In Australia, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds often face inequitable health outcomes and access to health care. An important, but under-researched, population is people of Latin American descent. A cross-sectional study obtained clinical data on Latin American Spanish-speaking patients from Brisbane’s south-west. Extracted data included demographic characteristics, risk factors, chronic disease and service use. A total of 382 people (60.5% female, 39.5% male), mainly from El Salvador and Chile and predominantly older people (70% over 50 years), were identified. Compared with the general Australian population, the proportion of people with dyslipidaemia, diabetes, arthritis and musculoskeletal, mental health disorders and being obese or overweight was high. There was also a higher use of the 20–40min general medicine consultation than in the general population. The proportion of patients receiving health promotion and chronic disease management activities was higher than in other reports. However, there were gaps in the provision of these services. The study shows an ageing population group with significant risk factors and an important burden of chronic disease and comorbidity. Addressing inequalities in health for culturally and linguistically diverse populations demands improvements in healthcare delivery and targeted actions based on a solid understanding of their complex health needs and their health, social and cultural circumstances.

This paper argues that the processes of evolutionary selection are becoming increasingly artificial, a trend that goes against the belief in a purely natural selection process claimed by Darwin's natural selection theory. Artificial selection is mentioned by Darwin, but it was ignored by Social Darwinists, and it is all but absent in neo-Darwinian thinking. This omission results in an underestimation of probable impacts of artificial selection upon assumed evolutionary processes, and has implications for the ideological uses of Darwin's language, particularly in relation to poverty and other social inequalities. The influence of artificial selection on genotypic and phenotypic adaptations arguably represents a substantial shift in the presumed path of evolution, a shift laden with both biological and political implications. , among others, to whom I am much grateful.Luis Manuel Sanchez is a Peruvian researcher currently conducting research on democracy and natural selection at the Australian National University.

The uses of natural selection argument in politics have been constant since Charles Darwin’s times. They have also been varied. The readings of Darwin’s theory range from the most radically individualist views, as in orthodox socio-Darwinism, to the most communitarian, as in Peter Kropotkin’s and other socialist perspectives. This essay argues that such diverse, contradictory, and sometimes even outrageous political derivations from Darwin’s theory may be partially explained by some incompleteness and ambivalences underlying Darwin’s concepts. “Natural selection,” “struggle for existence,” and “survival of the fittest” are open concepts and may suggest some hierarchical and segregationist interpretations. Circumstantially, Darwin accepted social “checks,” such as discouraging marriage of “lower” individuals to prevent them from reproducing, in a vein of Malthusian politics. This makes Darwin’s theory of selection by struggle collide with his theory of social instincts, by which he explains the origins of morality. It also favors reading Darwin’sOn the Origin of SpeciesorThe Descent of Manfrom opposite, mostly ideological perspectives. Darwin’s position is ambivalent, although hardly unreasonable. The recognition he makes of social instincts, as well as the use of the concept of artificial selection, entails accepting the role of human consciousness, by which social evolution cannot be reduced to natural evolution, as socio-Darwinians did next and as some neo-Darwinists seem to repeat. On these grounds, this essay argues the inadequacy of the conventional model of natural selection for understanding politics. If we want to describe politics in Darwin’s language,artificialrather thannatural selectionwould be the concept that performs better for explaining the courses of politics in real society.

In Descent of Man, Charles Darwin noted the impact of political institutions on natural selection. He thought that institutions such as asylums or hospitals may deter natural selection; however, he did not reach a decisive answer. Questions remain as to whether the selective impacts of political institutions, which in Darwin’s terms may be referred to as “artificial selection,” are compatible with natural selection, and if so, to what extent. This essay argues that currently there appears to be an essential mismatch between nature and political institutions. Unfitted institutions put exogenous and disproportionate pressures on living beings. This creates consequences for what is postulated as the condition of basic equivalence, which allows species and individuals to enjoy similar chances of survival under natural circumstances. Thus, contrary to Darwin’s expectations, it is sustained that assumed natural selection is not discouraged but becomes exacerbated by political institutions. In such conditions, selection becomes primarily artificial and perhaps mainly political, with consequences for species’ evolutionary future.