137 research outputs found

    Citizens Show Strong Support for Climate Policy, But Are They Also Willing to Pay?

    Get PDF
    To what extent citizens are willing not only to support ambitious climate policy, but also willing to pay for such policy remains subject to debate. Our analysis addresses three issues in this regard: whether, as is widely assumed but not empirically established, willingness to support (WTS) is higher than willingness to pay (WTP); whether the determinants of the two are similar; and what accounts for within-subject similarity between WTS and WTP. We address these issues based on data from an original nationally representative survey (N=2500) on forest conservation in Brazil, arguably the key climate policy issue in the country. The findings reveal that WTP is much lower than WTS. The determinants differ to some extent as well; regarding the effects of age, gender, and trust in government. The analysis also provides insights into factors influencing how much WTS and WTP line up within individuals, with respect to age, education, political ideology, salience of the deforestation issue, and trust in government. Our findings provide a more nuanced picture of how strong public support for climate change policy is, and a starting point for more targeted climate policy communication

    Evaluation of Three Multiplex Flow Immunoassays Compared to an Enzyme Immunoassay for the Detection and Differentiation of IgG Class Antibodies to Herpes Simplex Virus Types 1 and 2▿

    No full text
    The diagnosis of herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections is routinely made based on clinical findings and supported by laboratory testing using PCR or viral culture. However, in instances of subclinical or unrecognized HSV infection, serologic testing for IgG class antibodies to type-specific HSV glycoprotein G (gG) may be useful. This study evaluated and compared the performances of three multiplex flow immunoassays (AtheNA Multi-Lyte [Zeus Scientific], BioPlex 2200 [Bio-Rad Laboratories], and Plexus HerpeSelect [Focus Diagnostics]) for the simultaneous detection of gG type-specific IgG antibodies to HSV types 1 and 2 (HSV-1 and HSV-2). Serum specimens (n = 505) submitted for routine gG type-specific HSV IgG testing by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (HerpeSelect; Focus Diagnostics) were also tested by the three multiplex flow immunoassays. Specimens showing discordant results were tested by HSV type-specific Western blotting (WB). For HSV-1 IgG, the AtheNA, BioPlex, and Plexus assays demonstrated agreements of 94.9% (479/505 specimens), 97.8% (494/505 specimens), and 97.4% (492/505 specimens), respectively, with the results of EIA. For HSV-2 IgG, the AtheNA, BioPlex, and Plexus assays showed agreements of 87.9% (444/505 specimens), 97.2% (491/505 specimens), and 96.8% (489/505 specimens), respectively, with EIA results. Timing studies showed that the AtheNA, BioPlex, and Plexus assays could provide complete analysis of 90 serum specimens in 3.1, 1.5, and 2.9 h, respectively, versus 3.1 h by EIA. These findings suggest that the gG type-specific HSV IgG multiplex immunoassays may be beneficial to high-volume clinical laboratories experiencing significant increases in the number of specimens submitted for HSV serologic testing. The evaluated systems provide comparable results to those of EIA, while reducing hands-on time and eliminating the necessity to aliquot specimens prior to testing

    Multiplex Detection of IgM and IgG Class Antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii, Rubella Virus, and Cytomegalovirus Using a Novel Multiplex Flow Immunoassay ▿

    No full text
    The goal of this study was to evaluate the BioPlex 2200 Toxoplasma, rubella, and cytomegalovirus (CMV) (ToRC) IgG and IgM multiplex immunoassays (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) and compare the results to those of conventional testing by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and enzyme-linked fluorescent assay (ELFA). Serum specimens (n = 600) submitted for routine ToRC IgG and IgM testing by EIA (SeraQuest, Doral, FL; Diamedix, Miami, FL) or ELFA (Vidas; bioMérieux, Durham, NC) were also tested by the BioPlex ToRC multiplex immunoassays. Samples showing discordant results were retested by both methods, with further discrepancies being arbitrated by a third assay. Following repeat testing, the BioPlex Toxoplasma, rubella, and CMV IgG assays demonstrated agreements of 98.7 (592/600 specimens), 93.3 (560/600 specimens), and 98.3% (590/600 specimens), respectively, while the ToRC IgM assays yielded agreements of 91.2 (547/600 specimens), 87.3 (524/600 specimens), and 95.2% (571/600 specimens), respectively. The BioPlex ToRC IgG assays provided results comparable to EIA/ELFA results, with kappa coefficients showing near-perfect agreement for the Toxoplasma (κ = 0.94) and CMV (κ = 0.97) IgG assays and substantial agreement for the rubella IgG assay (κ = 0.66). The BioPlex ToRC IgM assays showed lower specificity with only slight agreement for Toxoplasma IgM (κ = 0.07), poor agreement for rubella IgM (κ = −0.03), and moderate agreement for CMV IgM (κ = 0.55). Both the BioPlex IgG and IgM assays reduced turnaround time (1.7 h versus 5.5 h by EIA/ELFA for 100 specimens) and eliminated the necessity to manually pipette or aliquot specimens prior to testing

    Evaluation of a Multiplex Flow Immunoassay for Detection of Epstein-Barr Virus-Specific Antibodies▿

    No full text
    Conventional methods for the detection of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-specific antibodies include the immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA). While sensitive and specific, these methods are labor-intensive and require separate assays for each analyte. This study evaluated the performance of a multiplex bead assay (BioPlex 2200; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) for the simultaneous detection of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgM class antibodies to the EBV viral capsid antigen (VCA) and IgG class antibodies to Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen-1 (EBNA-1). Serum specimens (n = 1,315) submitted for routine EBV-specific antibody testing by EIA (Grifols-Quest, Inc., Miami, FL) were also tested by the multiplex bead assay using the BioPlex 2200 automated analyzer. Specimens showing discordant results were tested by IFA. Following IFA resolution, the BioPlex VCA IgM, VCA IgG, and EBNA-1 IgG assays demonstrated 97.9%, 91.4%, and 96.9% agreement, respectively, with the results obtained by EIA. Furthermore, the BioPlex assays showed an overall agreement of 94.1% with the EIA when the specimens were categorized by disease state (susceptible, acute, or past infection) based on the EBV-specific antibody profiles. These findings indicate that the BioPlex EBV assays demonstrate a performance comparable to that of the conventional EIA, while allowing for a more rapid (2.3 h for 100 samples versus 4.5 h by the EIA) and higher-throughput (∼400 samples per 9 h versus 200 samples by the EIA) analysis of the EBV-specific antibody response

    Evaluation of Two Commercial Systems for Automated Processing, Reading, and Interpretation of Lyme Borreliosis Western Blots▿

    No full text
    The diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) is commonly made by serologic testing with Western blot (WB) analysis serving as an important supplemental assay. Although specific, the interpretation of WBs for diagnosis of LB (i.e., Lyme WBs) is subjective, with considerable variability in results. In addition, the processing, reading, and interpretation of Lyme WBs are laborious and time-consuming procedures. With the need for rapid processing and more objective interpretation of Lyme WBs, we evaluated the performances of two automated interpretive systems, TrinBlot/BLOTrix (Trinity Biotech, Carlsbad, CA) and BeeBlot/ViraScan (Viramed Biotech AG, Munich, Germany), using 518 serum specimens submitted to our laboratory for Lyme WB analysis. The results of routine testing with visual interpretation were compared to those obtained by BLOTrix analysis of MarBlot immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG and by ViraScan analysis of ViraBlot and ViraStripe IgM and IgG assays. BLOTrix analysis demonstrated an agreement of 84.7% for IgM and 87.3% for IgG compared to visual reading and interpretation. ViraScan analysis of the ViraBlot assays demonstrated agreements of 85.7% for IgM and 94.2% for IgG, while ViraScan analysis of the ViraStripe IgM and IgG assays showed agreements of 87.1 and 93.1%, respectively. Testing by the automated systems yielded an average time savings of 64 min/run compared to processing, reading, and interpretation by our current procedure. Our findings demonstrated that automated processing and interpretive systems yield results comparable to those of visual interpretation, while reducing the subjectivity and time required for Lyme WB analysis
    corecore