The problems associated with vision through mesh window screening materials are discussed and a laboratory experiment using a 1/8th replicate 2th factorial design is described which shows the relative effects on vision of main effects and first-order interactions. Two criteria of visibility were used: a Landolt ring, measuring changes in visual acuity, and paired ratio scaling giving direct magnitude estimates of "ease of seeing" through the material. The laboratory results were validated in a short field experiment in which the effects on visibility of three isolated variables was determined by paired comparisons. Some suggestions for future experiments are also discussed.
International audience ; Preliminary results of an empirical study of human experimentation practices are presented and contrasted with those of a survey conducted a hundred years ago when clinical research, although tolerated, was culturally deviant. Now that biomedical research is both authorized and controlled, its actors (sponsors, committees, investigators, subjects) come out with heterogeneous rationalities, and they appear to be engaged in a transactional process of negotiating their rationales with one another. In the European context "protective" of subjects, surprisingly the subjects we interviewed (and especially patient-subjects) were creative and revealed an aptitude for integrating experimental medicine into common culture.
International audience ; Preliminary results of an empirical study of human experimentation practices are presented and contrasted with those of a survey conducted a hundred years ago when clinical research, although tolerated, was culturally deviant. Now that biomedical research is both authorized and controlled, its actors (sponsors, committees, investigators, subjects) come out with heterogeneous rationalities, and they appear to be engaged in a transactional process of negotiating their rationales with one another. In the European context "protective" of subjects, surprisingly the subjects we interviewed (and especially patient-subjects) were creative and revealed an aptitude for integrating experimental medicine into common culture.
International audience ; Preliminary results of an empirical study of human experimentation practices are presented and contrasted with those of a survey conducted a hundred years ago when clinical research, although tolerated, was culturally deviant. Now that biomedical research is both authorized and controlled, its actors (sponsors, committees, investigators, subjects) come out with heterogeneous rationalities, and they appear to be engaged in a transactional process of negotiating their rationales with one another. In the European context "protective" of subjects, surprisingly the subjects we interviewed (and especially patient-subjects) were creative and revealed an aptitude for integrating experimental medicine into common culture.
International audience ; The article by Santos, Coimbra, and Radin makes for a fascinating read for many different reasons. Their thorough examination of the long-lasting disagreement between two prominent American biomedical scientists, Francis L. Black and James V. Neel, about the political implications of researching the biology and health of Amazonian Indians, could not be more topical. Neel's warning, first issued as early as 1976, that Black's promotion of "miscegenation" as a means for Brazilian Indigenous populations to alleviate their (allegedly) genetic vulnerability to pathogens "could play directly into the hands" of the military dictatorship that ruled the country at the time has gained extra, worrying relevance now that the "amalgamation" of Indian populations has been put back on the political agenda by those who would not accept any hindrance to the exploitation of the Amazonian El Dorado. First among them, the recently elected president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, could not let his inauguration day pass without starting to unravel the legal protections extended to Indigenous populations by the constitution adopted in 1988—a landmark in the return of the country to democracy.
International audience ; The article by Santos, Coimbra, and Radin makes for a fascinating read for many different reasons. Their thorough examination of the long-lasting disagreement between two prominent American biomedical scientists, Francis L. Black and James V. Neel, about the political implications of researching the biology and health of Amazonian Indians, could not be more topical. Neel's warning, first issued as early as 1976, that Black's promotion of "miscegenation" as a means for Brazilian Indigenous populations to alleviate their (allegedly) genetic vulnerability to pathogens "could play directly into the hands" of the military dictatorship that ruled the country at the time has gained extra, worrying relevance now that the "amalgamation" of Indian populations has been put back on the political agenda by those who would not accept any hindrance to the exploitation of the Amazonian El Dorado. First among them, the recently elected president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, could not let his inauguration day pass without starting to unravel the legal protections extended to Indigenous populations by the constitution adopted in 1988—a landmark in the return of the country to democracy.
International audience ; The morbidity and mortality of vector-borne diseases is closely linked to exposure of the human host to vectors. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of individual exposure to arthropod bites by investigation of the specific immune response to vector saliva would make it possible to monitor individuals at risk of vectorial transmission of pathogens. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the antibody (IgG) response to saliva from uninfected Glossina species, vectors, or non-vectors of Trypanosoma brucei gambiense by detecting immunogenic proteins in humans residing in an area endemic for human African trypanosomiasis in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Our results suggest that the immunogenic profiles observed seemed specific to the Glossina species (vector or non-vector species) and to the infectious status of exposed individuals (infected or not infected). This preliminary work tends to support the feasibility of development of an epidemiologic tool based on this antibody response to salivary proteins.
International audience ; The morbidity and mortality of vector-borne diseases is closely linked to exposure of the human host to vectors. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of individual exposure to arthropod bites by investigation of the specific immune response to vector saliva would make it possible to monitor individuals at risk of vectorial transmission of pathogens. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the antibody (IgG) response to saliva from uninfected Glossina species, vectors, or non-vectors of Trypanosoma brucei gambiense by detecting immunogenic proteins in humans residing in an area endemic for human African trypanosomiasis in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Our results suggest that the immunogenic profiles observed seemed specific to the Glossina species (vector or non-vector species) and to the infectious status of exposed individuals (infected or not infected). This preliminary work tends to support the feasibility of development of an epidemiologic tool based on this antibody response to salivary proteins.
International audience ; The current outbreak of Ebola virus disease has mobilized the international community against this deadly disease. However, rabies, another deadly disease, is greatly affecting the African continent, with an estimated 25 000 deaths every year. And yet, the disease can be prevented by a vaccine, if necessary with immunoglobulin, even when administered after exposure to the rabies virus. Rabies victims die because of neglect and ignorance, because they are not aware of these life-saving biologicals, or because they cannot access them or do not have the money to pay for them. Breaking the cycle of indifference of rabies deaths in humans in Africa should be a priority of governments, international organizations and all stakeholders involved.
International audience ; The current outbreak of Ebola virus disease has mobilized the international community against this deadly disease. However, rabies, another deadly disease, is greatly affecting the African continent, with an estimated 25 000 deaths every year. And yet, the disease can be prevented by a vaccine, if necessary with immunoglobulin, even when administered after exposure to the rabies virus. Rabies victims die because of neglect and ignorance, because they are not aware of these life-saving biologicals, or because they cannot access them or do not have the money to pay for them. Breaking the cycle of indifference of rabies deaths in humans in Africa should be a priority of governments, international organizations and all stakeholders involved.
International audience ; The current outbreak of Ebola virus disease has mobilized the international community against this deadly disease. However, rabies, another deadly disease, is greatly affecting the African continent, with an estimated 25 000 deaths every year. And yet, the disease can be prevented by a vaccine, if necessary with immunoglobulin, even when administered after exposure to the rabies virus. Rabies victims die because of neglect and ignorance, because they are not aware of these life-saving biologicals, or because they cannot access them or do not have the money to pay for them. Breaking the cycle of indifference of rabies deaths in humans in Africa should be a priority of governments, international organizations and all stakeholders involved.
The principle of precaution, a fundamental, essentially legalistic, rule underpinning health care legislation in France, basically arose from environmental protection policies. This principle became the topic of a good deal of well-publicized debate following the decree concerning HIV contamination rendered in 1993 by the Conseil d'Etat, the supreme jurisdiction on legislative matters in France. This translation of a fundamental principle from one domain to another is not devoid of significance and could have an unexpected impact on the nature and meaning of health care itself. When applied to medicine, the principle of precaution must be confronted with the notion of risk, inherent in all acts of health care. This risk certainly implies patients' rights and informed consent to medical care, but also, in a reasonable search for an acceptable balance between risk and benefit, the freedom of biomedical research from overly-restrictive regulations. Consequently, in accordance with an ethical approach to medical care, legislative and judicial bodies must take into consideration the practical reality of medicine in order to integrate the scientific, economic, social, and psychological aspects of everyday medical practice into health care laws and regulations. Once faced with the reality of health care, the principle of precaution could appear contradictory to the fundamental principles of medicine. Indeed, every physician, every health care worker, makes daily evidence-based decisions that are never devoid of risk. Unrestricted application of the principle of precaution to a growing number of public domains, including medicine, as advocated by a large number of opinion leaders, could lead to an inextricable situation, in total contradiction with the goal of health care itself. In order to develop new truly ethical and adapted health care regulations, we must break down the barriers confining judges and legal representatives to a purely legalistic vision of health care and equally confining physicians to a purely ...
The principle of precaution, a fundamental, essentially legalistic, rule underpinning health care legislation in France, basically arose from environmental protection policies. This principle became the topic of a good deal of well-publicized debate following the decree concerning HIV contamination rendered in 1993 by the Conseil d'Etat, the supreme jurisdiction on legislative matters in France. This translation of a fundamental principle from one domain to another is not devoid of significance and could have an unexpected impact on the nature and meaning of health care itself. When applied to medicine, the principle of precaution must be confronted with the notion of risk, inherent in all acts of health care. This risk certainly implies patients' rights and informed consent to medical care, but also, in a reasonable search for an acceptable balance between risk and benefit, the freedom of biomedical research from overly-restrictive regulations. Consequently, in accordance with an ethical approach to medical care, legislative and judicial bodies must take into consideration the practical reality of medicine in order to integrate the scientific, economic, social, and psychological aspects of everyday medical practice into health care laws and regulations. Once faced with the reality of health care, the principle of precaution could appear contradictory to the fundamental principles of medicine. Indeed, every physician, every health care worker, makes daily evidence-based decisions that are never devoid of risk. Unrestricted application of the principle of precaution to a growing number of public domains, including medicine, as advocated by a large number of opinion leaders, could lead to an inextricable situation, in total contradiction with the goal of health care itself. In order to develop new truly ethical and adapted health care regulations, we must break down the barriers confining judges and legal representatives to a purely legalistic vision of health care and equally confining physicians to a purely ...
The principle of precaution, a fundamental, essentially legalistic, rule underpinning health care legislation in France, basically arose from environmental protection policies. This principle became the topic of a good deal of well-publicized debate following the decree concerning HIV contamination rendered in 1993 by the Conseil d'Etat, the supreme jurisdiction on legislative matters in France. This translation of a fundamental principle from one domain to another is not devoid of significance and could have an unexpected impact on the nature and meaning of health care itself. When applied to medicine, the principle of precaution must be confronted with the notion of risk, inherent in all acts of health care. This risk certainly implies patients' rights and informed consent to medical care, but also, in a reasonable search for an acceptable balance between risk and benefit, the freedom of biomedical research from overly-restrictive regulations. Consequently, in accordance with an ethical approach to medical care, legislative and judicial bodies must take into consideration the practical reality of medicine in order to integrate the scientific, economic, social, and psychological aspects of everyday medical practice into health care laws and regulations. Once faced with the reality of health care, the principle of precaution could appear contradictory to the fundamental principles of medicine. Indeed, every physician, every health care worker, makes daily evidence-based decisions that are never devoid of risk. Unrestricted application of the principle of precaution to a growing number of public domains, including medicine, as advocated by a large number of opinion leaders, could lead to an inextricable situation, in total contradiction with the goal of health care itself. In order to develop new truly ethical and adapted health care regulations, we must break down the barriers confining judges and legal representatives to a purely legalistic vision of health care and equally confining physicians to a purely ...
The principle of precaution, a fundamental, essentially legalistic, rule underpinning health care legislation in France, basically arose from environmental protection policies. This principle became the topic of a good deal of well-publicized debate following the decree concerning HIV contamination rendered in 1993 by the Conseil d'Etat, the supreme jurisdiction on legislative matters in France. This translation of a fundamental principle from one domain to another is not devoid of significance and could have an unexpected impact on the nature and meaning of health care itself. When applied to medicine, the principle of precaution must be confronted with the notion of risk, inherent in all acts of health care. This risk certainly implies patients' rights and informed consent to medical care, but also, in a reasonable search for an acceptable balance between risk and benefit, the freedom of biomedical research from overly-restrictive regulations. Consequently, in accordance with an ethical approach to medical care, legislative and judicial bodies must take into consideration the practical reality of medicine in order to integrate the scientific, economic, social, and psychological aspects of everyday medical practice into health care laws and regulations. Once faced with the reality of health care, the principle of precaution could appear contradictory to the fundamental principles of medicine. Indeed, every physician, every health care worker, makes daily evidence-based decisions that are never devoid of risk. Unrestricted application of the principle of precaution to a growing number of public domains, including medicine, as advocated by a large number of opinion leaders, could lead to an inextricable situation, in total contradiction with the goal of health care itself. In order to develop new truly ethical and adapted health care regulations, we must break down the barriers confining judges and legal representatives to a purely legalistic vision of health care and equally confining physicians to a purely scientific vision of their mission.
