A fluoroplanigraphy system for rapid presentation of single plane body sections

Fluoroplanigraphic system for rapid presentation of single plane body sections with reduced X ray exposure to patient

Multiplane 3D superresolution optical fluctuation imaging

By switching fluorophores on and off in either a deterministic or a stochastic manner, superresolution microscopy has enabled the imaging of biological structures at resolutions well beyond the diffraction limit. Superresolution optical fluctuation imaging (SOFI) provides an elegant way of overcoming the diffraction limit in all three spatial dimensions by computing higher-order cumulants of image sequences of blinking fluorophores acquired with a conventional widefield microscope. So far, three-dimensional (3D) SOFI has only been demonstrated by sequential imaging of multiple depth positions. Here we introduce a versatile imaging scheme which allows for the simultaneous acquisition of multiple focal planes. Using 3D cross-cumulants, we show that the depth sampling can be increased. Consequently, the simultaneous acquisition of multiple focal planes reduces the acquisition time and hence the photo-bleaching of fluorescent markers. We demonstrate multiplane 3D SOFI by imaging the mitochondria network in fixed C2C12 cells over a total volume of $65\times65\times3.5 \mu\textrm{m}^3$ without depth scanning.Comment: 7 pages, 3 figure

The European Pasteurization of French Law

In a series of stunning decisions handed down in the last few years, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has condemned the decisionmaking procedures traditionally used by the French Supreme Courts (i.e., the Cour de cassation and the Conseil d\u27Etat). This Article traces and critiques this developing “fair trial” jurisprudence, which has also resulted in the condemnation of the supreme courts of Belgium, Portugal, and the Netherlands, whose decisionmaking procedures were all patterned on the French civil law model. Finally, the Article examines the dramatic and schismatic French responses that have ensued. This Article offers a case study at the intersection of European law, comparative law and judicial theory. It begins by describing—and distinguishing between—the interpretive practices and judicial theories that characterize the legal systems of France, the United States, and the European Union. It then analyzes the complex, multifaceted, and ongoing negotiation between these systems\u27 divergent understandings of proper judicial practice. Professor Lasser concludes that the largely misguided interchange between the French supreme courts and the ECHR may well have resulted in pasteurizing the French civil law procedural model into bland nonexistence. The traditionally republican and institutional modes of French judicial decisionmaking have been forced to take on some of the more democratic and argumentative features that characterize ECHR and, especially, American judicial decisionmaking. Unfortunately, these reforms may grant a new argumentative prominence—and thus normative dominance—to the French judiciary (precisely what the traditional French system was designed to avoid), without, however, counterbalancing this new judicial power with sufficiently effective individual, public, and argumentative judicial accountability. Whether these reforms mark the beginning of the end or the beginning of a creative new beginning of the French civil law model of judicial decisionmaking remains to be determined

Lit. Theory Put to the Test: A Comparative Literary Analysis of American Judicial Tests and French Judicial Discourse

The formalism/policy dichotomy has structured American jurisprudential analyses of judicial decisionmaking for most of the twentieth century. In this Article, Professor Lasser analyzes and compares American multi-part judicial tests and French civil judicial discourse to demonstrate that the dichotomy reflects and informs the ways in which judicial decisions are written. Drawing on the works of Roman Jakobson, Roland Barthes, and Paul de Man, he constructs a literary methodology to analyze American and French judicial discourse. Professor Lasser contends that the formalism/policy dichotomy is part of a larger process by which the American and French judicial systems justify how they produce judicial decisions. He argues that both American and French judicial decisions construct and use the dichotomy in order to make similar ontological claims about the nature of adjudication—namely, that adjudication is both inherently stable and socially responsive

The costs and benefits of a vaccination programme for Haemophilus influenzae type 8 disease

Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) infection is a major cause of severe bacterial infection in young children in South Africa and world-wide. These diseases can be prevented by immunisation with conjugate Hib vaccines. In South Africa, unlike some developed countries, Hib vaccines are not part of the routine immunisation schedule. The objective of this study was to measure the expected net benefits from a hypothetical programme of vaccination of the 1992 Cape Town birth cohort (N =46 537). Costs were calculated by summing the estimated direct medical care costs together with the indirect costs of Hib disease. The latter were calculated by valuing human life using alternative, and conservative human capital and willingness-to-pay measures. The difference between Hib disease costs (Le. the benefits which would be gained from a successful vaccination programme) and the costs of the vaccination programme itself (HibTITER, Praxis Biologicals) defined the expected net benefits. In the absence of an immunisation programme, the estimated economic costs of Hib disease in the 1992 Cape Town cohort ranged from R10,7 million to R11 ,8 million. The costs of introducing the vaccine would have amounted to R8,3 million. Had the vaccine been administered to the 1992 birth cohort, benefits would have exceeded costs by between R2,4 million and R3,5 million