Representations of sport in the revolutionary socialist press in Britain, 1988–2012

This paper considers how sport presents a dualism to those on the far left of the political spectrum. A long-standing, passionate debate has existed on the contradictory role played by sport, polarised between those who reject it as a bourgeois capitalist plague and those who argue for its reclamation and reformation. A case study is offered of a political party that has consistently used revolutionary Marxism as the basis for its activity and how this party, the largest in Britain, addresses sport in its publications. The study draws on empirical data to illustrate this debate by reporting findings from three socialist publications. When sport did feature it was often in relation to high profile sporting events with a critical tone adopted and typically focused on issues of commodification, exploitation and alienation of athletes and supporters. However, readers’ letters, printed in the same publications, revealed how this interpretation was not universally accepted, thus illustrating the contradictory nature of sport for those on the far left

Skin Sensitization Testing: The Ascendancy of Non-Animal Methods

A century ago, toxicology was an empirical science identifying substance hazards in surrogate mammalian models. Over several decades, these models improved, evolved to reduce animal usage, and recently have begun the process of dispensing with animals entirely. However, despite good hazard identification, the translation of hazards into adequately assessed risks to human health often has presented challenges. Unfortunately, many skin sensitizers known to produce contact allergy in humans, despite being readily identified as such in the predictive assays, continue to cause this adverse health effect. Increasing the rigour of hazard identification is inappropriate. Regulatory action has only proven effective via complete bans of individual substances. Since the problem applies to a broad range of substances and industry categories, and since generic banning of skin sensitizers would be an economic catastrophe, the solution is surprisingly simple—they should be subject to rigorous safety assessment, with the risks thereby managed accordingly. The ascendancy of non-animal methods in skin sensitization is giving unparalleled opportunities in which toxicologists, risk assessors, and regulators can work in concert to achieve a better outcome for the protection of human health than has been delivered by the in vivo methods and associated regulations that they are replacing