Yes, and Back Again by Sandy Marie Bonny

Review of Sandy Marie Bonny\u27s Yes, and Back Again

Spectrums of depositional practice in later prehistoric Britain and beyond. Grave goods, hoards and deposits 'in between'

AbstractThis paper critically evaluates how archaeologists define ‘grave goods’ in relation to the full spectrum of depositional contexts available to people in the past, including hoards, rivers and other ‘special’ deposits. Developing the argument that variations in artefact deposition over time and space can only be understood if different ‘types’ of find location are considered together holistically, we contend that it is also vital to look at the points where traditionally defined contexts of deposition become blurred into one another. In this paper, we investigate one particular such category – body-less object deposits at funerary sites – in later prehistoric Britain. This category of evidence has never previously been analysed collectively, let alone over the extended time period considered here. On the basis of a substantial body of evidence collected as part of a nationwide survey, we demonstrate that body-less object deposits were a significant component of funerary sites during later prehistory. Consequently, we go on to question whether human remains were actually always a necessary element of funerary deposits for prehistoric people, suggesting that the absence of human bone could be a positive attribute rather than simply a negative outcome of taphonomic processes. We also argue that modern, fixed depositional categories sometimes serve to mask a full understanding of the complex realities of past practice and ask whether it might be productive in some instances to move beyond interpretively confining terms such as ‘grave’, ‘hoard’ and ‘cenotaph’. Our research demonstrates that is it not only interesting in itself to scrutinize archaeological evidence that does not easily fit into traditional narratives, but that the process of doing so also sheds new light on the validity of our present-day categories, enabling deeper insights into how people in the past ordered their material and conceptual worlds. Whilst our main focus is later prehistoric Britain, the issues we consider are potentially relevant across all periods and regions.AHR

Covering the Dead in Later Prehistoric Britain: Elusive Objects and Powerful Technologies of Funerary Performance

This paper examines the containment and covering of people and objects in burials throughout later prehistory in Britain. Recent analyses of grave assemblages with exceptionally well-preserved organic remains have revealed some of the particular roles played by covers in funerary contexts. Beyond these spectacular examples, however, the objects involved in covering and containing have largely been overlooked. Many of the ‘motley crew’ of pots and stones used to wrap, cover, and contain bodies (and objects) were discarded or destroyed by antiquarian investigators in their quest for more immediately dazzling items. Organic containers and covers – bags, coffins, shrouds, blankets – are rarely preserved. Our study brings together the diverse and often elusive objects that played a part in covering and containing prehistoric burials, including items that directly enclosed bodies and objects, and those that potentially pinned together (now mostly absent) organic wraps. Overall, we contend, wrapping, covering, and containing were significantly more prevalent in prehistoric funerary practices than has previously been recognised.AHR

Specialist Clinicians' Management of Dependence on Non-Prescription Medicines and Barriers to Treatment Provision : An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study Using Behavioural Theory

This research was funded by THE SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF ADDICTION in the form a PhD studentship awarded to Niamh Fingleton. Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2226-4787/7/1/25/s1, Table S1: Summary of belief statements and illustrative quotes assigned to the theoretical domainsPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Systemic adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced malignant ocular medulloepithelioma

BACKGROUND: Ocular medulloepithelioma (diktyoma) is a rare and potentially malignant paediatric tumour of the non-pigmented ciliary epithelium. Adjuvant chemotherapy can be given in advanced cases, but the indications and regimens remain to be defined. The aim was to identify whether adjuvant chemotherapy offers treatment benefit in advanced ocular medulloepithelioma. METHODS: This was a retrospective case series of subjects referred to a single specialist ocular oncology centre for advanced ocular medulloepithelioma subsequently treated with enucleation, including those needing adjuvant systemic vincristine, etoposide and carboplatin. A case-note review was performed for included subjects meeting referral criteria. The outcomes were histopathology characteristics, recurrence, metastases and survival. RESULTS: Between March 2010 and June 2017, four male patients (mean age 31 months) underwent enucleation for ocular medulloepithelioma. Adjuvant chemotherapy was commenced in 3 patients (75%) due to malignant histopathological features. With a mean follow-up time of 81.5 months (median 71 months, range 49-135 months) none of the patients have had recurrence, metastases or death from the tumour. CONCLUSIONS: This series is unique in reporting the management of advanced malignant ocular medulloepithelioma with adjuvant systemic vincristine, etoposide and carboplatin for advanced tumours with malignant features. This regimen appears to be safe and may be effective in preventing metastatic spread

Non-prescription medicine misuse, abuse and dependence : a cross-sectional survey of the UK general population

BACKGROUND: Non-prescription medicines (NPMs) can be misused, abused or lead to dependence, but the prevalence of these problems within the UK general population was unknown. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of self-reported misuse, abuse and dependence to NPMs.METHODS: A cross-sectional postal survey was sent to 1000 individuals aged ≥18 randomly drawn from the UK Edited Electoral Register.RESULTS: A response rate of 43.4% was achieved. The lifetime prevalence of NPM misuse was 19.3%. Lifetime prevalence of abuse was 4.1%. Younger age, having a long-standing illness requiring regular NPM use and ever having used illicit drugs or legal highs were predictive of misuse/abuse of NPMs. In terms of dependence, lifetime prevalence was 2% with 0.8% currently dependent and 1.3% dependent in the past. Dependence was reported with analgesics (with and without codeine), sleep aids and nicotine products.CONCLUSION: Given the increasing emphasis on self-care and empowering the public to manage their health with NPMs, the findings highlight the need for improved pharmacovigilance of these medicines to maximize benefits with minimal risk. Healthcare providers need to be aware of the potential for misuse, abuse and dependence, particularly in patients with long-term illness

Association between benzodiazepine co-prescription and mortality in people on opioid replacement therapy:a population-based cohort study

Objective: To investigate the association between Opioid Replacement Therapy (ORT) and benzodiazepine co-prescription and all-cause mortality compared to the prescription of ORT alone.Design: Population based cohort studySetting: Scotland, UK.Participants: Participants were people prescribed ORT between January 2010 and end of December 2020 aged 18 years or above.Main outcome measures: all-cause mortality, drug related deaths and non-drug related deaths. Secondary outcome: ORT continuous treatment duration.Analysis: Cox regression with time-varying covariates.Results: During follow up 5776 of 46899 participants died: 1398 while on co-prescription and 4378 while on Opioid Replacement Therapy only. The mortality per 100 person years was 3.11 during co-prescription and 2.34 on ORT only. The adjusted hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 1.17 (1.10 to 1.24). The adjusted hazard ratio for drug related death was 1.14 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.24) and the hazard for death not classified as drug-related was 1.19 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.30).Conclusion: Co-prescription of benzodiazepines in opioid replacement therapy increased risk of all cause mortality, although less than the international literature. Co-prescribing was also associated with longer retention in treatment. Risk from benzodiazepine co-prescription needs to be balanced against the risk from illicit benzodiazepines and unplanned treatment discontinuation. A randomised controlled trial is urgently needed to provide clear clinical direction.<br/

Association between benzodiazepine coprescription and mortality in people on opioid replacement therapy:a population-based cohort study

Objective To investigate the association between opioid replacement therapy (ORT) and benzodiazepine (BZD) coprescription and all-cause mortality compared with the prescription of ORT alone.Design Population-based cohort study.Setting Scotland, UK.Participants Participants were people prescribed ORT between January 2010 and end of December 2020 aged 18 years or above.Main outcome measures All-cause mortality, drug-related deaths and non-drug related deaths.Secondary outcome ORT continuous treatment duration.Analysis Cox regression with time-varying covariates.Results During follow-up, 5776 of 46 899 participants died: 1398 while on coprescription and 4378 while on ORT only. The mortality per 100 person years was 3.11 during coprescription and 2.34 on ORT only. The adjusted HR for all-cause mortality was 1.17 (1.10 to 1.24). The adjusted HR for drug-related death was 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.24) and the hazard for death not classified as drug-related was 1.19 (95% CI, 1.09 to 1.30).Conclusion Coprescription of BZDs in ORT was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality, although with a small effect size than the international literature. Coprescribing was also associated with longer retention in treatment. Risk from BZD coprescription needs to be balanced against the risk from illicit BZDs and unplanned treatment discontinuation. A randomised controlled trial is urgently needed to provide a clear clinical direction.Trial registration number NCT04622995.</p