There is an epidemic of obesity in adults in rural America. It is estimated that about 19% of the population resides in rural areas, which encompasses 97% of America's total landmass. Although rural America makes up a fraction of America's total population, it has been estimated that the prevalence of obesity is approximately 6.2 times higher than in urban America. This illustrates an apparent disparity that exists between the rural population and urban populations that needs to be examined.The prevalence of obesity, especially in rural America, is a growing concern in the medical community in recent years. Obesity has been identified as a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cancer, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, which are leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the US. To better understand the disparity in the prevalence of adult obesity between rural and urban America, researchers have identified risk factors that are associated with the high incidence and prevalence of obesity in the rural American adult population. Low income and lack of physical activity have been identified as factors that predispose rural Americans to increased risk of obesity, arguing that low-income Americans may not have access to the resources available to assist them in weight reduction. With rural Americans being at an income disadvantage, it creates a risk for obesity, which further predisposes them to chronic diseases such as hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), diabetes, and coronary artery disease.As obesity continues to rise among the American population, the burden on the rural population is incredibly evident. Despite ongoing efforts by the US government and strategies implemented by the Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention, there is still much to be done to tackle the epidemic. With an existing strategy in place, such as the 12 Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention (COCOMO) strategies to fight obesity with physical activity, Americans are a step closer to conquering this epidemic. However, until other disparities such as income are addressed, rural Americans may continue to be severely impacted by the rising incidence of obesity and subsequent higher mortality rates from associated diseases.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a term that encompasses conditions characterized by chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). It includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Major scientific organizations interested in gastrointestinal systems or GIT-focused organizations worldwide release guidelines for diagnosing, classifying, managing, and treating IBD. However, there are subtle differences among each of these guidelines. This review evaluates four evidence-based guidelines in the management of IBD and seeks to highlight the differences and similarities between them. The main differences in the evaluated guidelines were in diagnosis and treatment recommendations. The diagnosing recommendations were comparable amongst the four guidelines; however, some were more specific about limiting the number of interventions necessary to confirm a diagnosis. Regarding treatment options, each guideline had clear suggestions about what was considered ideal. Although the treatment options were identical, the main differences existed in the recommended diets and initial therapy in patients with moderate disease. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommend evidence-based practice from opinion leaders in clinical decision-making. Rather than dictating a one-size-fits-all approach in IBD management, reviewing various guidelines can enhance the cross-pollination of ideas amongst clinicians to improve decision-making. Clearly describing and appraising evidence-based reasoning for scientific recommendations remain driving factors for quality patient care. The effectiveness of CPGs in improving health and the complexities of their formation requires constant review to maximize constructive criticisms and explore possible improvements.

Flattening the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) curve has been one of the most important public health targets since the outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) worldwide. In this review, we examined measures that were key to flattening the curve in countries that have succeeded in achieving this against other countries. The most consistent factors seen from studies were aggressive testing, contact tracing, social distancing, quarantine measures, and innovative technology. These factors were reported to have helped achieve drop in the number of daily new cases reported. Countries like South Korea and Australia employed extensive testing of their residents as a means of curbing the pandemic and limiting its spread. China and Spain employed tracking software and artificial intelligence (AI) in ensuring that infected individuals remained isolated for the recommended number of days and that close contacts of positive cases were tested and quarantined as well. While efforts towards developing a vaccine are still ongoing, and the possibility of a second wave in many countries, we discussed pertinent public health measures and recommendations.

No abstract

Mycophenolate is used to treat several disease conditions. Several side effects have been reported in several reported cases; however, a few other side effects have been underreported, for example, post-transplant pneumonitis. This case demonstrates suspected mycophenolate-associated pneumonitis, which was masked by the concurrent immune-modulatory drugs that the patients were taking. The pneumonitis became evident after the withdrawal of the immune drugs. This seldomly reported pneumonitis and mycophenolate association calls for further vigilance and a high index of suspicion by physicians when pneumonitis develops in patients taking this valuable medication.