Stranded seafarers: an unfolding humanitarian crisis

Seafarers’ classification as essential workers is a key step forward giving them access to onshore medical care and repatriations, say Bailey, Borovnik and Bedford.falseCrawford School of Pubic Plicy, AN

El Pensamiento Probabilístico de los Profesores de Biología en Formación

Los futuros profesores de secundaria requieren de una formación acorde a las demandas de la sociedad del siglo XXI. Ello impone el desarrollo de un pensamiento que le permita interpretar y abordar los fenómenos de naturaleza aleatoria. El objetivo de este trabajo es determinar las tendencias de pensamiento probabilístico de los estudiantes de los profesorados de Biología de la provincia de Mendoza, Argentina. Para ello se aplicó un cuestionario a los 325 estudiantes que cursan esta carrera. El mismo consta de tres partes; la primera trata sobre las variables demográficas de los estudiantes, la segunda corresponde al reconocimiento de la aleatoriedad; y la tercera a la estimación de la probabilidad de diferentes sucesos. Las respuestas se analizaron a partir de la aplicación de diferentes técnicas estadísticas; el test de independencia, el análisis de la varianza, el test de Tukey, análisis de clusters y análisis discriminante. En primer lugar, se encontraron diferencias significativas entre el reconocimiento de la aleatoriedad y el contexto del suceso, siendo mayor en el contexto de juego que en el físico natural. Mientras que, en el contexto físico natural se afirma la aleatoriedad desde la causalidad, en el de juego se afirma desde la incertidumbre. En segundo lugar, no se encontró relación de dependencia entre el reconocimiento de la aleatoriedad y la edad de los estudiantes, como así tampoco con el nivel académico de los mismos. Respecto a la estimación de la probabilidad, los estudiantes argumentan fundamentalmente desde la equiprobabilidad y desde la contingencia. El análisis de clusters y análisis discriminante permitieron encontrar cuatro tendencias de pensamiento: incertidumbre, determinista, contingente y personalista

Storying Pandemia Collectively: Sharing Plural Experiences of Interruption, Dislocation, Care, and Connection

During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, a group of academic geographers got together across borders to share our varied experiences. In this paper we illustrate how this storying of pandemia helped us critically and collaboratively understand, (re)imagine and reconfigure ways of living during a global pandemic. We were especially interested in exploring different forms and practices of collective thinking and academic labour, within and beyond the academy. This paper foregrounds emotions and lived experiences, power and positionality, natures, bodies, and relations, and how they have come to our attention in new, different, or more pronounced ways, through everyday geographies of pandemia. Our aim is to emphasise two important aspects: that pandemia is a state of being with/as/through pandemic, and, as a collective noun, pandemia centres plurality, focusing on the potential to attend to the ways experiences of pandemic are redolent with multiple, overlapping exclusions and belongings, openings and closures.</p

Effects of Intraosseous Erythropoietin during Hemorrhagic Shock in Swine

<div><p>Objective</p><p>To determine whether erythropoietin given during hemorrhagic shock (<i>HS</i>) ameliorates organ injury while improving resuscitation and survival.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Three series of 24 pigs each were studied. In an initial series, 50% of the blood volume (BV) was removed in 30 minutes and normal saline (threefold the blood removed) started at minute 90 infusing each third in 30, 60, and 150 minutes with shed blood reinfused at minute 330 (<i>HS-50_BV</i>). In a second series, the same <i>HS-50_BV</i> protocol was used but removing an additional 15% of BV from minute 30 to 60 (<i>HS-65_BV</i>). In a final series, blood was removed as in <i>HS-65_BV</i> and intraosseous vasopressin given from minute 30 (0.04 U/kg min⁻¹) until start of shed blood reinfusion at minute 150 (<i>HS-65_BV+VP</i>). Normal saline was reduced to half the blood removed and given from minute 90 to 120 in half of the animals. In each series, animals were randomized 1∶1 to receive erythropoietin (1,200 U/kg) or control solution intraosseously after removing 10% of the BV.</p><p>Results</p><p>In <i>HS-50_BV</i>, O₂ consumption remained near baseline yielding minimal lactate increases, 88% resuscitability, and 60% survival at 72 hours. In <i>HS-65_BV</i>, O₂ consumption was reduced and lactate increased yielding 25% resuscitability. In <i>HS-65_BV+VP</i>, vasopressin promoted hemodynamic stability yielding 92% resuscitability and 83% survival at 72 hours. Erythropoietin did not affect resuscitability or subsequent survival in any of the series but increased interleukin-10, attenuated lactate increases, and ameliorated organ injury based on lesser troponin I, AST, and ALT increases and lesser neurological deficits in the <i>HS-65_BV+VP</i> series.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>Erythropoietin given during HS in swine failed to alter resuscitability and 72 hour survival regardless of HS severity and concomitant treatment with fluids and vasopressin but attenuated acute organ injury. The studies also showed the efficacy of vasopressin and restrictive fluid resuscitation for hemodynamic stabilization and survival.</p></div

Survival curves comparing pigs treated with EPO and controls.

<p>Series <i>HS-50_BV</i> and <i>HS-65_BV+VP</i> include 72 hour survival. The <i>p</i>-values for survival differences between groups were calculated using the Gehan-Breslow test and are shown within each graph along with the resuscitation and survival rates for the combined EPO and control groups. The shaded horizontal bars successively represent; the percentage of blood withdrawn (BW), the interval of hemorrhagic shock after blood withdrawal without fluid administration, the administration of normal saline (NS) as described in the <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0110908#s2" target="_blank">Method</a>, and blood reinfusion (BR). Shown in <i>65_BV+VP</i> is the vasopressin infusion (VP).</p

Swine model of hemorrhagic shock.

<p>CO, cardiac output; IO, intraosseous; P_ETCO₂, end-tidal PCO₂; ECG, electrocardiogram.</p

Hemodynamic effects of fluid resuscitation (open symbols, n = 12) and no fluid resuscitation (closed symbols, n = 12) in series <i>HS-65_BV+VP</i>.

<p>Numbers in brackets indicate when the number of animals decreased from the preceding time point consequent to death of the animal. BL, baseline; BW, blood withdrawal; HS, hemorrhagic shock; NS, normal saline; BR, blood reinfusion; Ao, aortic pressure; SVRI, systemic vascular resistance index. Values are shown as mean ± SEM. Differences between groups were analyzed by two-way repeated measures ANOVA. There was an overall statistically significant treatment effect for cardiac index (<i>p</i> = 0.021). There were also overall statistically significant interactions between treatment and time for cardiac index (<i>p</i><0.001) and SVRI (<i>p</i><0.001). *<i>p</i>≤0.05, †<i>p</i>≤0.01, and ‡<i>p</i>≤0.001 denote statistically significant differences between groups at the specified time points. ^a<i>p</i>≤0.05, and ^c<i>p</i>≤0.001 denote significant differences <i>vs</i> baseline using the Holm-Sidak test for multiple comparisons showing the differences only when they occurred in one of the two groups.</p

Hemodynamic and myocardial effects of EPO (open circles, n = 12) compared with vehicle control (closed circles, n = 12) in <i>HS-65_BV+VP</i>.

<p>Numbers in brackets indicate when the number of animals decreased from the preceding time point consequent to death of the animal. BL, baseline; BW, blood withdrawal; HS, hemorrhagic shock; NS, normal saline; BR, blood reinfusion; Ao, aortic pressure; SVRI, systemic vascular resistance index; LVSWI, left ventricular stroke work index; RVWI, right ventricular stroke work index. Values are shown as mean ± SEM. Differences between groups were analyzed by two-way repeated measures ANOVA. There was an overall statistically significant treatment effect for LVSWI (<i>p</i> = 0.035) and an overall statistically significant interaction between treatment and time for Ao mean (<i>p</i> = 0.002). *<i>p</i>≤0.05, †<i>p</i>≤0.01, and ‡<i>p</i>≤0.001 denote statistically significant differences between groups at the specified time points. ^a<i>p</i>≤0.05, ^b<i>p</i>≤0.01, and ^c<i>p</i>≤0.001 denote significant differences <i>vs</i> baseline using the Holm-Sidak test for multiple comparisons showing the differences only when they occurred in one of the two groups.</p