Radiological effluents released from US continental tests, 1961 through 1992. Revision 1

This report documents all continental tests from September 15, 1961, through September 23, 1992, from which radioactive effluents were released. The report includes both updated information previously published in the publicly available May, 1990 report, DOE/NV-317, ``Radiological Effluents Released from Announced US Continental Tests 1961 through 1988``, and effluent release information on formerly unannounced tests. General information provided for each test includes the date, time, location, type of test, sponsoring laboratory and/or agency or other sponsor, depth of burial, purpose, yield or yield range, extent of release (onsite only or offsite), and category of release (detonation-time versus post-test operations). Where a test with simultaneous detonations is listed, location, depth of burial and yield information are given for each detonation if applicable, as well as the specific source of the release. A summary of each release incident by type of release is included. For a detonation-time release, the effluent curies are expressed at R+12 hours. For a controlled releases from tunnel-tests, the effluent curies are expressed at both time of release and at R+12 hours. All other types are listed at the time of the release. In addition, a qualitative statement of the isotopes in the effluent is included for detonation-time and controlled releases and a quantitative listing is included for all other types. Offsite release information includes the cloud direction, the maximum activity detected in the air offsite, the maximum gamma exposure rate detected offsite, the maximum iodine level detected offsite, and the maximum distance radiation was detected offsite. A release summary incudes whatever other pertinent information is available for each release incident. This document includes effluent release information for 433 tests, some of which have simultaneous detonations. However, only 52 of these are designated as having offsite releases

Meloxicam and dexamethasone administration as anti-Inflammatory compounds to sows prior to farrowing does not improve lactation performance

The aim of this experiment was to determine whether administration of an anti-inflammatory compound to sows prior to farrowing would, via reduced pain and inflammation, increase piglet survival and growth. At day 114 of gestation, multiparous sows were randomly allocated to one of the following treatments: Control (n = 43), which received 10 mL saline, NSAID (n = 55) which received 0.4 mg/kg meloxicam and SAID (n = 54) which received 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone. Treatments were applied again on day 116 if farrowing had not occurred. There was no treatment effect on piglets born alive or dead from parity two to four sows but in those of parity five and older, NSAID administration reduced the number of piglets born alive and increased the number of piglets born dead (p 0.05). Lactation day two plasma concentrations of cortisol, prostaglandin F2 alpha metabolite and haptoglobin did not differ among treatments (p > 0.05). Treatment effects were not observed in liveborn piglet mortality at any age, or litter weight at day 21 (p > 0.05). Average feed intake during lactation was increased by both NSAID and SAID treatments (p = 0.001). The use of meloxicam prior to farrowing should be avoided as it reduced the number of piglets born alive and did not improve piglet survival and growth

What explains variations in the clinical use of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) as a diagnostic category?

Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is proposed to describe the transitional stage between normal cognitive aging and dementia. It has had significant impact in the field of dementia research, but it remains controversial whether or not it should be used as a diagnostic category in clinical practice. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with international experts (N = 37) in the field of dementia research and practice. These interviews explored the advantages and difficulties of using MCI as a clinical diagnosis. Results: There is wide variation in the clinical use of MCI. This variation depends on institutional factors and two types of cultural factors: (a) clinical culture, and (b) the “evidential culture” – how research and guidelines figure in clinical practice. Conclusion: The study shows the importance of combining values-based practice with evidence-based practice in the early diagnosis of dementia

3次元立体視とクラウドサービスを活用したVirtual Reality遠隔リハビリテーションシステムの開発

No abstract available