The use of latest trends and technologies in academic research may now be changing with such a frequency in the universities in terms of faculties who teaches and students that learn. Each and every universities wants to not only improve the syllabus but they also want to upgrade their labs with latest use of hardware and software. They are also focusing upon the technological growth of the students and their students can also develop their applications in different zones like traffic management for government, application that help to improve the lifestyle of the peoples. For academic institutions, stimulating with endowing graduates to contend in today's knowledge economy, the possibilities and promises are great. The universities is not only focusing to provide the education only to the students but they also taking in account of the research oriented work and freelancing to the students. But significant challenges also come into view. For all of its benefits, technology remains a upsetting innovation—and an exclusive one. Faculty members used to teaching in one way may be reluctant to invest the time to learn new methods, and may lack the budget for needed support.
Noise pollution is considered as environmental stressor which now becomes a problem of all over the word especially in developing countries like India. Jabalpur city (Union Territory) is second biggest city of Madhya Pradesh having population of 10.81 lakhs and selected in first round of smart city mission under the government of India. The rapid growth and development of city in terms of industrialization, Increase of traffic and urbanization causing increasing trends of noise level. The present study is concerned with assessment of ambient noise level in commercial zone of Jabalpur city in May 2016. Noise level study was conducted at 5 different locations in commercial area of Jabalpur and recorded noise data are interpreted in form of parameter,, , , LNP. The Value in different hours of different locations compared with prescribed standard of Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and it was observed that in all the study area sound level is much above the maximum permissible limit. This study reveals commercial area of Jabalpur city is highly exposed to noise pollution and there is a need to adopt suitable control measure for reduction of noise.
Contextualising the anthropocene : the cultures, practices and politics of water knowledge in Asia / Ravi Baghel and Lea Stepan -- Governing fisheries and marine radiation in Japan after the Fukushima nuclear accident / Leslie Mabon and Midori Kawabe -- Trans-disciplinary analysis of Australian-Indonesian monsoon epistemologies and their implications on climate change adaptation strategies / Sarah Casson -- An epistemological re-visioning of hybridity : water/lands / Kuntala Lahiri-Dutt -- Science as friend or foe? : development projects undermining farmer-managed irrigation systems in Asia's high mountain valleys / Joseph K.W. Hill -- Competing epistemologies of community-based groundwater recharge in semi-arid north Rajasthan : progress and lessons for groundwater-dependent areas / Chad Staddon and Mark Everard -- Traditional knowledge and modernization of water : the story of a desert town Jaisalmer / Chandrima Mukhopadhyay and Devika Hemalatha Devi -- The hydro-ecological self and the community of water : Anupam Mishra and the epistemological foundation of water traditions in Rajasthan / Daniel Mishori and Ricki Levi -- Epistemological undercurrents : Delhi's water crisis and the role of the urban water poor / Heather O'Leary -- Being-in-the-water, or, Socialisation through Interactions with water in the thermal baths of Taipei / Nathalie Boucher -- In the eye of the storm : water in the cross-currents of consumerism, science and tradition in India / Neeraj Vedwan -- Balinese wet rice agriculture in transition : water knowledge between a sentient ecology and the pursuit of development / Lea Stepan -- Water flows uphill to power : hydraulic development discourse in Thailand and power relations surrounding kingship and statemaking / David J.H. Blake -- Waterscapes in transition : past and present reshaping of sacred water places in Banaras / Vera Lazzaretti -- Resettling a river goddess : aspects of local culture, development and national environmental movements in conflicting discourses on Dhari Devi Temple and Srinagar Dam project in Uttarakhand, India / Frances A. Niebuhr.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
An improved non-aqueous decontaminant has been explored against chemical warfare agents sulfur mustard (HD) and soman (GB). This decontaminant comprises of 2-aminoethanol (30% w/v), dimethylamino ethanol (42% w/v), sodium hydroxide (2% w/v), benzotriazole (1% w/v), and dimethyl sulfoxide (25 %) and it chemically degraded more than 99 % of sulfur mustard and soman within a time of 45 min at -35°C. It was found to be effective over a broad range of temperatures from -35 to +55°C without losing its efficacy even at sub zero temperatures. This decontaminant exhibited decontamination ratio of V[Detoxicant]/V[HD, GD] 50 or 5 while a recently reported one exhibited a ratio of 100 or 2 against HD or GD respectively. Although, this ratio decreased slightly in the case of GD, it is sufficient enough for complete decontamination. This improved decontaminant meets all the military requirements and promise its field application in near future.
630 Domestic-Terrorist-Mass-Murdering-Spree-Shooters are compared with 623-controls and separated by16-Questions with significant a=.846, p<.01, AUC=.704, p<.01 that are: (1) homicidal? (2) suicidal? (3) stressful-life-event? (4) handgun-many-weapons-access? (5) violence-planning-preparing? (6) revenge-motive? (7) eliciting-others-concern? (8) intent-leakage? (9) criminal-misconduct-history? (10) personal-grievance? (11) random-violent-behavior? (12) threatening-victims? (13) dead-male-victim? (14) targeting-person-school-or-work? (15) student-professional-work-relationship? and (15) student? Before the killing, terrorists come twice to courts, doctors, schools and human resources and are not diagnosed as dangerous. In Study-1: [from 1936-2019] 232-school-shooters are contrasted with 232-controls resulting in 414-dead, 832-injured, and 68-suicides (29%) which are analyzed with logistic-regression, F= 227.14, p<.01, df=8/455, R=.894, p<.01, R2=.8, p<.01, and separated with 8-Questions: (1) student? (2) suicidal? (3) stressful-life-event? (4) homicidal? (5) violence-planning-preparing? (6) personal-grievance? (7) handgun-access? and (8) targeting-person(s)? In Study-2: 6-teen-shooters with 11-homicidal and 12-controls are contrasted with the Ask-Standard-Predictor [ASP] Violence-Potential, Youth-Version (54-questions, a=.61, p<.01, AUC=.91, p<.01, rtest-retest=.75, p<.01, F=123.09, p<.01, and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Adolescent Version [MMPI-A (468-questions):], ANOVA-F=17.22, p<.01, Lie, F=33.91, Depression, F=26.18, p<.01, Psychopathic-Deviate, F=57.45, p<.01,Paranoia, F=23.92, p<.01, Schizophrenia, F=21.69, p<.01, MacAndrews Alcohol, F=16.84, p<.01, Addiction Admission, F= 38.88, p<.01, resulting in a “7-point-violence-profile,”found over 95 yrs. in 212-studies .(N=320,051). The expense side includes 2 examples. 1st, School-shooter insurance-industry higher-premiums from (1936-2019) resulted in [414-dead @ $3,834,988.08=$1,587,685,065.12] + [832-injured @ $33,773.52=$28,099,568.64]+[232-shooters@$3,834,988.08=$889,717,234.60]+[$2,505,501,868.32x1.3= $3,257,152,428.82] =a high cost of $5,762,654,297.14]. With no-computer-tests-equations from 2020-2106, ($5,762,654,297.14x2= [the expense will double to] $11,525,308,594.27, 828-dead, 1,664-injured. The 2nd violence example is the U.S-Catholic-Church-pedophilia-loss, (1936-2107) [payouts, $17,435,353,000] + [lost-donations =1.3 x payouts=] 22,665,958,900=$40,101,511,900(1986-2107), with 5,679 victims increasing (1936-2107) to 39,753-victims.
630 Terrorist-Mass-Murdering-Spree-Shooters are compared with 623-controls and separated by 16-Questions with a=.846, p<.01, AUC= .704, p<.01 that are: (1) homicidal? (2) suicidal? (3) stressful-life-event? (4) handgun-many-weapons-access? (5) violence-planning-preparing? (6) revenge? (7) eliciting-others-concern? (8) intent-leakage? (9) criminal-misconduct? (10) grievance? (11) random-violent-behavior? (12) threatening-victims? (13) dead-male-victim? (14) targeting-person-school-work? (15) student-professional-work-relationship? and (16) student? Before killing, terrorists come twice to courts-police, doctors-hospitals, schools-universities and human resources and are not diagnosed as dangerous due to error-prone current ways. In Study-1: 370-workplace-shooters (1968-2021) are contrasted with 370-controls using logistic-regression (F= 134.64, p<.01, df = 13/726, R=.84, p<.01, R2=. 71, p<.01 resulting in 14-Questions: (1) homicidal? (2) intent-leakage? (3) stressful-life-event? (4) revenge? (5) many-weapons? (6) elicited-others-concern? (7) criminal-misconduct? (8) threatened-victims? (9) dead-male-victim? (10) targeted-workplace? (11) professional-work-relationship? (12) suicidal? (13) random–violence? In Study-2: 9-spree-shooters are distinguished from 12-homicidal and 24-control adults showing a “7-point-violence-profile on two scales: (1)[Ask Standard Predictor of Violence Potential-Adult Version] violence (F=17.48, p<.01); and (2) the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, Second Edition [MMPI-2] F (infrequency) (F=92.15, p<.01); L (lie) (F=13.13, p<.01), (3) D (depression) (F=37.76, p<.01); (4) Pd (psychopathic-deviance) (F=44.66, p<.01); (5)Pa (paranoia) (F=50.58, p<.01); (6) Sc (schizophrenia) (F=53.85, p<.01), (7) MacAndrews alcohol (F=42.01, p<.01); AAS (addiction admission) (F=57.34, p<.01). Looking from 1968-2021 at the insurance industry expense, there is the workplace-shooter loss = [$1,418,945,589.60 (370-shooters @ $3,834,988.08) + $4,053,582,400.56(1,057-deaths @) $3,834,988.08 + $37,556,154.24 (1,112-injured@ $33,773.52)] = $5,510,084,144.40 + [higher-insurance-premiums [$5,510,084,144.40 x 1.3 =] $7,163,109,387.72 = $12,673,193,582.12. No-computer-tests-equations, 2022-2105 [2 x $12,673,193,582.12 = $25,346,387,064.24.The 2nd violence example is the U.S-Catholic-Church-pedophilia-loss, (1936-2107) [payouts, $17,435,353,000] + [lost-donations =1.3 x payouts =] 22,665,958,900= $40,101,511,900 (1986-2107), with the 5,679 victims increasing (1936-2107) to 39,753-victims.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background: Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods: This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings: Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation: Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.