DONALD TRUMP: MORBID SYMPTOM OF THE INTERREGNUM TRUMP AS TROPE

The election of Donald Trump raises a number of questions about how and why he was supported by the voters to gain electoral college victory. His election was not due to economic hardships but rather due to his unique ability to mobilize three primary constituents of the republican party: its billionaire elites, evangelical Christians and racist white nationalists. His appeal rested upon the authoritarianism of these constituencies, as well as fears of the loss of privileged Identities based on race, religion and/ or gender, disdain toward immigrants, fearing the “decline” of the nation and ressentiment toward corrupt elites

Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis Complicating Therapy With Inotersen, an Antisense Oligonucleotide Inhibitor: A Case Report

Inotersen is an antisense oligonucleotide inhibitor licensed for the treatment of polyneuropathy complicating hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTRv). Nephrotoxicity has been reported with inotersen, including progression to end stage renal disease. We describe the first reported case of inotersen-associated nephrotic syndrome secondary to focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) and review the literature concerning inotersen-induced nephrotoxicity. We report a woman in her early 30s with ATTRv associated with the (p.V50M) transthyretin (TTR) variant, who presented with nephrotic syndrome 7 months after commencement of inotersen. Renal histology demonstrated focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and scanty glomerular amyloid deposition. Discontinuation of inotersen alone resulted in complete clinical and biochemical resolution of nephrotic syndrome. Inotersen is associated with significant nephrotoxicity. In the phase III NEURO-TTR clinical trial, 3% of patients in the treatment arm developed a crescentic glomerulonephritis. All affected patients carried the (p.V50M) TTR variant which is known to be associated with renal amyloid deposition. This case adds to spectrum of renal disease associated with inotersen and indicates that discontinuation of the drug alone may result in resolution of renal complications without additional immunosuppression. Monitoring of renal function is essential in patients with ATTRv receiving inotersen, particularly if there is evidence of existing renal amyloid

Antipsychotic medication versus psychological intervention versus a combination of both in adolescents with first-episode psychosis (MAPS): a multicentre, three-arm, randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study

Background Evidence for the effectiveness of treatments in early-onset psychosis is sparse. Current guidance for the treatment of early-onset psychosis is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs versus psychological intervention (cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT] and family intervention) versus the combination of these treatments for early-onset psychosis. The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of antipsychotic monotherapy, psychological intervention monotherapy, and antipsychotics plus psychological intervention in adolescents with first-episode psychosis. Methods We did a multicentre pilot and feasibility trial according to a randomised, single-blind, three-arm, controlled design. We recruited participants from seven UK National Health Service Trust sites. Participants were aged 14–18 years; help-seeking; had presented with first-episode psychosis in the past year; were under the care of a psychiatrist; were showing current psychotic symptoms; and met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder, or met the entry criteria for an early intervention for psychosis service. Participants were assigned (1:1:1) to antipsychotics, psychological intervention (CBT with optional family intervention), or antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. Randomisation was via a web-based randomisation system, with permuted blocks of random size, stratified by centre and family contact. CBT incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions, and family intervention incorporated up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. Participants were followed up for a maximum of 12 months. The primary outcome was feasibility (ie, data on trial referral and recruitment, session attendance or medication adherence, retention, and treatment acceptability) and the proposed primary efficacy outcome was total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at 6 months. Primary outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. Safety outcomes were reported according to as-treated status, for all patients who had received at least one session of CBT or family intervention, or at least one dose of antipsychotics. The study was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN80567433. Findings Of 101 patients referred to the study, 61 patients (mean age 16·3 years [SD 1·3]) were recruited from April 10, 2017, to Oct 31, 2018, 18 of whom were randomly assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics, and 21 to antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. The trial recruitment rate was 68% of our target sample size of 90 participants. The study had a low referral to recruitment ratio (around 2:1), a high rate of retention (51 [84%] participants retained at the 6-month primary endpoint), a high rate of adherence to psychological intervention (defined as six or more sessions of CBT; in 32 [82%] of 39 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups), and a moderate rate of adherence to antipsychotic medication (defined as at least 6 consecutive weeks of exposure to antipsychotics; in 28 [65%] of 43 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups). Mean scores for PANSS total at the 6-month primary endpoint were 68·6 (SD 17·3) for antipsychotic monotherapy (6·2 points lower than at randomisation), 59·8 (13·7) for psychological intervention (13·1 points lower than at randomisation), and 62·0 (15·9) for antipsychotics plus psychological intervention (13·9 points lower than at randomisation). A good clinical response at 6 months (defined as ≥50% improvement in PANSS total score) was achieved in four (22%) of 18 patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy, five (31%) of 16 receiving psychological intervention, and five (29%) of 17 receiving antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. In as-treated groups, serious adverse events occurred in eight [35%] of 23 patients in the combined group, two [13%] of 15 in the antipsychotics group, four [24%] of 17 in the psychological intervention group, and four [80%] of five who did not receive any treatment. No serious adverse events were considered to be related to participation in the trial. Interpretation This trial is the first to show that a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention, antipsychotics, and their combination is safe in young people with first-episode psychosis. However, the feasibility of a larger trial is unclear because of site-specific recruitment challenges, and amendments to trial design would be needed for an adequately powered clinical and cost-effectiveness trial that provides robust evidence

Modern American populism: Analyzing the economics behind the Silent Majority, the Tea Party and Trumpism

This article researches populism, more specifically, Modern American Populism (MAP), constructed of white, rural, and economically oppressed reactionarianism, which was borne out of the political upheaval of the 1960’s Civil Rights movement. The research looks to explain the causes of populism and what leads voters to support populist movements and politicians. The research focuses on economic anxiety as the main cause but also examines an alternative theory of racial resentment. In an effort to answer the question, what causes populist movements and motivations, I apply a research approach that utilizes qualitative and quantitative methods. There is an examination of literature that defines populism, its causes and a detailed discussion of the case studies, including the 1972 election of Richard Nixon; the Tea Party election of 2010; and the 2016 election of Donald Trump. In addition, statistical data analysis was run using American National Election Studies (ANES) surveys associated with each specific case study. These case studies were chosen because they most represent forms of populist movements in modern American history. While ample qualitative evidence suggested support for the hypothesis that economic anxiety is a necessary condition for populist voting patterns that elected Nixon, the Tea Party and Trump, the statistical data only supported the hypothesis in two cases, 2010 and 2016, with 1972 coming back inconclusive. The data also suggested that both economic anxiety and racial resentment played a role in 2010 and 2016, while having no significant effect in 1972 in either case. This suggests that further research needs to be conducted into additional populist case studies, as well as an examination into the role economic anxiety and economic crises play on racial resentment and racially motivated voting behavior

Nature meets nurture: molecular genetics of gastric cancer

The immensity of genes and molecules implicated in gastric carcinogenesis is overwhelming and the relevant importance of some of these molecules is too often unclear. This review serves to bring us up-to-date with the latest findings as well as to look at the larger picture in terms of how to tackle the problem of solving this multi-piece puzzle. In this review, the environmental nurturing of intestinal cancer is discussed, beginning with epidemiology (known causative factors for inducing molecular change), an update of H. pylori research, including the role of inflammation and stem cells in premalignant lesions. The role of E-cadherin in the nature (genotype) of diffuse gastric cancer is highlighted, and finally the ever growing discipline of SNP analysis (including IL1B) is discussed

An original phylogenetic approach identified mitochondrial haplogroup T1a1 as inversely associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers

Introduction: Individuals carrying pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have a high lifetime risk of breast cancer. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in DNA double-strand break repair, DNA alterations that can be caused by exposure to reactive oxygen species, a main source of which are mitochondria. Mitochondrial genome variations affect electron transport chain efficiency and reactive oxygen species production. Individuals with different mitochondrial haplogroups differ in their metabolism and sensitivity to oxidative stress. Variability in mitochondrial genetic background can alter reactive oxygen species production, leading to cancer risk. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that mitochondrial haplogroups modify breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Methods: We genotyped 22,214 (11,421 affected, 10,793 unaffected) mutation carriers belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 for 129 mitochondrial polymorphisms using the iCOGS array. Haplogroup inference and association detection were performed using a phylogenetic approach. ALTree was applied to explore the reference mitochondrial evolutionary tree and detect subclades enriched in affected or unaffected individuals. Results: We discovered that subclade T1a1 was depleted in affected BRCA2 mutation carriers compared with the rest of clade T (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34 to 0.88; P = 0.01). Compared with the most frequent haplogroup in the general population (that is, H and T clades), the T1a1 haplogroup has a HR of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.95; P = 0.03). We also identified three potential susceptibility loci, including G13708A/rs28359178, which has demonstrated an inverse association with familial breast cancer risk. Conclusions: This study illustrates how original approaches such as the phylogeny-based method we used can empower classical molecular epidemiological studies aimed at identifying association or risk modification effects.Peer reviewe

A three-arm feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing antipsychotic medication to psychological intervention to a combined treatment in adolescents with first episode psychosis: The Managing Adolescent first episode Psychosis Study (MAPS)

Background: The evidence base for treatments for early-onset psychosis (EOP) is limited and of low quality. Current guidance for the treatment of EOP is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. NICE, in the United Kingdom (UK), make a specific research recommendation for the evaluation of clinical and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotics (AP), versus psychological intervention (cognitive behaviour therapy [CBT] and family intervention), versus combination treatment for EOP. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) in the UK commissioned this research to establish feasibility and acceptability of a definitive trial examining these three treatment options. Methods: We conducted a multi-site, Prospective Randomised Open Blinded Evaluation (PROBE) design, feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing AP monotherapy with psychological intervention monotherapy (PI) plus a combination of these treatments in 14-18-year olds with a first episode of psychosis. We recruited participants from seven United Kingdom sites. Participants were followed-up at six and 12 months. Cognitive behavioural therapy incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions. Family intervention included up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. The primary outcome was feasibility data (recruitment, retention, acceptability) and the main effectiveness outcome was the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at 6 months. We conducted a repeated-measures analysis of the proposed primary outcome (PANSS) and the secondary outcome, the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) using a mixed effects model to account for the discrete timing of the follow-up assessments and adjusted for site. Safety outcomes were reported on the basis of as treated status defined as any one session of CBT or any one dose of APs; descriptive statistics are reported for safety outcomes. The study was prospectively registered on 27th February 2017, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN80567433. Findings: 61 patients (aged 14-18 years; mean 16.3, SD 1.3) were recruited from 1st April 2017 to 31st October 2018, 18 were assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics and 21 to the combination. The feasibility of recruitment was unclear, since the trial only recruited 61 of a target of 90 participants. The study had a low referral: randomisation ratio (101:61), high rates of retention (>80%), high rates of adherence for psychological intervention (82.1%) defined as 6 or more sessions of CBT, and moderate rates of adherence for antipsychotic medication (65.1%), defined as 6 or more consecutive weeks of APs. The median number of sessions for CBT for those in the PI arm was 14 (IQR 9, 23) and 15 in the combined arm (IQR 9, 17). Of those in receipt of APs the mean duration that the participant remained on the medication was 31.5 weeks (SD 14.6, minimum 8.7 and maximum 52). There were no serious adverse events considered to be related to the trial. Interpretation: This is the first trial to show that it is safe to conduct a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotics and the combination in people in young people with a first-episode psychosis. However, feasibility is unclear due to not meeting the recruitment progression criteria, so amendments to trial design are required in order to conduct an adequately powered clinical and cost effectiveness trial to provide robust evidence

I Hate, therefore I am

How can we best understand contemporary reactionary movernents? What are the continuities and differences with classical fascism, what qualities are invariant,. what qualities are historically contingent? Marxian analyses, especially after the Second Internationale, critiqued capitalism from the standpoint of wage labor. But Fascism was far more than a response to unemployment, it was a complex political outcome of historical legacies. cultural traditions, the pre-fascist political economy, and its class structure. class relationships and class contradictions reflected in voting patterns and the kinds of social movements. Last, but not least, certain patterns of individual character structure, qua authority, and its expressions in personal identities held a cultural and psychic affinity for fascism, This was a central concern for the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory (cf Smith 1992)