Macrophages are central in coordinating the host response to both sterile and infective insults. Clearance of apoptotic cells and cellular debris is a key biological action preformed by macrophages that paves the way to the resolution of local inflammation, repair and regeneration of damaged tissues, and re-establishment of function. The essential fatty acid-derived autacoids termed specialized pro-resolving mediators (SPM) play central roles in promoting these processes. In the present article, we will review the role of microvesicles in controlling macrophage efferocytosis and SPM production. We will also discuss the role of both apoptotic cells and microvesicles in providing substrate for transcellular biosynthesis of several SPM families during efferocyotsis. In addition, this article will discuss the biological actions of the recently uncovered macrophage-derived SPM termed maresins. These mediators are produced via 14-lipoxygenation of docosahexaenoic acid that is either enzymatically converted to mediators carrying two hydroxyl groups or to autacoids that are peptide-lipid conjugates, coined maresin conjugates in tissue regeneration. The formation of these mediators is temporally regulated during acute self-limited infectious-inflammation where they promote the uptake and clearance of apoptotic cells, regulate several aspects of the tissue repair and regeneration, and display potent anti-nociceptive actions. ; Studies in the authors' laboratories were supported by a Sir Henry Dale Fellowship jointly funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society (Grant number: 107613/Z/15/Z), funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (Grant number: 677542), the Barts Charity (Grant number: MGU0343) to JD, and National Institutes of Health (grant numbers R01GM38765 and P01GM095467) to CNS.
In: Ecotoxicology and environmental safety: EES ; official journal of the International Society of Ecotoxicology and Environmental safety, Band 241, S. 113788
AbstractThis article considers the functions of transparency in regulating consumer contract terms in the UK and Australia. The discussion is set in the context of EU level regulation with various references to civil law approaches. The main issue explored here is the extent to which transparency is capable of legitimizing substantively unfair terms. However, I also exploreotherroles that may be played by transparency and the extent to which these are facilitated in the UK and Australia.
The subject. The article is devoted to the description of the basic functions of self-regulating organizations: regulatory, control, organizational and security, jurisdictional.The purpose of the article is to explore the content features of self-regulating organizations, to identify problems in their implementation and offer recommendations for their solution.Methodology. The methodological basis for the study: general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison, description); private and academic (interpretation, formal-legal method).Results, scope. Under self-regulation this article is to understand the management activities carried out by self-regulatory organizations, and consisting in the development and establishment of standards and rules of professional activity, as well as sanctions for non-compliance or inadequate performance. Set forth in the Law on SRO powers to self-regulating organizations United by the author and summarized as to their functions – activities of the SRO. The main functions of the SRO as special entities, the following:– regulatory, which manifests itself in the development of standards and rules, conditions of membership in self-regulating organizations and other internal documents SRO;– control: self-regulating organizations exercise control over the professional activities of its members;– organizational and security: an example of this function is the maintenance of the register of members of the SRO, ensuring property liability of members of self-regulating organizations to consumers of goods (works, services) and other persons forming management authorities of the self-regulating organization, lodging of statutory documents and information on the official website of SRO;– jurisdictional: SRO consider complaints against actions of members of self-regulating organization and cases on breaches of its members of the standards and rules of self-regulating organizations, conditions of membership in self-regulating organization, apply disciplinary measures against its members.Conclusions. The combination of ongoing self-regulating organizations against their members functions determines features of the legal status of SRO.Analysis of peculiarities of self-regulating organizations of these functions has allowed the author come to the conclusion that, at present, administrative and legal status of self-regulating organizations in need of further refinement, since the content of normative legal acts regulating relations in the sphere of self-regulation, often contradictory and requires improvement.In the case of mandatory self-regulation SRO vested with the special administrative-legal status, carry out in relation to their member state authority, which means that the implementation of these authority relationships are vertical. ; Дается характеристика основных функций саморегулируемых организаций (СРО): регулирующей, контрольной, организационно-обеспечительной, юрисдикционной. Совокупность осуществляемых саморегулируемыми организациями в отношении своих членов функций определяет особенности правового статуса СРО. Анализ особенностей осуществления саморегулируемыми организациями указанных функций позволяет сделать вывод, что в настоящее время административно-правовой статус саморегулируемых организаций нуждается в дальнейшей конкретизации, поскольку содержание нормативных правовых актов, регулирующих отношения в сфере саморегулирования, зачастую носит противоречивый характер и требует совершенствования. В случае обязательного саморегулирования СРО, наделенные специальным административно-правовым статусом, осуществляют в отношении своих членов публично-властные полномочия, а значит, возникающие при реализации данных полномочий отношения являются вертикальными.
The author states that associations of small businesses are necessary for formation of positive corporate business ethics, control over authorities, development of partnership of business and authorities aimed at improving economic performance. Stage-by-stage monitoring of associations of small enterprises is carried out in Moscow. Its first results show that opportunities of transferring some of the state control and regulating functions to business associations unfortunately are rather weak due to immaturity of small business itself.
This report is the first comparative study of international press councils designed to inform the Leveson Inquiry and stimulate wider debate on UK press reform. Its aim is not to identify a blueprint for future regulation, rather it seeks to draw together core principles from the experience of overseas regulation. It also explores the challenges shared by regulators in an era marked by the blurring of boundaries between converging media platforms, between 'professional' and 'citizen' journalists and between national and global publication. In this report Lara Fielden draws on interviews conducted with the Press Council Chairs and Press Ombudsmen in Australia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland and Sweden, supplemented by case studies from Canada, New Zealand and Norway. She investigates how distinct approaches to press council purposes, membership, funding, codes of ethics and complaints-handling provide thought-provoking points of comparison and contrast. Are press councils mandatory or voluntary and are there merits in a framework of statutory incentivises? What sanctions do press councils have at their disposal and how do they view 'the public interest'? What impact do they have on press standards and what have been their successes and failures? Press freedoms, the report contends, are not an end in themselves but serve a democratic function in the public interest. The report therefore argues that however press regulation is developed in the UK, the interests of the public should lie at its heart.