (adjusted for age, sex, income, education, location and household composition) was conducted. SETTING: Tasmania, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling adults (aged 18 years and over). RESULTS: The mean ARFS total for the sample (n 804, 53 % female, 29 % aged > 65 years) was 32·4 (sd = 9·8). As the severity of household food insecurity increased, ARFS total decreased. Marginally food-insecure respondents reported a mean ARFS score three points lower than food-secure adults (B = ­2·7; 95 % CI (­5·11, ­0·34); P = 0·03) and reduced by six points for moderately (B = ­5·6; 95 % CI (­7·26, ­3·90); P < 0·001) and twelve points for severely food-insecure respondents (B = ­11·5; 95 % CI (­13·21, ­9·78); P < 0·001). Marginally food-insecure respondents had significantly lower vegetable sub-scale scores, moderately food-insecure respondents had significantly lower sub-scale scores for all food groups except dairy and severely food-insecure respondents had significantly lower scores for all sub-scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: Poorer diet quality is evident in marginally, moderately and severely food-insecure adults. Interventions to reduce food insecurity and increase diet quality are required to prevent poorer nutrition-related health outcomes in food-insecure populations in Australia.

In science we trust? Public trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and accepting anthropogenic climate change.

One barrier to action on climate change is public trust in climate science, and projections made by climate scientists. However, climate science projections are rarely measured in public surveys. We designed survey questions based on two Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections regarding global warming and coral reef decline. We gauge Australians' trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, and explore how trust in climate science is associated with accepting anthropogenic climate change. A slim majority of Australian adults trust Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, with trust correlated positively with accepting anthropogenic climate change. While partisan divisions are extant in accepting anthropogenic climate change, partisan influences are attenuated substantially after controlling for trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, as trust in climate science mediates the influence of partisanship on the acceptance of anthropogenic climate change. A minority of those who accept anthropogenic climate change have low trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, viewing scientists' computer models as unreliable, or believing climate scientists benefit from overstating the impact of climate change.

Climate patriots? Concern over climate change and other environmental issues in Australia.

Echoing the anti-pollution and resource conservation campaigns in the United States in the early-to-mid-twentieth century, some scholars advocate mobilising support for environmental issues by harnessing the notion of environmental patriotism. Taking action to reduce the impact of global warming has also been cast as a patriotic cause. Drawing upon quantitative data from a recent national survey, we examine the link between patriotism and environmental attitudes in Australia, focussing upon climate change. We find that patriotism has a largely neutral association with concern over environmental issues, with the exception of climate change and, to a lesser extent, wildlife preservation. Expressing concern over climate change appears to be unpatriotic for some Australians. Even after controlling for political party identification and other important correlates of environmental issue concerns, patriots are less likely than others to prioritise climate change as their most urgent environmental issue and less likely to believe that climate change is actually occurring.