Impact of Art Educators: Artistic Practices, Political Advocacy and Pedagogy of Frida Kahlo and Faith Ringgold

Throughout the accomplished careers of Frida Kahlo (1907-1954) and Faith Ringgold (b. 1930), both women produced intimate autobiographical art that was exhibited in major institutions such as The Museum of Modern Art, The Whitney Museum of Modern Art, and The Louvre. Beyond their art, I present an analysis of their commitments to work as political activists and arts educators which reveals their prioritization of the social, political, and economic advancement of their respective communities. I argue that their pedagogy, as a culmination of personal and cultural interrogation and celebration, produced measurable success in impacting future generations of diverse artists and should serve as case studies for institutions that carry the responsibility of educating children

Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being(1,2), addressing the global biodiversity crisis(3) still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature's diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever(4). Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature's values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)(5) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals(6), predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature(7). Arguably, a 'values crisis' underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change(8), pandemic emergence(9) and socio-environmental injustices(10). On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature's diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions(7,11). Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures

Rhabdomyolysis caused by Commiphora mukul, a natural lipid-lowering agent

OBJECTIVE: To report a case of rhabdomyolysis caused by Commiphora mukul, a natural lipid-lowering agent. CASE SUMMARY: A 55-year-old man was taking an extract of C. mukul 300 mg 3 times daily to lower his cholesterol level. He developed rhabdomyolysis with hemoglobinuria after 2 weeks of treatment. Laboratory tests showed creatine kinase 144 600 IU/L (reference range 24-195), myoglobin >3000 ng/mL (28-72), lactate dehydrogenase 7157 IU/L (230-460), aspartate aminotransferase 1115 IU/L (10-35), and alanine aminotransferase 205 IU/L (10-35). Analysis of a urine sample was 2+ positive for hemoglobin. All parameters returned to normal after the herbal preparation was discontinued. DISCUSSION: The Naranjo probability scale indicates C. mukul as the possible cause of rhabdomyolysis in our patient. Drug-induced rhabdomyolysis is an established but rare adverse effect of high doses of cholesterol-lowering agents (statins) or interactions between drugs (eg, statins and fibrates). As of May 28, 2004, to our knowledge, this is the first reported case of rhabdomyolysis following C. mukul ingestion. CONCLUSIONS: Our report describes a case of rhabdomyolysis possibly caused by C. mukul and underlines the need for active surveillance of natural products

Contrasting meta-learning and hyper-heuristic research: the role of evolutionary algorithms

The fields of machine meta-learning and hyper-heuristic optimisation have developed mostly independently of each other, although evolutionary algorithms (particularly genetic programming) have recently played an important role in the development of both fields. Recent work in both fields shares a common goal, that of automating as much of the algorithm design process as possible. In this paper we first provide a historical perspective on automated algorithm design, and then we discuss similarities and differences between meta-learning in the field of supervised machine learning (classification) and hyper-heuristics in the field of optimisation. This discussion focuses on the dimensions of the problem space, the algorithm space and the performance measure, as well as clarifying important issues related to different levels of automation and generality in both fields. We also discuss important research directions, challenges and foundational issues in meta-learning and hyper-heuristic research. It is important to emphasize that this paper is not a survey, as several surveys on the areas of meta-learning and hyper-heuristics (separately) have been previously published. The main contribution of the paper is to contrast meta-learning and hyper-heuristics methods and concepts, in order to promote awareness and cross-fertilisation of ideas across the (by and large, non-overlapping) different communities of meta-learning and hyper-heuristic researchers. We hope that this cross-fertilisation of ideas can inspire interesting new research in both fields and in the new emerging research area which consists of integrating those fields

Ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (THEMIS-PCI) : a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor. Methods: The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population). Findings: Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8–3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74–0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, p interaction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78–1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75–1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48–2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36–3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74–1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75–0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, p interaction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI. Interpretation: In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk