Suchergebnisse

Prostration, putting forehead on the ground or clay-tablet, has many medical benefits. But some reports showed on the forehead of a few prayers it causes prostration effect/PE or clay-tablet effect/CTE, as a skin-callosity, on his/her forehead. This effect, which in Persian language is named Mohr-e-Pishani, has always been a curious question for researchers. Observation of the PE raises many questions in mind, which is not limited to the present time. For example; in old books 'Ali Ibn Al Husayn, Zainul Abedeen (PBUH), the fourth Imam of the Shia, has been nicknamed "Zol-Seqqnat" for having the CTE on his forehead which in the Arabic language means "the owner of skin-callosity". The main purpose of this study was to uncover the scientific evidence of the PE on the forehead of some prayers. The results showed that several factors would result the development of PE, including physiological factors such as skin structure and its keratin content; allergens of the ground and soil as an external factor including chemical elements, acidity, macromolecules, and microorganisms. Physical factors, such as the way and duration of prostration, head weight concentration on the ground, soil or clay-tablet are also effective. These findings can answer some of the questions, curiosities, and possible doubts related to the phenomenon of PE or CTE on the forehead as a phenotype for other researches.

AbstractAlthough uncertainty is inherent in scientific research, it is an often neglected topic in public communication. In this article, we analyze how scientists and journalists think they should communicate about the uncertainty of scientific evidence in public, and whether their real-world communication meets laypersons' demands and expectations. For scientists and journalists, our analyses are based theoretically on an expectancy-value model and empirically on two representative surveys. Laypersons' expectations and evaluations are analyzed using qualitative in-depth interviews. Results show that scientists and journalists widely agree that scientific uncertainty should be pointed out in their communication. Nonetheless, while scientists show a clear inclination toward the media and hope that uncertainties will not be dramatized or misused, journalists on the other hand have a strong audience orientation and hope to stimulate critical reflection on scientific findings. For audiences, however, media coverage about scientific uncertainty is of less interest. They clearly expect fact-oriented information on the use of technology in everyday life.

Objective: This review summarises the existing evidence on the effects that recreational and medical use of cannabis and cannabinoids have on cognitive performance. Methods: Databases (PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar) were searched from inception to March 2017 by adopting the following key terms: dronabinol, nabilone, nabiximols, cannabis, marijuana, cognition, neurology, and neuropsychology. A total of 94 documents, including reviews, preclinical and clinical studies, industrial and government agencies reports were included in this review. Results: We found that recreational use of cannabis doubles the risk of a fatal traffic accident by impairing attention and lengthening reaction time. Short-term use lowers performance in working memory, attention, executive functions and visual perception tasks. Chronic recreational use in adolescents also doubles the risk of early school-leaving, cognitive impairment and psychoses in adulthood. Adverse effects of cannabis-based medication – dronabinol, nabiximol and nabilone – and ingestion/inhalation of marijuana allowed for medical use include dizziness, drowsiness and short-term memory impairment.Conclusion: Cannabis consumption is associated with significant impairments in a range of cognitive abilities. Of particular concern, early and chronic exposure to cannabis, especially in the adolescence, seems to be associated with irreversible cognitive impairments.Please click PDF below to download the full paper.

In 2003, the Missouri Supreme Court set aside the death sentence of Christopher Simmons, who was 17 when he was arrested for the murder of Shirley Crook. The Simmons court held that the "evolving standards of decency" embodied in the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments barred execution of persons who committed capital crimes before their 18th birthday. This decision was based in part on the emerging legislative consensus in the states opposing execution of juvenile offenders and the infrequency with which the death penalty is imposed on juvenile offenders. The State sought a writ of certiorari, and the case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. This article presents results of analyses of empirical data on the use of the death penalty for adolescent homicide offenders in state courts in the U.S. since 1990. The data show that, since 1994, when death sentences for juvenile offenders peaked, juvenile death sentences have declined significantly. In particular, the decline in juvenile death sentences since 1999 is statistically significant after controlling for the murder rate, the juvenile homicide arrest rate, and the rate of adult death sentences. This downward trend in juvenile death sentences signals that there is an evolving standard in state trial courts opposing the imposition of death sentences on minors who commit capital offenses.

Science journalists are responsible for the media content about nanoscale science and technology, and its representation as scientifically certain or uncertain. This article applies the reasoned action approach (RAA) to identify factors having an impact on journalists' decisions on how to depict aspects of scientific evidence (= scientific (un)certainty). Results of interviews with science journalists ( n = 21) from diverse media channels showed that they adopt different coverage styles when representing (un)certainty. To find reasons for that, behavioral, normative, and control beliefs were investigated, and a model of science journalistic depiction behavior with respect to scientific evidence was constructed.

Abstract Background The government-led "evidence-based guidelines for cataract treatment" labelled pirenoxine and glutathione eye drops, which have been regarded as the standard care for cataracts in Japan, as lacking evidence of effectiveness, causing great upset among ophthalmologists and professional ophthalmology societies. This study investigated the reasons why such "scientific evidence of treatment effectiveness" is not easily accepted by physicians, and thus, why they do not change their clinical practices to reflect such evidence. Methods We conducted a qualitative study based on grounded theory to explore physicians' awareness of "scientific evidence" and evidence-supported treatment in relation to pirenoxine and glutathione eye drops, and to identify current barriers to the implementation of evidence-based policies in clinical practice. Interviews were conducted with 35 ophthalmologists and 3 general practitioners on their prescribing behaviours, perceptions of eye drop effectiveness, attitudes toward the eye drop guideline recommendations, and their perceptions of "scientific evidence." Results Although few physicians believed that eye drops are remarkably effective, the majority of participants reported that they prescribed eye drops to patients who asked for them, and that such patients accounted for a considerable proportion of those with cataracts. Physicians seldom attempted to explain to patients the limitations of effectiveness or to encourage them to stop taking the eye drops. Physicians also acknowledged the benefits of prescribing such drugs, which ultimately outweighed any uncertainty of their effectiveness. These benefits included economic incentives and a desire to be appreciated by patients. Changes in clinical practice were considered to bring little benefit to physicians or patients. Government approval, rarity of side effects, and low cost of the drops also encouraged prescription. Conclusion Physicians occasionally provide treatment without expecting remarkable therapeutic effectiveness, as exemplified by the use of eye drops. This finding highlights that scientific evidence alone cannot easily change physicians' clinical practices, unless evidence-based practices are accepted by the general public and supported by health policy.

AbstractThe claims of scientific misconduct surrounding the pandemic influenza event in 2009 and the furor surrounding purported scientific manipulation at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit were used as grounds in Avery's 2010 paper to ostensibly criticize how science is corrupted by the need to support particular political or ethical perspectives and, implicitly, that such perspectives are either lacking in evidence, or that such evidence is distorted or suppressed to maintain the politically correct interpretation. However, this rejoinder to Avery's paper demonstrates unambiguously that both unbalanced interpretation and one‐sided presentation of opinion as evidence in support of these claims is in fact a thinly disguised attack on two issues that are contentious to certain vested interests. Having written the original paper on which Avery 2010 is based for a think tank well known for its opposition on ideological grounds to both environmental legislation and anthropogenic global warming, and for which some funding was received, Avery undermines his own arguments by appearing to embody the very problem he seeks to reveal. This rejoinder details why that seems to be the case.

Risk assessments form the methodological basis for many public policies. A key component of the risk assessment process is the public commentary period. We conducted a case study of the California environmental tobacco smoke risk assessment to describe the contribution of the commentary to the risk assessment process. We used content analysis to examine the sources, quantity, and quality of public commentary, as well as the agency's response to the commentary. We examined the type and quality of publications cited in the commentary. Most of the comments were from critics of the risk assessment (36/44, 80%), especially tobacco industry affiliates (30/36, 83%). Critics were more likely to evoke the science evaluation criteria of study quality, reliability, and validity than were supporters. More than half the critics argued that appropriate procedures were not followed (13/23, 57%). Of the 29 commentaries on the respiratory, carcinogenic, and cardiovascular chapters, four resulted in changes to the risk assessment, such as the addition of new references or reanalysis of data. Journal articles were the most frequently cited type of reference, cited by critics (1,022/1,526 of references, 67%) and supporters (39/60, 65%). However, journal articles submitted by critics had lower impact factors than those cited by supporters (2.6 vs. 3.6, p=0.03). Participation in the public input process was not balanced among all interested parties, although this may reflect different opportunities for stakeholders to participate in stages of the process. Critics and supporters of the risk assessment used different criteria to evaluate the scientific evidence, suggesting that they were socially constructing the evidence to support their positions.

Abstract
Part of the population considers themselves as sensitive to the man-made electromagnetic radiation (EMF) emitted by powerlines, electric wiring, electric home appliance and the wireless communication devices and networks. Sensitivity is characterized by a broad variety of non-specific symptoms that the sensitive people claim to experience when exposed to EMF. While the experienced symptoms are currently considered as a real life impairment, the factor causing these symptoms remains unclear. So far, scientists were unable to find causality link between symptoms experienced by sensitive persons and the exposures to EMF. However, as presented in this review, the executed to-date scientific studies, examining sensitivity to EMF, are of poor quality to find the link between EMF exposures and sensitivity symptoms of some people. It is logical to consider that the sensitivity to EMF exists but the scientific methodology used to find it is of insufficient quality. It is time to drop out psychology driven provocation studies that ask about feelings-based non-specific symptoms experienced by volunteers under EMF exposure. Such research approach produces only subjective and therefore highly unreliable data that is insufficient to prove, or to disprove, causality link between EHS and EMF. There is a need for a new direction in studying sensitivity to EMF. The basis for it is the notion of a commonly known phenomenon of individual sensitivity, where individuals' responses to EMF depend on the genetic and epigenetic properties of the individual. It is proposed here that new studies, combining provocation approach, where volunteers are exposed to EMF, and high-throughput technologies of transcriptomics and proteomics are used to generate objective data, detecting molecular level biochemical responses of human body to EMF.

Many private sector employers adopted policies in the 1970s-1980s barring fertile women from jobs that might expose them to reproductive or fetal hazards. Here, the scientific evidence supporting such fetal protection policies is explored. Existing federal regulations that aim at limiting both maternal & paternal exposure to reproductive hazards is examined, in addition to existing data on the effects of exposure to occupational toxicants. It is concluded that the evidence on which fetal protection policies were based does not definitively establish that excluding fertile women will eliminate the risk of fetal harm. 25 References. Adapted from the source document.