Galactic emission at 19 GHz

We cross-correlate a 19 GHz full sky Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) survey with other maps to quantify the foreground contribution. Correlations are detected with the Diffuse Infrared Background Experiment (DIRBE) 240, 140 and 100 micron maps at high latitudes (|b|>30degrees), and marginal correlations are detected with the Haslam 408 MHz and the Reich & Reich 1420 MHz synchrotron maps. The former agree well with extrapolations from higher frequencies probed by the COBE DMR and Saskatoon experiments and are consistent with both free-free and rotating dust grain emission.Comment: 4 pages, with 4 figures included. Accepted for publication in ApJL. Color figure and links at http://www.sns.ias.edu/~angelica/foreground.html#19 or from [email protected]

Proof of concept of a method that assesses the spread of microbial infections with spatially explicit and non-spatially explicit data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A method that assesses bacterial spatial dissemination was explored. It measures microbial genotypes (defined by electrophoretic patterns or EP), host, location (farm), interfarm Euclidean distance, and time. Its proof of concept (construct and internal validity) was evaluated using a dataset that included 113 <it>Staphylococcus aureus </it>EPs from 1126 bovine milk isolates collected on 23 farms between 1988 and 2005.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Construct validity was assessed by comparing results based on the interfarm Euclidean distance (a spatially explicit measure) and those produced by the (non-spatial) interfarm number of isolates reporting the same EP. The distance associated with EP spread correlated with the interfarm number of isolates/EP (<it>r </it>= .59, <it>P </it>< 0.02). Internal validity was estimated by comparing results obtained with different versions of the same indices. Concordance was observed between: (a) EP distance (estimated microbial dispersal over space) and EP speed (distance/year, <it>r </it>= .72, <it>P </it>< 0.01), and (b) the interfarm number of isolates/EP (when measured on the basis of non-repeated cow testing) and the same measure as expressed by repeated testing of the same animals (<it>r </it>= .87, <it>P </it>< 0.01). Three EPs (2.6% of all EPs) appeared to be super-spreaders: they were found in 26.75% of all isolates. Various indices differentiated local from spatially disseminated infections and, within the local type, infections suspected to be farm-related were distinguished from cow-related ones.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Findings supported both construct and internal validity. Because 3 EPs explained 12 times more isolates than expected and at least twice as many isolates as other EPs did, false negative results associated with the remaining EPs (those erroneously identified as lacking spatial dispersal when, in fact, they disseminated spatially), if they occurred, seemed to have negligible effects. Spatial analysis of laboratory data may support disease surveillance systems by generating hypotheses on microbial dispersal ability.</p

Tribute to Professor Samuel W. Calhoun

A tribute to Professor Samuel W. Calhoun, who served on the faculty of the Washington and Lee University School of Law from 1978 to 2020. Calhoun became Professor of Law, Emeritus in 2020

Health Diplomacy the Adaptation of Global Health Interventions to Local Needs in sub-Saharan Africa and Thailand: Evaluating Findings from Project Accept (HPTN 043).

Study-based global health interventions, especially those that are conducted on an international or multi-site basis, frequently require site-specific adaptations in order to (1) respond to socio-cultural differences in risk determinants, (2) to make interventions more relevant to target population needs, and (3) in recognition of 'global health diplomacy' issues. We report on the adaptations development, approval and implementation process from the Project Accept voluntary counseling and testing, community mobilization and post-test support services intervention. We reviewed all relevant documentation collected during the study intervention period (e.g. monthly progress reports; bi-annual steering committee presentations) and conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with project directors and between 12 and 23 field staff at each study site in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Thailand and Tanzania during 2009. Respondents were asked to describe (1) the adaptations development and approval process and (2) the most successful site-specific adaptations from the perspective of facilitating intervention implementation. Across sites, proposed adaptations were identified by field staff and submitted to project directors for review on a formally planned basis. The cross-site intervention sub-committee then ensured fidelity to the study protocol before approval. Successfully-implemented adaptations included: intervention delivery adaptations (e.g. development of tailored counseling messages for immigrant labour groups in South Africa) political, environmental and infrastructural adaptations (e.g. use of local community centers as VCT venues in Zimbabwe); religious adaptations (e.g. dividing clients by gender in Muslim areas of Tanzania); economic adaptations (e.g. co-provision of income generating skills classes in Zimbabwe); epidemiological adaptations (e.g. provision of 'youth-friendly' services in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Tanzania), and social adaptations (e.g. modification of terminology to local dialects in Thailand: and adjustment of service delivery schedules to suit seasonal and daily work schedules across sites). Adaptation selection, development and approval during multi-site global health research studies should be a planned process that maintains fidelity to the study protocol. The successful implementation of appropriate site-specific adaptations may have important implications for intervention implementation, from both a service uptake and a global health diplomacy perspective