2,009 research outputs found

    For the humanities to play a stronger role in public policy making, they must move from individual to institutional engagement

    Get PDF
    What should society expect from the humanities? This question has become pressing in the debate around interdisciplinary research in support of public policy that aims to tackle societal issues. To influence that policy effectively, argues Frans Brom, the humanities must transcend individualism. This would mean not only abandoning “outsider” perspectives focusing solely on criticism of power through individual political action, but also setting up institutions to pursue systematic dialogue with policymakers and the other sciences and to develop the expertise needed to conduct those conversations

    Eine Verteidigung der Staatlichen NeutralitÀt

    Get PDF
    Einleitung Bis vor kurzem schlen die NeutralitĂ€tsthese zu den Kernelementen des modernen Liberalismus zu gehören. Diese These wird gewöhnlich so definiert, dass der Staat sich gegenĂŒber verschledenen Konzeptionen des Guten neutral verhalten soil. Es ist nicht besonders schwer zu verstehen, warum sich gerade Liberale fĂŒr diese These einsetzen: Sie gewĂ€hrleistet ein hohes Mass an Freiheit gegenĂŒber staatlicher Intervention-und indem sie die umstrittensten Vorstellungen aus der Diskussion heraus halt, erleichtert sie die Errichtung einer gemeinsamen Grundlage fĂŒr Politik und Recht in einer pluralistischen Gesellschaft. ..

    From trust to trustworthiness: why information is not enough in the food sector

    Get PDF
    ABSTRACT. The many well-publicized food scandals in recent years have resulted in a general state of vulnerable trust. As a result, building consumer trust has become an important goal in agri-food policy. In their efforts to protect trust in the agricultural and food sector, governments and industries have tended to consider the problem of trust as merely a matter of informing consumers on risks. In this article, we argue that the food sector better addresses the problem of trust from the perspective of the trustworthiness of the food sector itself. This broad idea for changing the focus of trust is the assumption that if you want to be trusted, you should be trustworthy. To provide a clear understanding of what being trustworthy means within the food sector, we elaborate on both the concept of trust and of responsibility. In this way we show that policy focused on enhancing transparency and providing information to consumers is crucial, but not sufficient for dealing with the problem of consumer trust in the current agri-food context

    Coronavirus disease 2019 scenarios for a long-term strategy under fundamental uncertainty

    Get PDF
    Early on, scientists have pointed out that coronavirus disease 2019 is most likely here to stay, although its course and development are uncertain. This requires a long-term strategy of living with the virus. However, the urgency of new waves of infection and the emergence of new variants have invoked an approach of acute crisis management over and over, hindering the design of a structural approach for the long term. Exploratory scenarios can provide scientific strategic guidance to policy processes to be better prepared in this situation of fundamental uncertainty. We have therefore developed five scenarios, which describe the possible long-term development of the pandemic from an epidemiological, virological, and broader societal perspective. These scenarios are based on four driving forces that are both important and uncertain: immunity, vaccination, mutations, and human behavior. The scenarios are (1) return to normal, (2) flu+, (3) external threat, (4) continuous struggle, and (5) worst case. Working with scenarios is crucial for appropriate public communication and provides guidance for anticipating the various conceivable possibilities for the further course of the pandemic

    Phase I interim results of a phase I/II study of the IgG-Fc fusion COVID-19 subunit vaccine, AKS-452

    Get PDF
    To address the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a recombinant subunit vaccine, AKS-452, is being developed comprising an Fc fusion protein of the SARS-CoV-2 viral spike protein receptor binding domain (SP/RBD) antigen and human IgG1 Fc emulsified in the water-in-oil adjuvant, Montanideℱ ISA 720. A single-center, open-label, phase I dose-finding and safety study was conducted with 60 healthy adults (18–65 years) receiving one or two doses 28 days apart of 22.5 ”g, 45 ”g, or 90 ”g of AKS-452 (i.e., six cohorts, N = 10 subjects per cohort). Primary endpoints were safety and reactogenicity and secondary endpoints were immunogenicity assessments. No AEs ≄ 3, no SAEs attributable to AKS-452, and no SARS-CoV-2 viral infections occurred during the study. Seroconversion rates of anti-SARS-CoV-2 SP/RBD IgG titers in the 22.5, 45, and 90 ”g cohorts at day 28 were 70%, 90%, and 100%, respectively, which all increased to 100% at day 56 (except 89% for the single-dose 22.5 ”g cohort). All IgG titers were Th1-isotype skewed and efficiently bound mutant SP/RBD from several SARS-CoV-2 variants with strong neutralization potencies of live virus infection of cells (including alpha and delta variants). The favorable safety and immunogenicity profiles of this phase I study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04681092) support phase II initiation of this room-temperature stable vaccine that can be rapidly and inexpensively manufactured to serve vaccination at a global scale without the need of a complex distribution or cold chain

    Behavioral and psychosocial effects of rapid genetic counseling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: Design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It has been estimated that between 5% and 10% of women diagnosed with breast cancer have a hereditary form of the disease, primarily caused by a <it>BRCA1 </it>or <it>BRCA2 </it>gene mutation. Such women have an increased risk of developing a new primary breast and/or ovarian tumor, and may therefore opt for preventive surgery (e.g., bilateral mastectomy, oophorectomy). It is common practice to offer high-risk patients genetic counseling and DNA testing after their primary treatment, with genetic test results being available within 4-6 months. However, some non-commercial laboratories can currently generate test results within 3 to 6 weeks, and thus make it possible to provide <it>rapid </it>genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) prior to primary treatment. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of RGCT on treatment decisions and on psychosocial health.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In this randomized controlled trial, 255 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients with at least a 10% risk of carrying a <it>BRCA </it>gene mutation are being recruited from 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either a RGCT intervention group (the offer of RGCT directly following diagnosis with tests results available before surgical treatment) or to a usual care control group. The primary behavioral outcome is the uptake of direct bilateral mastectomy or delayed prophylactic contralateral mastectomy. Psychosocial outcomes include cancer risk perception, cancer-related worry and distress, health-related quality of life, decisional satisfaction and the perceived need for and use of additional decisional counseling and psychosocial support. Data are collected via medical chart audits and self-report questionnaires administered prior to randomization, and at 6 month and at 12 month follow-up.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This trial will provide essential information on the impact of RGCT on the choice of primary surgical treatment among women with breast cancer with an increased risk of hereditary cancer. This study will also provide data on the psychosocial consequences of RGCT and of risk-reducing behavior.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR1493) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00783822).</p
    • 

    corecore