Cohort studies of fat intake and the risk of breast cancer--a pooled analysis.

Cohort studies of fat intake and the risk of breast cancer--a pooled analysis. Hunter DJ, Spiegelman D, Adami HO, Beeson L, van den Brandt PA, Folsom AR, Fraser GE, Goldbohm RA, Graham S, Howe GR, et al. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. BACKGROUND. Experiments in animals, international correlation comparisons, and case-control studies support an association between dietary fat intake and the incidence of breast cancer. Most cohort studies do not corroborate the association, but they have been criticized for involving small numbers of cases, homogeneous fat intake, and measurement errors in estimates of fat intake. METHODS. We identified seven prospective studies in four countries that met specific criteria and analyzed the primary data in a standardized manner. Pooled estimates of the relation of fat intake to the risk of breast cancer were calculated, and data from study-specific validation studies were used to adjust the results for measurement error. RESULTS. Information about 4980 cases from studies including 337,819 women was available. When women in the highest quintile of energy-adjusted total fat intake were compared with women in the lowest quintile, the multivariate pooled relative risk of breast cancer was 1.05 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.94 to 1.16). Relative risks for saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fat and for cholesterol, considered individually, were also close to unity. There was little overall association between the percentage of energy intake from fat and the risk of breast cancer, even among women whose energy intake from fat was less than 20 percent. Correcting for error in the measurement of nutrient intake did not materially alter these findings. CONCLUSIONS. We found no evidence of a positive association between total dietary fat intake and the risk of breast cancer. There was no reduction in risk even among women whose energy intake from fat was less than 20 percent of total energy intake. In the context of the Western lifestyle, lowering the total intake of fat in midlife is unlikely to reduce the risk of breast cancer substantially

Is American Public Administration Detached From Historical Context?: On the Nature of Time and the Need to Understand It in Government and Its Study

The study of public administration pays little attention to history. Most publications are focused on current problems (the present) and desired solutions (the future) and are concerned mainly with organizational structure (a substantive issue) and output targets (an aggregative issue that involves measures of both individual performance and organizational productivity/services). There is much less consideration of how public administration (i.e., organization, policy, the study, etc.) unfolds over time. History, and so administrative history, is regarded as a “past” that can be recorded for its own sake but has little relevance to contemporary challenges. This view of history is the product of a diminished and anemic sense of time, resulting from organizing the past as a series of events that inexorably lead up to the present in a linear fashion. To improve the understanding of government’s role and position in society, public administration scholarship needs to reacquaint itself with the nature of time.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline

Size Doesn't Matter: Towards a More Inclusive Philosophy of Biology

notes: As the primary author, O’Malley drafted the paper, and gathered and analysed data (scientific papers and talks). Conceptual analysis was conducted by both authors.publication-status: Publishedtypes: ArticlePhilosophers of biology, along with everyone else, generally perceive life to fall into two broad categories, the microbes and macrobes, and then pay most of their attention to the latter. ‘Macrobe’ is the word we propose for larger life forms, and we use it as part of an argument for microbial equality. We suggest that taking more notice of microbes – the dominant life form on the planet, both now and throughout evolutionary history – will transform some of the philosophy of biology’s standard ideas on ontology, evolution, taxonomy and biodiversity. We set out a number of recent developments in microbiology – including biofilm formation, chemotaxis, quorum sensing and gene transfer – that highlight microbial capacities for cooperation and communication and break down conventional thinking that microbes are solely or primarily single-celled organisms. These insights also bring new perspectives to the levels of selection debate, as well as to discussions of the evolution and nature of multicellularity, and to neo-Darwinian understandings of evolutionary mechanisms. We show how these revisions lead to further complications for microbial classification and the philosophies of systematics and biodiversity. Incorporating microbial insights into the philosophy of biology will challenge many of its assumptions, but also give greater scope and depth to its investigations