16 research outputs found

    Why liberal state funding of denominational schools cannot be unconditional: a reply to Neil Burtonwood

    No full text
    Contains fulltext : 54531.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)In this article we take up Burtonwood's criticism of our view that liberal states should, under certain conditions, fund denominational schools. We not only reject his plea for the accommodation of strong faith schools by liberalism but also criticise his portrayal of the character of the conflict between liberals and strong faith school advocates. Arguing that liberalism is not part of the diversity of goods, we maintain that liberals and strong faith school advocates should not be seen as competing on the same playing field. Rather, liberalism transcends the battleground both by enabling and conditioning the competition between adherents of rival conceptions of the good

    Conclusions

    No full text

    Microbiome Analysis of More Than 2,000 NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Samples Shows the Potential to Improve Screening Accuracy

    No full text
    Purpose: There is potential for fecal microbiome profiling to improve colorectal cancer screening. This has been demonstrated by research studies, but it has not been quantified at scale using samples collected and processed routinely by a national screening program. Experimental Design: Between 2016 and 2019, the largest of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme hubs prospectively collected processed guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) samples with subsequent colonoscopy outcomes: blood-negative [n = 491 (22%)]; colorectal cancer [n = 430 (19%)]; adenoma [n = 665 (30%)]; colonoscopy-normal [n = 300 (13%)]; nonneoplastic [n = 366 (16%)]. Samples were transported and stored at room temperature. DNA underwent 16S rRNA gene V4 amplicon sequencing. Taxonomic profiling was performed to provide features for classification via random forests (RF). Results: Samples provided 16S amplicon-based microbial profiles, which confirmed previously described colorectal cancer–microbiome associations. Microbiome-based RF models showed potential as a first-tier screen, distinguishing colorectal cancer or neoplasm (colorectal cancer or adenoma) from blood-negative with AUC 0.86 (0.82–0.89) and AUC 0.78 (0.74–0.82), respectively. Microbiome-based models also showed potential as a second-tier screen, distinguishing from among gFOBT blood-positive samples, colorectal cancer or neoplasm from colonoscopy-normal with AUC 0.79 (0.74–0.83) and AUC 0.73 (0.68–0.77), respectively. Models remained robust when restricted to 15 taxa, and performed similarly during external validation with metagenomic datasets. Conclusions: Microbiome features can be assessed using gFOBT samples collected and processed routinely by a national colorectal cancer screening program to improve accuracy as a first- or second-tier screen. The models required as few as 15 taxa, raising the potential of an inexpensive qPCR test. This could reduce the number of colonoscopies in countries that use fecal occult blood test screening
    corecore