The politics and aesthetics of commemoration: national days in southern Africa

The contributions to the special section in this issue study recent independence celebrations and other national days in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Madagascar and the Democratic Republic of Congo. They explore the role of national days in state-making and nation-building, and examine the performativity of nationalism and the role of performances in national festivities. Placing the case studies in a broader, comparative perspective, the introduction first discusses the role of the state in national celebrations, highlighting three themes: firstly, the political power-play and contested politics of memory involved in the creation of a country’s festive calendar; secondly, the relationship between state control of national days and civic or popular participation or contestation; and thirdly, the complex relationship between regional and ethnic loyalties and national identifications. It then turns to the role of performance and aesthetics in the making of nations in general, and in national celebrations in particular. Finally, we look at the different formats and meanings of national days in the region and address the question whether there is anything specific about national days in southern Africa as compared to other parts of the continent or national celebrations world-wide.Web of Scienc

Estimating the current and future cancer burden in Canada: Methodological framework of the Canadian population attributable risk of cancer (ComPARe) study

Introduction The Canadian Population Attributable Risk of Cancer project aims to quantify the number and proportion of cancer cases incident in Canada, now and projected to 2042, that could be prevented through changes in the prevalence of modifiable exposures associated with cancer. The broad risk factor categories of interest include tobacco, diet, energy imbalance, infectious diseases, hormonal therapies and environmental factors such as air pollution and res

Immunoglobulin, glucocorticoid, or combination therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a propensity-weighted cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. METHODS: The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. FINDINGS: We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2-11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75-1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58-1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91-1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70-1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11-0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50-0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38-0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45-0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. FUNDING: Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health

Teaching reading skills in a foreign language

xiii, 235 p. : il.; 24 cm

Teaching reading skills in a foreign language

vi, 282 p. : ill. ; 24 cm

Feline allergic diseases: introduction and proposed nomenclature

BACKGROUND: Feline allergic diseases present as challenging problems for clinicians, not least because of the number of reaction patterns of the feline skin, none of which are specific for allergy. Furthermore, there is some controversy over the nomenclature that should be used in their description. OBJECTIVES: To review the literature, assess the status of knowledge of the topic and the extent to which these diseases could be categorized as atopic in nature, and make recommendations concerning nomenclature. METHODS: Atopic diseases in humans and cats were researched. A comparison then was made of the essential features in the two species. RESULTS: There were sufficient similarities between human atopic diseases and the manifestations of feline diseases of presumed allergic aetiology to justify the use of atopic to describe some of the feline conditions affecting the skin, respiratory and gastrointestinal tract. However, none of the allergic skin diseases showed features consistent with atopic dermatitis as described in man and the dog. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The term Feline Atopic Syndrome (FAS) is proposed to encompass allergic diseases of the skin, gastrointestinal tract and respiratory tract, and Feline atopic skin syndrome (FASS) proposed to describe allergic skin disease associated with environmental allergies. We are not aware of any adverse food reactions in cats that are attributable to causes other than immunological reactions against the food itself. We therefore propose an aetiological definition of Food Allergy (FA) to describe such cases