Contradiction, Cultural Tourism, Development and Social Structure in Nepal

The purpose of this paper is to suggest a testable model of the effects of development-related, cultural tourism on local social structures in Nepal and elsewhere. This essay attempts to sort out some of the more salient, patterned features of social interaction from the messiness of the total social reality in which they exist, or to deal with what Rojek and Urry (1997, 3) have termed Modernity 1, “rules to live by” and Modernity 2, the, “’dis- orderliness’ of life.

Salinity and sensitivity to endocrine disrupting chemicals: A comparison of reproductive endpoints in small-bodied fish exposed under different salinities

The influence of salinity on toxicity outcomes has been demonstrated for various contaminants, but has received limited attention for endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Short-term laboratory tests using small-bodied fish are an important tool for evaluating impacts of EDCs on reproduction. Tests have been developed for both freshwater and estuarine/marine species, providing an opportunity to assess whether concentrations at which small-bodied fish respond to EDCs may be influenced by salinity. We conducted a semi-quantitative review of short-term laboratory tests with small-bodied fish exposed to EDCs, including 59 studies under freshwater conditions (7 species) and 23 studies conducted under saline conditions (5 species). We focused on two model estrogens [17α-ethinylestradiol and 17β-estradiol (E2)], and three androgens (17β-trenbolone, 5α-dihydrotestosterone and 17α-methyltestosterone). The lowest observed adverse effect concentration (LOAECLOW) for key reproductive endpoints was recorded, including sex-steroid and vitellogenin (VTG) levels, fecundity and fertilization. In 65.2% of cases, responses occurred at lower doses under freshwater compared to saline conditions, compared to only 4.3% of cases where fish responded to lower doses under saline conditions. The potential influence of salinity was more pronounced when estrogenic compounds were considered separately, with fish responding to lower doses under fresh compared to saline conditions in 90.5% of cases. Fecundity and E2 level were identified as the most sensitive endpoints for evaluating EDCs regardless of salinity. Interestingly, female VTG levels were a sensitive endpoint under freshwater but not saline conditions. Overall, our results suggest that salinity may be an important factor influencing how small-bodied fish respond to environmental EDCs.Full Tex

Seasonal cycle in vitamin A1/A2-based visual pigment composition during the life history of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch )

Microspectrophotometry of rod photoreceptors was used to follow variations in visual pigment vitamin A1/A2 ratio at various life history stages in coho salmon. Coho parr shifted their A1/A2 ratio seasonally with A2 increasing during winter and decreasing in summer. The cyclical pattern was statistically examined by a least-squares cosine model, fit to the 12-month data sets collected from different populations. A1/A2 ratio varied with temperature and day length. In 1+ (>12 month old) parr the A2 to A1 shift in spring coincided with smoltification, a metamorphic transition preceding seaward migration in salmonids. The coincidence of the shift from A2 to A1 with both the spring increase in temperature and day length, and with the timing of seaward migration presented a challenge for interpretation. Our data show a shift in A1/A2 ratio correlated with season, in both 0+

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health