Representations of mad cow disease

This paper examines the reporting of the story of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and its human derivative variant Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease (vCJD) in the British newspapers. Three ‘snapshots’ of newspaper coverage are sampled and analysed between the period 1986 and 1996 focusing on how representations of the disease evolved over the 10-year period. Social representations theory is used to elucidate how this new disease threat was conceptualised in the newspaper reporting and how it was explained to the UK public. This paper examines who or what was said to be at risk from the new disease, and whether some individuals or groups held to blame for the diseases’ putative origins, the appearance of vCJD in human beings, and its spread

The hospital ‘superbug’: social representations of MRSA

The so-called ‘hospital superbug’ methcillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) became a topic of media and political concern from the middle of the 1990’s. It was increasingly politicised in the period leading up to the British General Election of 2005. This study examines the meanings of MRSA that circulate in Britain by analysing newspaper coverage of the disease over a ten year period. It utilises social representations theory and contextualises MRSA within existing research on representations of emerging infectious diseases (EIDs). A key pattern in the representation of EIDs is to externalise the threat they pose by linking the origin, risk and blame to ‘the other’ of those who represent them. In this light the study investigates who and what MRSA is associated with and the impact that these associations have on levels of alarm and blame. Key findings are that MRSA is represented as a potentially lethal ‘superbug’, marking the end of a ‘golden age of medicine’ in which the story of the discovery of antibiotics has played such a key role. Furthermore, MRSA is constructed around an “it could be you / me” set of assumptions by way of the plethora of human interest stories that dominate the coverage. Finally, the blame for MRSA focuses not on its genesis, but rather on why it spreads. This is attributed to poor hygiene in hospitals, which is ultimately caused by mismanagement of the National Health Service and erosion of the authority and morality symbolised by the ‘matron’ role. This constellation of meanings speaks to a somewhat different pattern of response to MRSA when compared to many past EIDs

Cultural relativism in the Poisonwood Bible

In her novel The Poisonwood Bible, Barbara Kingsolver explores this same ethnocentric missionary zeal when critiquing the ways in which Western countries relate to “foreign” countries. She creates an allegory where the Price Family and the Congolese people are a microcosm of the United States and its relations to “foreign” countries. In this allegory, Kingsolver suggests that the attempt of the U.S. to change what it does not understand can be detrimental and unethical – that the attempt to spread an ethical system becomes the most unethical idea of all

Robert Koch, Creation, and the Specificity of Germs

Microbiology is dominated by evolution today. Just look at any text, journal article, or the topics presented at professional scientific meetings. Darwin is dominant. Microbiology is dominated by evolution today. Just look at any text, journal article, or the topics presented at professional scientific meetings. Darwin is dominant. Many argue that “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” (Dobzhansky 1973). But it was not always this way. In fact, a review of the major founders of microbiology has shown that they were creationists.1 We would argue that a better idea thanevolution and one of much more practical importance is the germ theory of disease, originally put forth primarily by non-Darwinian biologists (Gillen and Oliver 2009). In our previous article (Gillen and Oliver 2009), we documented these and many other creation and Christian contributions to germ theory. But only recently has it become known that another important microbiology founder, Robert Koch (Fig. 1) and his co-workers were Linnaean creationists in their classification.2 This is due, in part, to additional works of Robert Koch that were translated from German to English. The year 2010 marks the 100thanniversary of his death (died: May 27, 1910). Although Koch and other German microbiologists were fairly secular in their thinking, their acceptance of Darwinian evolution was minimal

A confrontation of economic and theological approaches to “ending poverty” in Africa

We seek to assess the adequacy of an “economic” as opposed to a “Christian” worldview in confronting one of the major challenges to the world, namely the chronic nature of absolute poverty in much of Africa. Our study comprises, first, an overview and contrast of the two approaches in general terms and, second, a critical examination of economist Jeffrey Sachs’ The End of Poverty (which undergoes a theological critique) and theologian Ronald Sider’s Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger (which is subjected to economic criticism). Overall, we find that economic analyses rely on an excessively narrow view of human motivation, which may vitiate secular attempts to aid development. A blend of Biblical understanding and economic insight is needed for a genuine transformation of the lives of the poor to take place

Ambiguity of Social Networks in Post-Communist Contexts

The paper discusses three hypotheses. First, it introduces four ideal types of networks which are combined in the category of networks as used by social scientists. Four types result from the intersection of two implicit choices made about networks – networks are assumed to be either personal or impersonal, and are viewed either internally or externally. Thus, networks are understood in terms of sociability, access to resources, enabling structure, or social capital. Second, I argue that networks function in a fundamentally ambiguous way. They operate in their capacity of a safety net or survival kit, provide a ‘beating the system’ capacity or compensate for the system’s defects. At the same time networks provide constraints such as high costs of informal contract, limits on individual action, lock-in effects and the handicaps of social capital. Third, I illustrate differences between networks serving the economy of favors in Russia and networks serving the purposes of ‘network society.

The Genesis of Pathogenic E. coli

Even though some strains are pathogenic, most E. coli strains still show evidence of being one of God’s “very good” creations. Fig. 1. E. coli Gram stain (Wiki commons image). E. coli are Gram-negative bacteria, thus red or pink colored. The red color is due to a counterstain, called safranin. Escherichia coli is frequently in the news (Fig. 1). E. coli often gets “bad press” for contaminating drinking water or causing a food-borne infection (via hamburgers, apple juice, spinach, or other foods). Recently a new strain (E. coli O145) has been implicated in contaminating lettuce in the U.S., while another strain (E. coliO157:H7) is apparently in tons of beef and other foods. Pathogenic (disease-causing) E. coli is becoming so common in foods that the government is likely to “beef up” its regulation on the food industry (Dininny 2010). Even though some strains are pathogenic, most E. coli strains still show evidence of being one of God’s “very good” creations. E. coli is also a common experimental organism (a laboratory “pet”) of biologists, and is valuable for studying genetics and variation in living things. Newspapers, biology texts and the popular media increasingly discuss “evolution in action.” Evidence to support this concept includes emerging diseases, antibiotic resistance, and changes in characteristics of bacteria, especially the work of Richard Lenski’s lab. Lenski and his coworkers have shown that bacteria can change rapidly in phenotype (outward appearance) and evolutionists have seized upon this rapid phenotypic change as alleged powerful evidence for Darwinian evolution. Thus, E. coliand “evolution in action” is an important two-fold issue involving empirical (or observational/operational) science and its relationship to the theoretical (or historical) origins issue. Carl Zimmer (2008), in his book, Microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life, uses emerging diseases caused by E. coli to bolster his arguments for molecules-to-man evolution. Zimmer’s book popularizes the work of Lenski on emerging (i.e., newly appearing) diseases and increases the appeal of his research as seen in news magazines, general biology and microbiology texts, and at many scientific conferences. Zimmer states that scientists are investigating phenotypic changes in E. coli to demonstrate their ability to undergo “rapid bursts of evolution” (p. 97). Many biologists argue that the wide variation in pathogenicity found in E. coli as support for Darwinian evolution. The typical explanation for the origin of E. coli is that it has been around for billions of years and man only a few millions years. For the mutualistic relationship to have begun between man and microbe, animals and E. coli had to co-evolve in both E. coli and man. The human body had to allow a bacteria to pass through the stomach and reach the intestine (a rapid turnover rate) to become one of the most successful bacteria on the planet (i.e., it\u27s found in every mammal known and even extends to fish). Increasingly reoccurring themes (examples) are being declared about pathogenic E. coli and its “evolution in action”: primarily how new and emerging diseases arise. The origins of new diseases within the same species are really examples of variation and adaptation. We seek to provide an “answer” and alternative to the Darwinian paradigm through investigation of the origin of E. coli and its role in examples of “evolution in action.” The purpose of this article is to discuss the possible origin of E. coli from the time of Creation; and its modification since the Edenic Curse. The specific objectives of this article are to provide reasonable explanations for: (1) the origin and purpose of E. coli in the human body; (2) the genesis of new pathogenic E. coli strains; and (3) a reasonable alternative to evolution in regard to past changes in E. coli and similar bacteria. Finally, we discuss how E. coli fits into the historic, biblical worldview stages of Creation, Curse, Corruption, and Contagion.3 It will integrate the topics of modification and displacement for emerging diseases