Offshore Oil Leasing: Trump Administration’s Environmentally Dangerous Energy Policy

The Trump administration’s Executive orders on Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth (“Energy Independence Order”) and Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy (“Offshore Energy Order”) set the stage to open over 90% of the continental shelf to offshore oil drilling from 2019–2024. The Offshore Energy Order ignores the statutory requirements of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (“OCSLA”) and the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) to balance energy exploration with safeguards for marine life and the environment. We analyze the lack of express authority in OCSLA for the President to rescind its protective designations, in comparison to other laws that grant such authority. This Article discusses the traditional administrative processes for assessing environmental concerns with lease proposals, and contrasts those with the Trump administration’s proposals for streamlining the process. We examine the volatility of oil prices and the impact of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) on the viability of offshore leasing. While most mayors, governors, and senators of affected states oppose further offshore drilling, the Trump administration’s proposals ignore these stakeholders. This Article emphasizes the importance of minimizing environmental risks of offshore oil exploration and drilling, including threats to marine mammals and the fishing industry, as well as climate change implications of expanding fossil fuel exploration and use. More safety oversight is needed (including a reversal of the Trump administration’s discontinuance of the Methane Waste Rule, the Well Control Rule, and third-party audits of oil well blowout preventers). This Article concludes with the recommendation that it is imprudent to expand offshore drilling when conservation for future generations and protection of the environment is a more prudent course

“Experimental Populations” Outside Historical Range Proposal: Will It Get the Frog Out of Hot Water?

72 pagesTo address the impact of climate change on habitats of endangered and threatened species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing a 2022 rule change to allow “experimental populations” to be introduced into habitat outside the species’ historical range. For essential experimental populations, habitat could be designated beyond current or historical range where “little to no habitat remains within the historical range of a species or where formerly suitable habitat . . . is undergoing, irreversible decline or change, rendering it unable to support one or more life history stages for the species.” A statutory prerequisite (under Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 10(j)) to designation of critical habitat for an experimental population is that “such population is essential to the continued existence of an endangered species or a threatened species.” The ESA defines “critical habitat” but does not separately define “habitat.” Designation of “critical habitat” has been complicated by the Weyerhaeuser v. FWS decision, in which the Supreme Court concluded that “critical habitat” must first be “habitat.

Examining the Evidence Base for Forensic Case Formulation: An Integrative Review of Recent Research

In the past decade, forensic case formulation (FCF) has become a key activity in many forensic services. However, the evidence base for FCF remains limited. This integrative review aimed to identify and evaluate all FCF research conducted since the lack of understanding within this field was highlighted by several academics in 2011. A rigorous literature search led to the identification of 14 studies fitting the inclusion criteria. Studies were critically evaluated and synthesised to create a summary of the recent research, to identify remaining gaps in our understanding, and to create an agenda for future research

The OscSNS White Paper

There exists a need to address and resolve the growing evidence for short-baseline neutrino oscillations and the possible existence of sterile neutrinos. Such non-standard particles require a mass of $\sim 1$ eV/c$^2$, far above the mass scale associated with active neutrinos, and were first invoked to explain the LSND $\bar \nu_\mu \rightarrow \bar \nu_e$ appearance signal. More recently, the MiniBooNE experiment has reported a $2.8 \sigma$ excess of events in antineutrino mode consistent with neutrino oscillations and with the LSND antineutrino appearance signal. MiniBooNE also observed a $3.4 \sigma$ excess of events in their neutrino mode data. Lower than expected neutrino-induced event rates using calibrated radioactive sources and nuclear reactors can also be explained by the existence of sterile neutrinos. Fits to the world's neutrino and antineutrino data are consistent with sterile neutrinos at this $\sim 1$ eV/c$^2$ mass scale, although there is some tension between measurements from disappearance and appearance experiments. In addition to resolving this potential major extension of the Standard Model, the existence of sterile neutrinos will impact design and planning for all future neutrino experiments. It should be an extremely high priority to conclusively establish if such unexpected light sterile neutrinos exist. The Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, built to usher in a new era in neutron research, provides a unique opportunity for US science to perform a definitive world-class search for sterile neutrinos.Comment: This white paper is submitted as part of the SNOWMASS planning proces

Feasibility of trial procedures for a randomised controlled trial of a community based group exercise intervention for falls prevention for visually impaired older people: the VIOLET study

Background Visually impaired older people (VIOP) have a higher risk of falling than their sighted peers, and are likely to avoid physical activity. The aim was to adapt the existing Falls Management Exercise (FaME) programme for VIOP, delivered in the community, and to investigate the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of this adapted intervention. Methods Two-centre randomised mixed methods pilot trial and economic evaluation of the adapted group-based FaME programme for VIOP versus usual care. A one hour exercise programme ran weekly over 12 weeks at the study sites (Newcastle and Glasgow), delivered by third sector (voluntary and community) organisations. Participants were advised to exercise at home for an additional two hours over the week. Those randomised to the usual activities group received no intervention. Outcome measures were completed at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks. The potential primary outcome was the Short Form Falls Efficacy Scale – International (SFES-I). Participants’ adherence was assessed by reviewing attendance records and self-reported compliance to the home exercises. Adherence with the course content (fidelity) by instructors was assessed by a researcher. Adverse events were collected in a weekly phone call. Results Eighteen participants, drawn from community-living VIOP were screened; 68 met the inclusion criteria; 64 participants were randomised with 33 allocated to the intervention and 31 to the usual activities arm. 94% of participants provided data at the 12 week visit and 92% at 24 weeks. Adherence was high. The intervention was found to be safe with 76% attending nine or more classes. Median time for home exercise was 50 min per week. There was little or no evidence that fear of falling, balance and falls risk, physical activity, emotional, attitudinal or quality of life outcomes differed between trial arms at follow-up. Conclusions The intervention, FaME, was implemented successfully for VIOP and all progression criteria for a main trial were met. The lack of difference between groups on fear of falling was unsurprising given it was a pilot study but there may have been other contributory factors including suboptimal exercise dose and apparent low risk of falls in participants. These issues need addressing for a future trial

Pain assessment for people with dementia: a systematic review of systematic reviews of pain assessment tools.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence of under-detection and poor management of pain in patients with dementia, in both long-term and acute care. Accurate assessment of pain in people with dementia is challenging and pain assessment tools have received considerable attention over the years, with an increasing number of tools made available. Systematic reviews on the evidence of their validity and utility mostly compare different sets of tools. This review of systematic reviews analyses and summarises evidence concerning the psychometric properties and clinical utility of pain assessment tools in adults with dementia or cognitive impairment. METHODS: We searched for systematic reviews of pain assessment tools providing evidence of reliability, validity and clinical utility. Two reviewers independently assessed each review and extracted data from them, with a third reviewer mediating when consensus was not reached. Analysis of the data was carried out collaboratively. The reviews were synthesised using a narrative synthesis approach. RESULTS: We retrieved 441 potentially eligible reviews, 23 met the criteria for inclusion and 8 provided data for extraction. Each review evaluated between 8 and 13 tools, in aggregate providing evidence on a total of 28 tools. The quality of the reviews varied and the reporting often lacked sufficient methodological detail for quality assessment. The 28 tools appear to have been studied in a variety of settings and with varied types of patients. The reviews identified several methodological limitations across the original studies. The lack of a 'gold standard' significantly hinders the evaluation of tools' validity. Most importantly, the samples were small providing limited evidence for use of any of the tools across settings or populations. CONCLUSIONS: There are a considerable number of pain assessment tools available for use with the elderly cognitive impaired population. However there is limited evidence about their reliability, validity and clinical utility. On the basis of this review no one tool can be recommended given the existing evidence

Developing the practice context to enable more effective pain management with older people: an action research approach

Background\ud \ud This paper, which draws upon an Emancipatory Action Research (EAR) approach, unearths how the complexities of context influence the realities of nursing practice. While the intention of the project was to identify and change factors in the practice context that inhibit effective person-centred pain management practices with older people (65 years or older), reflective critical engagement with the findings identified that enhancing pain management practices with older people was dependent on cultural change in the unit as a whole. \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud An EAR approach was utilised. The project was undertaken in a surgical unit that conducted complex abdominal surgery. Eighty-five percent (n = 48) of nursing staff participated in the two-year project (05/NIR02/107). Data were obtained through the use of facilitated critical reflection with nursing staff. \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Three key themes (psychological safety, leadership, oppression) and four subthemes (power, horizontal violence, distorted perceptions, autonomy) were found to influence the way in which effective nursing practice was realised. Within the theme of 'context,' effective leadership and the creation of a psychologically safe environment were key elements in the enhancement of all aspects of nursing practice. \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud Whilst other research has identified the importance of 'practice context' and models and frameworks are emerging to address this issue, the theme of 'psychological safety' has been given little attention in the knowledge translation/implementation literature. Within the principles of EAR, facilitated reflective sessions were found to create 'psychologically safe spaces' that supported practitioners to develop effective person-centred nursing practices in complex clinical environments

A practical risk scale for predicting morbidity and mortality in the emergency general surgical setting : a prospective multicenter study

We acknowledge the support of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Center at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London (BC).Peer reviewedPostprin