Nitric Oxide Inhibits the Rate and Strength of Cardiac Contractions in the Lobster Homarus americanus by Acting on the Cardiac Ganglion

The lobster heart is synaptically driven by the cardiac ganglion, a spontaneously bursting neural network residing within the cardiac lumen. Here, we present evidence that nitric oxide (NO) plays an inhibitory role in lobster cardiac physiology. (1) NO decreases heartbeat frequency and amplitude. Decreased frequency is a direct consequence of a decreased ganglionic burst rate. Decreased amplitude is an indirect consequence of decreased burst frequency, attributable to the highly facilitating nature of the synapses between cardiac ganglion neurons and muscle fibers (although, during prolonged exposure to NO, amplitude recovers to the original level by a frequency-independent adaptation mechanism). NO does not alter burst duration, spikes per burst, heart muscle contractility, or amplitudes of synaptic potentials evoked by stimulating postganglionic motor nerves. Thus, NO acts on the ganglion, but not on heart muscle. (2) Two observations suggest that NO is produced within the lobster heart. First, immunoblot analysis shows that nitric oxide synthase (NOS) is strongly expressed in heart muscle relative to other muscles. Second

The role of ethics and ideology in our contribution to global health The topic of this article has vividly interested the author for many years. It is fascinating to him that the issues at stake have not changed for the last 30 years or so. As proof of this – and on purpose – references quoted are both those published before 1985 and after 1995 (Table 1). Considerable material on this topic was already available from the mid 1970s on. The end result has been the (re)construction of a scenario that has been stubborn to change and that looks into most of the, still highly relevant, burning questions of then and now on the issues pertaining to the title of this contribution for debate. It will be of interest to the reader to see how we often need to be reminded of the things our peers had evidence of and wrote about long before us – as the examples of Dr. Virchov and of the Alma Ata Declaration, for instance, show.

What drives public health professionals in their daily work? Presumably it is the appeal of working, either locally or globally, to alleviate the suffering caused by (preventable) ill-health. This article explores the political awareness of health professionals, the political implications of their daily activities and suggests an enhanced role for them in the battle against preventable ill-health worldwide. The starting point for this article is the motivating principles behind these professionals as individuals. It challenges established paradigms in health, medicine, development and academia with a focus on health professionals' political, ethical and ideological motivations and awareness plus the implications of their actions in the realm of global health in the future. It further has implications for the everyday practice of health care providers, public health practitioners, epidemiologists and social scientists in academia

Idle hands are the devil’s tools: The geopolitics and geoeconomics of hunger

In current geopolitical and geoeconomic discourses, hunger is understood as both a threat to be contained, resulting in an often severe social and spatial localization of food insecurity, and a humanitarian problem to be solved through diffuse global flows of food and other aid. The resulting scalar tensions demonstrate the potentially contradictory alignment of geopolitics and geoeconomics within processes of globalization and neoliberalization. This article examines the geopolitical and geoeconomic place of hunger and the hungry through a critical analysis of the food-for-work (FFW) approach to combating hunger. FFW programs distribute food aid in exchange for labor, and have long been used to plan and deliver food aid. While debate continues as to whether and under what conditions FFW programs are socially and economically just, governments, international institutions, and NGOs tout them as a flexible and efficient way to deliver targeted aid, promote community development, and improve long-term prospects for economic development and food security. In the post-9/11 period, FFW programs are also cited as effective deterrents to terrorist recruitment strategies, while development and food security more broadly have been incorporated into national security strategies, especially but not only in the United States. The food-for-work approach attempts to resolve the scalar contradictions of hunger through the imposition of a labor requirement that disciplines the threat of the hungry while enforcing global connection. Case studies of FFW programs in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Indonesia illustrate this contradiction, and highlight the development and possible future of approaches to hunger under neoliberal geopolitics

Meat Your Enemy: Animal Rights, Alignment, and Radical Change

Radical change can be conceived in terms of the reconceiving of ontological distinctions, such as those separating humans from animals. In building on insights from French pragmatism, we suggest that, while no doubt very difficult, radical change can potentially be achieved by creating “alignment” between multiple “economies of worth” or “common worlds” (e.g., the market world of money, the industrial world of efficiency). Using recent campaigns by animal rights organizations as our case, we show how the design of “tests” (e.g., tests of profitability, tests of efficiency) can help align multiple common worlds in support for radical change. Our analysis contributes to the broader management and organization studies literatures by conceiving radical change in terms of changing ontological categorizations (e.g., human/animals vs. sentient/ non-sentient), and by proposing that radical social change agents can be helpfully conceived as opportunistically using events to cumulatively justify the change they desire overtime

New frontiers for Biosocial Birth Cohort Research: interdisciplinary approaches to exposure, harmonisation and collaboration

In this Open Letter we bring together researchers from the Biosocial Birth Cohort Research (BBCR) network to reflect on interdisciplinary research and methods within birth cohorts and to draw attention to social science approaches to this field, which we argue are underutilized. A more comprehensive and consistent integration of social science approaches would expand the scope and value of research with birth cohorts. We critically engage three specific areas of birth cohort research that provide significant opportunities for exchange across disciplines; how exposure is defined and measured in birth cohorts, the harmonisation of data within and between birth cohorts and the broader experience of interdisciplinary collaboration in birth cohorts and birth cohort research. By reflecting on these three areas, we highlight the need for more in-depth dialogue between life and social sciences in the design of birth cohorts, the measures that are used, and the research made possible. We argue that improving the methodological tools for measuring social and biological exposures, incorporating the complexity of participant experience, and ensuring that longitudinal studies are recognised by a wider range of disciplines are essential for collaborative biosocial research with the goal of mitigating health disparities in global and public health

Prima facie reasons to question enclosed intellectual property regimes and favor open-source regimes for germplasm

In principle, intellectual property protections (IPPs) promote and protect important but costly investment in research and development. However, the empirical reality of IPPs has often gone without critical evaluation, and the potential of alternative approaches to lend equal or greater support for useful innovation is rarely considered. In this paper, we review the mounting evidence that the global intellectual property regime (IPR) for germplasm has been neither necessary nor sufficient to generate socially beneficial improvements in crop plants and maintain agrobiodiversity. Instead, based on our analysis, the dominant global IPR appears to have contributed to consolidation in the seed industry while failing to genuinely engage with the potential of alternatives to support social goods such as food security, adaptability, and resilience. The dominant IPR also constrains collaborative and cumulative plant breeding processes that are built upon the work of countless farmers past and present. Given the likely limits of current IPR, we propose that social goods in agriculture may be better supported by alternative approaches, warranting a rapid move away from the dominant single-dimensional focus on encouraging innovation through ensuring monopoly profits to IPP holders