Reframing NCDs? An analysis of current debates

There have been many debates in recent years as to whether the communicable disease versus non-communicable disease (NCD) division is a meaningful one in disease classification. Several critiques have been raised about the framing of NCDs, regarding not only the prominent role that infections play in the aetiology of NCDs, but also the communicability of many social determinants of NCDs and the individualistic, ‘lifestyle’ framing of NCDs that tends to focus on health behaviours to the neglect of socio-political, environmental, and structural determinants of health. In this paper, we give a historical overview of the usage of the NCD terminology and analyse some of the recent debates regarding the naming and framing of NCDs. We argue that a lack of reflection on the assumptions underlying the naming and framing of NCDs may lead to the collection of insufficient epidemiological data, the development of inappropriate interventions and the provision of inadequate care. Work in social epidemiology, health promotion, medical anthropology, demography, and other fields may provide insights into the ways in which efforts targeting NCDs may be reframed to improve impact and efficacy. In addition, concepts such as multimorbidity and syndemics, frameworks such as ecosocial theory and approaches based in the social sciences may provide a way forward in the conceptualization of disease

DNA uracil repair initiated by the archaeal ExoIII homologue Mth212 via direct strand incision

No genes for any of the known uracil DNA glycosylases of the UDG superfamily are present in the genome of Methanothermobacter thermautotrophicus ΔH, making it difficult to imagine how DNA-U repair might be initiated in this organism. Recently, Mth212, the ExoIII homologue of M. thermautotrophicus ΔH has been characterized as a DNA uridine endonuclease, which suggested the possibility of a novel endonucleolytic entry mechanism for DNA uracil repair. With no system of genetic experimentation available, the problem was approached biochemically. Assays of DNA uracil repair in vitro, promoted by crude cellular extracts, provide unequivocal confirmation that this mechanism does indeed operate in M. thermautotrophicus ΔH

DNA uracil repair initiated by the archaeal ExoIII homologue Mth212 via direct strand incision

No genes for any of the known uracil DNA glycosylases of the UDG superfamily are present in the genome of Methanothermobacter thermautotrophicus ΔH, making it difficult to imagine how DNA-U repair might be initiated in this organism. Recently, Mth212, the ExoIII homologue of M. thermautotrophicus ΔH has been characterized as a DNA uridine endonuclease, which suggested the possibility of a novel endonucleolytic entry mechanism for DNA uracil repair. With no system of genetic experimentation available, the problem was approached biochemically. Assays of DNA uracil repair in vitro, promoted by crude cellular extracts, provide unequivocal confirmation that this mechanism does indeed operate in M. thermautotrophicus ΔH