The ABCs and NTBs of GMOs: The Great European Union-United States Trade Debate - Do European Restrictions on the Trade of Genetically Modified Organisms Violate Internaitonal Trade Law

The genetic engineering of agriculture has spurred a lively worldwide discussion, and the technology has found both enthusiastic fans and formidable foes. Specifically, the United States has signed on as a proponent of the genetic modification of agriculture. In fact, the United States has become the largest producer of genetically modified organisms ( GMOs ) and is consequently the leading exporter of genetically modified goods. On the other side of this debate lies the European Community ( EC ). The European Community is much less enthusiastic about GMOs and effectively questions their presence in our environment and food products. The European Community has focused on the risks that GMOs potentially pose to environmental and human health, and accordingly, have regulated GMO trade. These markedly different positions have created strained trade relations between the United States and the European Community. The European Community believes that, in light of the scientific uncertainty and consumer mistrust surrounding GMOs, it is of utmost necessity to regulate GM goods in order to protect and preserve consumer and environmental health. The United States points out that the risks posed by GMOs are only potential, and that the prospective benefits of GM agriculture may be too great to sacrifice to precautionary measures. It appears, then, that the United States believes the European Community\u27s GMO regulation scheme to be simply thinly veiled protectionism in violation of international trade law, which ultimately reigns supreme over Community law. Consequently, the United States has looked to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade ( GATT ) and its accompanying Agreements, the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures ( SPS ) and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade ( TBT ), to end the European Community\u27s restriction on GMO trade and to demonstrate that Europe\u27s protectionist measures amount to illegal Non-Trade Barriers ( NTBs ) according to the current international trade regime

The ABCs and NTBs of GMOs: The Great European Union-United States Trade Debate - Do European Restrictions on the Trade of Genetically Modified Organisms Violate Internaitonal Trade Law

The genetic engineering of agriculture has spurred a lively worldwide discussion, and the technology has found both enthusiastic fans and formidable foes. Specifically, the United States has signed on as a proponent of the genetic modification of agriculture. In fact, the United States has become the largest producer of genetically modified organisms ( GMOs ) and is consequently the leading exporter of genetically modified goods. On the other side of this debate lies the European Community ( EC ). The European Community is much less enthusiastic about GMOs and effectively questions their presence in our environment and food products. The European Community has focused on the risks that GMOs potentially pose to environmental and human health, and accordingly, have regulated GMO trade. These markedly different positions have created strained trade relations between the United States and the European Community. The European Community believes that, in light of the scientific uncertainty and consumer mistrust surrounding GMOs, it is of utmost necessity to regulate GM goods in order to protect and preserve consumer and environmental health. The United States points out that the risks posed by GMOs are only potential, and that the prospective benefits of GM agriculture may be too great to sacrifice to precautionary measures. It appears, then, that the United States believes the European Community\u27s GMO regulation scheme to be simply thinly veiled protectionism in violation of international trade law, which ultimately reigns supreme over Community law. Consequently, the United States has looked to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade ( GATT ) and its accompanying Agreements, the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures ( SPS ) and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade ( TBT ), to end the European Community\u27s restriction on GMO trade and to demonstrate that Europe\u27s protectionist measures amount to illegal Non-Trade Barriers ( NTBs ) according to the current international trade regime

Burdens of Persuasion in Civil Cases: Algorithms v. Explanations

The conjunction paradox has fascinated generations of scholars, primarily because it brings into focus the apparent incompatibility of equally well accepted conventions. On the one hand, trials should be structured to reduce the total number, or optimize the allocation, of errors. On the other hand, burdens of persuasion are allocated to elements by the standard jury instruction rather than to a case as a whole. Because an error in finding to be true any element of the plaintiff\u27s cause of action will result in an error if liability is found, errors on the overall case accumulate with errors on discrete issues. This, in turn, means that errors will neither be minimized nor optimized (except possibly randomly). Thus, the conventional view concerning the purpose of trial is inconsistent with the conventional view concerning the allocation of burdens of persuasion. Two recent efforts to resolve this conflict are examined in this article. Dean Saul Levmore has argued that the paradox is eliminated or reduced considerably because of either the implications of the Condorcet Jury Theorem or the implications of super majority voting rules. Professor Alex Stein has constructed a micro-economic explanation of negligence that is also offered as resolving the paradox. Neither succeed, and both fail for analogous reasons. First, each makes a series of ad hoc adjustments to the supposedly formal arguments that are out of place in formal reasoning. The result is that neither argument is, in fact, formal; both arguments thus implicitly reject the very formalisms they are supposedly employing in their explanations. Second, both articles mismodel the system of litigation they are trying to explain in an effort to close the gap between their supposedly formal models and the reality of the legal system; and when necessary corrections are made to their respective models of litigation, neither formal argument maps onto the reality of trials, leaving the original problem untouched and unexplained. These two efforts are thus very much similar to the failed effort to give a Bayesian explanation to trials and juridical proof, which similarly failed due to the inability to align the formal requirements of subjective Bayesianism with the reality of modern trials. We also explore the reasons for this consistent misuse of formal arguments in the evidentiary context. Rationality requires, at a minimum, sensitivity to the intellectual tools brought to a task, of which algorithmic theoretical accounts are only one of many. Another, somewhat neglected in legal scholarship, is substantive explanations of legal questions that take into account the surrounding legal landscape. As we show, although the theoretical efforts to domesticate the conjunction paradox fail, a substantive explanation of it can be given that demonstrates the small likelihood of perverse consequences flowing from it. The article thus adds to the growing literature concerning the nature of legal theorizing by demonstrating yet another area where legal theorizing in one of its modern conventional manifestations (involving the search for the algorithmic argument that purportedly explains or justifies an area of law) has been ineffectual, whereas explanations that are informed by the substantive contours of the relevant legal field have considerable promise

Computer-Generated and Traditional Language Sample Analysis

Graduate Symposium 2013 Poster by Sarah Lively for the Department of Communication Sciences and DisordersLanguage sample analysis is imperative for language assessment in young children. Computer technology, Language Environmental Analysis System (LENATM), collects language samples and employs Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) to automatically generate language assessment. Data were gathered from 26 families with children aged 24 to 48 months old. A small correlation effect was present, but more research is necessary for validation.Jade Costo

Unethical Business and Fair Trade

The goal of this presentation is to educate others about the impact of America’s businesses on the global community. We will do this by first discussing the history of foreign trade in America, highlighting the exploitative characteristics our international business has for decades. From here, we will move into five specific industries that consume American life and the ways they violate social, environmental, and economic justice worldwide. These three industries include: the fashion industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the oil industry, and the food industry. We will end our presentation by challenging our audience to think about the spirit of consumerism that exists in America, and the ways in which this affects their buying. With this, we will offer examples of businesses that create products ethically and encourage our listeners to become more aware and conscientious of the products and businesses they support

CROS or Hearing Aid? Selecting the Ideal Solution for Unilateral CI Patients with Limited Aidable Hearing in the Contralateral Ear

A hearing aid or a contralateral routing of signal device are options for unilateral cochlear implant listeners with limited hearing in the unimplanted ear; however, it is uncertain which device provides greater benefit beyond unilateral listening alone. Eighteen unilateral cochlear implant listeners participated in this prospective, within-participants, repeated measures study. Participants were tested with the cochlear implant alone, cochlear implant + hearing aid, and cochlear implant + contralateral routing of signal device configurations with a one-month take-home period between each in-person visit. Audiograms, speech perception in noise, and lateralization were evaluated. Subjective feedback was obtained via questionnaires. Marked improvement in speech in noise and non-implanted ear lateralization accuracy were observed with the addition of a contralateral hearing aid. There were no significant differences in speech recognition between listening configurations. However, the chronic device use questionnaires and the final device selection showed a clear preference for the hearing aid in spatial awareness and communication domains. Individuals with limited hearing in their unimplanted ears demonstrate significant improvement with the addition of a contralateral device. Subjective questionnaires somewhat contrast with clinic-based outcome measures, highlighting the delicate decision-making process involved in clinically advising one device or another to maximize communication benefits

Molecular and cellular responses to interleukin-4 treatment in a rat model of transient ischemia

Within hours after stroke, potentially cytotoxic pro-inflammatory mediators are elevated within the brain; thus, one potential therapeutic strategy is to reduce them and skew the brain toward an anti-inflammatory state. Because interleukin-4 (IL-4) treatment induces an anti-inflammatory, "alternative-activation" state in microglia and macrophages in vitro, we tested the hypothesis that early supplementation of the brain with IL-4 can shift it toward an anti-inflammatory state and reduce damage after transient focal ischemia. Adult male rat striata were injected with endothelin-1, with or without co-injection of IL-4. Inflammation, glial responses and damage to neurons and white matter were quantified from 1 to 7 days later. At 1 day, IL-4 treatment increased striatal expression of several anti-inflammatory markers (ARG1, CCL22, CD163, PPAR gamma), increased phagocytic (Iba1-positive, CD68-positive) microglia/macrophages, and increased VEGF-A-positive infiltrating neutrophils in the infarcts. At 7 days, there was evidence of sustained, propagating responses. IL-4 increased CD206, CD200R1, IL-4R alpha, STAT6, PPARc, CD11b, and TLR2 expression and increased microglia/macrophages in the infarct and astrogliosis outside the infarct. Neurodegeneration and myelin damage were not reduced, however. The sustained immune and glial responses when resolution and repair processes have begun warrant further studies of IL-4 treatment regimens and long-term outcomes

Molecular and cellular responses to interleukin-4 treatment in a rat model of transient ischemia

Within hours after stroke, potentially cytotoxic pro-inflammatory mediators are elevated within the brain; thus, one potential therapeutic strategy is to reduce them and skew the brain toward an anti-inflammatory state. Because interleukin-4 (IL-4) treatment induces an anti-inflammatory, "alternative-activation" state in microglia and macrophages in vitro, we tested the hypothesis that early supplementation of the brain with IL-4 can shift it toward an anti-inflammatory state and reduce damage after transient focal ischemia. Adult male rat striata were injected with endothelin-1, with or without co-injection of IL-4. Inflammation, glial responses and damage to neurons and white matter were quantified from 1 to 7 days later. At 1 day, IL-4 treatment increased striatal expression of several anti-inflammatory markers (ARG1, CCL22, CD163, PPAR gamma), increased phagocytic (Iba1-positive, CD68-positive) microglia/macrophages, and increased VEGF-A-positive infiltrating neutrophils in the infarcts. At 7 days, there was evidence of sustained, propagating responses. IL-4 increased CD206, CD200R1, IL-4R alpha, STAT6, PPARc, CD11b, and TLR2 expression and increased microglia/macrophages in the infarct and astrogliosis outside the infarct. Neurodegeneration and myelin damage were not reduced, however. The sustained immune and glial responses when resolution and repair processes have begun warrant further studies of IL-4 treatment regimens and long-term outcomes

Molecular and cellular responses to interleukin-4 treatment in a rat model of transient ischemia

Within hours after stroke, potentially cytotoxic pro-inflammatory mediators are elevated within the brain; thus, one potential therapeutic strategy is to reduce them and skew the brain toward an anti-inflammatory state. Because interleukin-4 (IL-4) treatment induces an anti-inflammatory, "alternative-activation" state in microglia and macrophages in vitro, we tested the hypothesis that early supplementation of the brain with IL-4 can shift it toward an anti-inflammatory state and reduce damage after transient focal ischemia. Adult male rat striata were injected with endothelin-1, with or without co-injection of IL-4. Inflammation, glial responses and damage to neurons and white matter were quantified from 1 to 7 days later. At 1 day, IL-4 treatment increased striatal expression of several anti-inflammatory markers (ARG1, CCL22, CD163, PPAR gamma), increased phagocytic (Iba1-positive, CD68-positive) microglia/macrophages, and increased VEGF-A-positive infiltrating neutrophils in the infarcts. At 7 days, there was evidence of sustained, propagating responses. IL-4 increased CD206, CD200R1, IL-4R alpha, STAT6, PPARc, CD11b, and TLR2 expression and increased microglia/macrophages in the infarct and astrogliosis outside the infarct. Neurodegeneration and myelin damage were not reduced, however. The sustained immune and glial responses when resolution and repair processes have begun warrant further studies of IL-4 treatment regimens and long-term outcomes