Lure Hotel

Media theorist Aaron Koblin stated that, 19th century culture was defined by the novel, the 20th century culture by cinema, and the culture of the 21st century will be defined by the interface. This idea of interaction through a new interface became the driving force behind the Lure Hotel

Lure Hotel

Media theorist Aaron Koblin stated that, "19th century culture was defined by the novel, the 20th century culture by cinema, and the culture of the 21st century will be defined by the interface." This idea of interaction through a new interface became the driving force behind the Lure Hotel.</p

Description of trihalomethane levels in three UK water suppliers

Samples of drinking water are routinely analysed for four trihalomethanes (THMs), which are indicators of by-products of disinfection with chlorine, by UK water suppliers to demonstrate compliance with regulations. The THM data for 1992–1993 to 1997–1998 for three water suppliers in the north and midlands of England were made available for a UK epidemiological study of the association between disinfection by-products and adverse birth outcomes. This paper describes the THM levels in these three supply regions and discusses possible sources of variation. THM levels varied between different suppliers' water, and average THM levels were within the regulatory limits. Chloroform was the predominant THM in all water types apart from the ground water of one supplier. The supplier that distributed more ground and lowland surface water had higher dibromochloromethane (DBCM) and bromoform levels and lower chloroform levels than the other two suppliers. In the water of two suppliers, seasonal fluctuations in bromodichloromethane (BDCM) and DBCM levels were found with levels peaking in the summer and autumn. In the other water supplier, chloroform levels followed a similar seasonal trend whereas BDCM and DBCM levels did not. For all three water suppliers, chloroform levels declined throughout 1995 when there was a drought period. There was a moderate positive correlation between the THMs most similar in their structure (chloroform and BDCM, BDCM and DBCM, and DBCM and bromoform) and a slight negative correlation between chloroform and bromoform levels

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing

International audienceAbstract The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer’s ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the principle that the randomized trials and large registry data should guide programming more than anecdotal evidence. These recommendations should not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient’s clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing

International audienceAbstract The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer’s ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the principle that the randomized trials and large registry data should guide programming more than anecdotal evidence. These recommendations should not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient’s clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Survival after Breast Cancer Diagnosis by Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Status: A Pooled Analysis

BackgroundLimited studies have investigated racial/ethnic survival disparities for breast cancer defined by estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status in a multiethnic population.MethodsUsing multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, we assessed associations of race/ethnicity with ER/PR-specific breast cancer mortality in 10,366 California women diagnosed with breast cancer from 1993 to 2009. We evaluated joint associations of race/ethnicity, health care, sociodemographic, and lifestyle factors with mortality.ResultsAmong women with ER/PR+ breast cancer, breast cancer-specific mortality was similar among Hispanic and Asian American women, but higher among African American women [HR, 1.31; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.05-1.63] compared with non-Hispanic White (NHW) women. Breast cancer-specific mortality was modified by surgery type, hospital type, education, neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES), smoking history, and alcohol consumption. Among African American women, breast cancer-specific mortality was higher among those treated at nonaccredited hospitals (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.21-2.04) and those from lower SES neighborhoods (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.16-1.88) compared with NHW women without these characteristics. Breast cancer-specific mortality was higher among African American women with at least some college education (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11-1.82) compared with NHW women with similar education. For ER-/PR- disease, breast cancer-specific mortality did not differ by race/ethnicity and associations of race/ethnicity with breast cancer-specific mortality varied only by neighborhood SES among African American women.ConclusionsRacial/ethnic survival disparities are more striking for ER/PR+ than ER-/PR- breast cancer. Social determinants and lifestyle factors may explain some of the survival disparities for ER/PR+ breast cancer.ImpactAddressing these factors may help reduce the higher mortality of African American women with ER/PR+ breast cancer