Cultural and heritage tourism in Singapore : a learning experience for an island city state

Tourism has developed into an important economic sector for many small islands and island states. In the main, sun, sea and sand have constituted the core bases for tourism growth, especially for islands located in the tropics. In contrast, cultural tourism in island tourism has fewer examples and has been more successful on larger islands, e.g. Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Cyprus, Sri Lanka and Bali (Conlin and Baum, 1995; Butler, Harrison and Filho, 1996; Hoyle and Biagini. 1999).peer-reviewe

Introduction: Rethinking tourism in Asia

It is not often that an academic book is inspired by a pair of Speedos. Here is one. As countless postcards, travel shows and holiday brochures tell us, our ideal beach is tropical, sandy and washed over by clear, warm, turquoise-colored waters. Indeed, the scene of ‘paradise on earth’ is deserted, apart from the romantic couple walking arm in arm towards the sunset or the beautiful bikini-clad woman lying on the water’s edge soaking up the sun. Reclining alone, she seduces the viewer through passivity and possibility. She tells us the beach is a space of youthfulness, sexuality, independence, and time spent away from the chaos of everyday life. Crucial to this message is the all-over, carefully cultivated suntan. It is here we need to look closer, as it is in the suntan that we see the beach is not the space of brown skin, but the browning of skin, or, to be more exact, the browning of white skin. As a marker of sexuality, health and youthful vigor, the suntan is the desired coloring of pale, white skin. And so as the swimwear exposes this skin to the sun, it also reveals a series of broader, underlying values. Today’s postcards, brochures, websites and television programs not only carefully define where in the world the ideal beach is to be found, but also who are its actors, or imagined consumers. Tracing the genealogy of these images, and the ideals they convey, quickly reveals their European and North American roots. At the beginning of the twentieth century, social commentators on both continents would express shock and contempt for an emerging trend of exposed, tanned bodies. In the wake of World War I, however, much had changed as seaside resorts in California and Southern Europe established themselves as extremely popular places dedicated to the pursuit of leisure and fun. Recent years have seen a number of books trace this evolution of the beach as a space of leisure and recreation (Len-ek and Bosker 1998; Urbain 2003; Gray 2006). While their titles and introductions promise the definitive story, their accounts focus on beaches in California, the Mediterranean or the north of England. No mention is given to the cultural histories of beaches in Africa, the Middle East or Asia

Singapore and the Experience of Place in Old Age

Geographical Review864529-54

Population-Attributable Fractions of Modifiable Lifestyle Factors for CKD and Mortality in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes: A Cohort Study

BackgroundWe quantified the impact of lifestyle and dietary modifications on chronic kidney disease (CKD) by estimating population-attributable fractions (PAFs).Study DesignObservational cohort study.Setting & ParticipantsMiddle-aged adults with type 2 diabetes but without severe albuminuria from the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination With Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET; n=6,916).FactorsModifiable lifestyle/dietary risk factors, such as physical activity, size of social network, alcohol intake, tobacco use, diet, and intake of various food items.OutcomesThe primary outcome was CKD, ascertained as moderate to severe albuminuria or ≥5% annual decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) after 5.5 years. The competing risk for death was considered. PAF was defined as the proportional reduction in CKD or mortality (within 5.5 years) that would occur if exposure to a risk factor was changed to an optimal level.ResultsAt baseline, median urinary albumin-creatinine ratio and eGFR were 6.6 (IQR, 2.9-25.0) mg/mmol and 71.5 (IQR, 58.1-85.9) mL/min/1.73m2, respectively. After 5.5 years, 704 (32.5%) participants developed albuminuria, 1,194 (55.2%) had a ≥5% annual eGFR decline, 267 (12.3%) had both, and 1,022 (14.8%) had died. Being physically active every day has PAFs of 5.1% (95% CI, 0.5%-9.6%) for CKD and 12.3% (95% CI, 4.9%-19.1%) for death. Among food items, increasing vegetable intake would have the largest impact on population health. Considering diet, weight, physical activity, tobacco use, and size of social network, exposure to less than optimum levels gives PAFs of 13.3% (95% CI, 5.5%-20.9%) for CKD and 37.5% (95% CI, 27.8%-46.7%) for death. For the 17.8 million middle-aged Americans with diabetes, improving 1 of these lifestyle behaviors to the optimal range could reduce the incidence or progression of CKD after 5.5 years by 274,000 and the number of deaths within 5.5 years by 405,000.LimitationsAscertainment of changes in kidney measures does not precisely match the definitions for incidence or progression of CKD.ConclusionsHealthy lifestyle and diet are associated with less CKD and mortality and may have a substantial impact on population kidney health

Safety and Efficacy of Low Blood Pressures Among Patients With Diabetes Subgroup Analyses From the ONTARGET (ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial)

ObjectivesWe sought to determine whether the blood pressure (BP) levels at which cardiovascular (CV) protection is achieved differ between diabetic and nondiabetic patients from the ONTARGET (ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial).BackgroundGreater absolute benefits of BP reductions have been claimed for diabetic as compared with nondiabetic patients.MethodsA total of 25,584 patients (9,603 diabetic), older than 55 years, at high CV risk were randomized to ramipril, telmisartan, or both and observed for 4.6 years. We pooled the treatment arms to examine the relationships between BP and the primary composite outcome (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, or hospitalized heart failure) and its components.ResultsThe primary outcome occurred in 1,938 (20.2%) diabetic patients and in 2,276 (14.2%) nondiabetic patients. Compared with nondiabetic patients, diabetic patients had a significantly higher risk for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38 to 1.57) and CV death (HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.42 to 1.71); myocardial infarction (HR: 1.30 (95% CI: 1.17 to 1.46); stroke (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.23 to 1.56); and congestive heart failure hospitalization (HR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.82 to 2.32). The CV risk was significantly higher in diabetic than in nondiabetic patients regardless of the systolic BP changes during treatment. In both diabetic and nondiabetic patients, progressively greater systolic BP reductions were accompanied by reduced risk for the primary outcome only if baseline systolic BP levels ranged from 143 to 155 mm Hg; except for stroke, there was no benefit in fatal or nonfatal CV outcomes by reducing systolic BP below 130 mm Hg.ConclusionsThe relationship between BP and overall CV risk had a similar pattern in diabetic and nondiabetic patients over a wide range of baseline and in-treatment BP values although, for the same systolic BP, a higher risk is observed in diabetic patients. (Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination With Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial [ONTARGET]; NCT00153101

Common non-synonymous SNPs associated with breast cancer susceptibility: findings from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium.

Candidate variant association studies have been largely unsuccessful in identifying common breast cancer susceptibility variants, although most studies have been underpowered to detect associations of a realistic magnitude. We assessed 41 common non-synonymous single-nucleotide polymorphisms (nsSNPs) for which evidence of association with breast cancer risk had been previously reported. Case-control data were combined from 38 studies of white European women (46 450 cases and 42 600 controls) and analyzed using unconditional logistic regression. Strong evidence of association was observed for three nsSNPs: ATXN7-K264R at 3p21 [rs1053338, per allele OR = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04-1.10, P = 2.9 × 10(-6)], AKAP9-M463I at 7q21 (rs6964587, OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.03-1.07, P = 1.7 × 10(-6)) and NEK10-L513S at 3p24 (rs10510592, OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.07-1.12, P = 5.1 × 10(-17)). The first two associations reached genome-wide statistical significance in a combined analysis of available data, including independent data from nine genome-wide association studies (GWASs): for ATXN7-K264R, OR = 1.07 (95% CI = 1.05-1.10, P = 1.0 × 10(-8)); for AKAP9-M463I, OR = 1.05 (95% CI = 1.04-1.07, P = 2.0 × 10(-10)). Further analysis of other common variants in these two regions suggested that intronic SNPs nearby are more strongly associated with disease risk. We have thus identified a novel susceptibility locus at 3p21, and confirmed previous suggestive evidence that rs6964587 at 7q21 is associated with risk. The third locus, rs10510592, is located in an established breast cancer susceptibility region; the association was substantially attenuated after adjustment for the known GWAS hit. Thus, each of the associated nsSNPs is likely to be a marker for another, non-coding, variant causally related to breast cancer risk. Further fine-mapping and functional studies are required to identify the underlying risk-modifying variants and the genes through which they act.BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A12014) and by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n8 223175 (HEALTH-F2–2009-223175) (COGS). Meetings of the BCAC have been funded by the European Union COST programme (BM0606). Genotyping of the iCOGS array was funded by the European Union (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10710), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the ‘CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer’ program and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade of Quebec (PSR-SIIRI-701). Additional support for the iCOGS infrastructure was provided by the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112—the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The ABCFS and OFBCR work was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (USA). The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement t by the US Government or the BCFR. The ABCFS was also supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales Cancer Council, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia) and the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. J.L.H. is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Senior Principal Research Fellow and M.C.S. is a NHMRC Senior Research Fellow. The OFBCR work was also supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research ‘CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer’ program. The ABCS was funded by the Dutch Cancer Society Grant no. NKI2007-3839 and NKI2009-4363. The ACP study is funded by the Breast Cancer Research Trust, UK. The work of the BBCC was partly funded by ELAN-Programme of the University Hospital of Erlangen. The BBCS is funded by Cancer Research UK and Breakthrough Breast Cancer and acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, and the National Cancer Research Network (NCRN). E.S. is supported by NIHR Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, Guy’s & St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King’s College London, UK. Core funding to the Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics was provided by the Wellcome Trust (090532/Z/09/Z). I.T. is supported by the Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. The BSUCH study was supported by the Dietmar-Hopp Foundation, the Helmholtz Society and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). The CECILE study was funded by the Fondation de France, the French National Institute of Cancer (INCa), The National League against Cancer, the National Agency for Environmental l and Occupational Health and Food Safety (ANSES), the National Agency for Research (ANR), and the Association for Research against Cancer (ARC). The CGPS was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council and Herlev Hospital.The CNIO-BCS was supported by the Genome Spain Foundation the Red Temática de Investigación Cooperativa en Cáncer and grants from the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer and the Fondo de Investigación Sanitario PI11/00923 and PI081120). The Human Genotyping-CEGEN Unit, CNIO is supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III. D.A. was supported by a Fellowship from the Michael Manzella Foundation (MMF) and was a participant in the CNIO Summer Training Program. The CTS was initially supported by the California Breast Cancer Act of 1993 and the California Breast Cancer Research Fund (contract 97-10500) and is currently funded through the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA77398). Collection of cancer incidence e data was supported by the California Department of Public Health as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885. HAC receives support from the Lon V Smith Foundation (LVS39420). The ESTHER study was supported by a grant from the Baden Württemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts. Additional cases were recruited in the context of the VERDI study, which was supported by a grant from the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe). The GENICA was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany grants 01KW9975/5, 01KW9976/8, 01KW9977/0 and 01KW0114, the Robert Bosch Foundation, Stuttgart, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), as well as the Department of Internal Medicine , Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Johanniter Krankenhaus Bonn, Germany. The HEBCS was supported by the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (132473), the Finnish Cancer Society, The Nordic Cancer Union and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. The HERPACC was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Priority Areas from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, Culture and Technology of Japan, by a Grant-in-Aid for the Third Term Comprehensive 10-Year strategy for Cancer Control from Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, by a research grant from Takeda Science Foundation , by Health and Labour Sciences Research Grants for Research on Applying Health Technology from Ministry Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and by National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund. The HMBCS was supported by short-term fellowships from the German Academic Exchange Program (to N.B), and the Friends of Hannover Medical School (to N.B.). Financial support for KARBAC was provided through the regional agreement on medical training and clinical research (ALF) between Stockholm County Council and Karolinska Institutet, the Stockholm Cancer Foundation and the Swedish Cancer Society. The KBCP was financially supported by the special Government Funding (EVO) of Kuopio University Hospital grants, Cancer Fund of North Savo, the Finnish Cancer Organizations, the Academy of Finland and by the strategic funding of the University of Eastern Finland. kConFab is supported by grants from the National Breast Cancer Foundation , the NHMRC, the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. The kConFab Clinical Follow Up Study was funded by the NHMRC (145684, 288704, 454508). Financial support for the AOCS was provided by the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (DAMD17-01-1-0729), the Cancer Council of Tasmania and Cancer Foundation of Western Australia and the NHMRC (199600). G.C.T. and P.W. are supported by the NHMRC. LAABC is supported by grants (1RB-0287, 3PB-0102, 5PB-0018 and 10PB-0098) from the California Breast Cancer Research Program. Incident breast cancer cases were collected by the USC Cancer Surveillance Program (CSP) which is supported under subcontract by the California Department of Health. The CSP is also part of the National Cancer Institute’s Division of Cancer Prevention and Control Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, under contract number N01CN25403. LMBC is supported by the ‘Stichting tegen Kanker’ (232-2008 and 196-2010). The MARIE study was supported by the Deutsche Krebshilfe e.V. (70-2892-BR I), the Federal Ministry of Education Research (BMBF) Germany (01KH0402), the Hamburg Cancer Society and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). MBCSG is supported by grants from the Italian Association ciation for Cancer Research (AIRC) and by funds from the Italian citizens who allocated a 5/1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects ‘5 × 1000’). The MCBCS was supported by the NIH grants (CA122340, CA128978) and a Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation and the Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao Foundation. MCCS cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further supported by Australian NHMRC grants 209057, 251553 and 504711 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. The MEC was supported by NIH grants CA63464, CA54281, CA098758 and CA132839. The work of MTLGEBCS was supported by the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant CRN-87521) and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade (grant PSR-SIIRI-701). MYBRCA is funded by research grants from the Malaysian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation (CARIF). Additional controls were recruited by the Singapore Eye Research Institute, which was supported by a grant from the Biomedical Research Council (BMRC08/1/35/19,tel:08/1/35/19./550), Singapore and the National medical Research Council, Singapore (NMRC/CG/SERI/2010). The NBCS was supported by grants from the Norwegian Research council (155218/V40, 175240/S10 to A.L.B.D., FUGE-NFR 181600/ V11 to V.N.K. and a Swizz Bridge Award to A.L.B.D.). The NBHS was supported by NIH grant R01CA100374. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The OBCS was supported by research grants from the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, the Academy of Finland, the University of Oulu, and the Oulu University Hospital. The ORIGO study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (RUL 1997-1505) and the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI-NLCP16). The PBCS was funded by Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. pKARMA is a combination of the KARMA and LIBRO-1 studies. KARMA was supported by Ma¨rit and Hans Rausings Initiative Against Breast Cancer. KARMA and LIBRO-1 were supported the Cancer Risk Prediction Center (CRisP; www.crispcenter.org), a Linnaeus Centre (Contract ID 70867902) financed by the Swedish Research Council. The RBCS was funded by the Dutch Cancer Society (DDHK 2004-3124, DDHK 2009-4318). SASBAC was supported by funding from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research of Singapore (A∗STAR), the US National Institute of Health (NIH) and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation KC was financed by the Swedish Cancer Society (5128-B07-01PAF). The SBCGS was supported primarily by NIH grants R01CA64277, R01CA148667, and R37CA70867. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The SBCS was supported by Yorkshire Cancer Research S305PA, S299 and S295. Funding for the SCCS was provided by NIH grant R01 CA092447. The Arkansas Central Cancer Registry is fully funded by a grant from National Program of Cancer Registries, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Data on SCCS cancer cases from Mississippi were collected by the Mississippi Cancer Registry which participates in the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the CDC or the Mississippi Cancer Registry. SEARCH is funded by a programme grant from Cancer Research UK (C490/A10124) and supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University of Cambridge. The SEBCS was supported by the BRL (Basic Research Laboratory) program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2012-0000347). SGBCC is funded by the National Medical Research Council Start-up Grant and Centre Grant (NMRC/CG/NCIS /2010). The recruitment of controls by the Singapore Consortium of Cohort Studies-Multi-ethnic cohort (SCCS-MEC) was funded by the Biomedical Research Council (grant number: 05/1/21/19/425). SKKDKFZS is supported by the DKFZ. The SZBCS was supported by Grant PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004. K. J. is a fellow of International PhD program, Postgraduate School of Molecular Medicine, Warsaw Medical University, supported by the Polish Foundation of Science. The TNBCC was supported by the NIH grant (CA128978), the Breast Cancer Research Foundation , Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, the Stefanie Spielman Fund for Breast Cancer Research and a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation and the Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao Foundation. Part of the TNBCC (DEMOKRITOS) has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek National Funds through the Operational Program ‘Education and Life-long Learning’ of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF)—Research Funding Program of the General Secretariat for Research & Technology: ARISTEIA. The TWBCS is supported by the Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica and the National Science Council, Taiwan. The UKBGS is funded by Breakthrough Breast Cancer and the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR). ICR acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. Funding to pay the Open Access publication charges for this article was provided by the Wellcome Trust.This is the advanced access published version distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0, which can also be viewed on the publisher's webstie at: http://hmg.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/07/04/hmg.ddu311.full.pdf+htm

Trans-ancestry genome-wide association meta-analysis of prostate cancer identifies new susceptibility loci and informs genetic risk prediction.

Prostate cancer is a highly heritable disease with large disparities in incidence rates across ancestry populations. We conducted a multiancestry meta-analysis of prostate cancer genome-wide association studies (107,247 cases and 127,006 controls) and identified 86 new genetic risk variants independently associated with prostate cancer risk, bringing the total to 269 known risk variants. The top genetic risk score (GRS) decile was associated with odds ratios that ranged from 5.06 (95% confidence interval (CI), 4.84-5.29) for men of European ancestry to 3.74 (95% CI, 3.36-4.17) for men of African ancestry. Men of African ancestry were estimated to have a mean GRS that was 2.18-times higher (95% CI, 2.14-2.22), and men of East Asian ancestry 0.73-times lower (95% CI, 0.71-0.76), than men of European ancestry. These findings support the role of germline variation contributing to population differences in prostate cancer risk, with the GRS offering an approach for personalized risk prediction

Fine-Scale Mapping of the 4q24 Locus Identifies Two Independent Loci Associated with Breast Cancer Risk

Background: A recent association study identified a common variant (rs9790517) at 4q24 to be associated with breast cancer risk. Independent association signals and potential functional variants in this locus have not been explored. Methods: We conducted a fine-mapping analysis in 55,540 breast cancer cases and 51,168 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Results: Conditional analyses identified two independent association signals among women of European ancestry, represented by rs9790517 [conditional P = 2.51 × 10−4; OR, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02–1.07] and rs77928427 (P = 1.86 × 10−4; OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02–1.07). Functional annotation using data from the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project revealed two putative functional variants, rs62331150 and rs73838678 in linkage disequilibrium (LD) with rs9790517 (r2 ≥ 0.90) residing in the active promoter or enhancer, respectively, of the nearest gene, TET2. Both variants are located in DNase I hypersensitivity and transcription factor–binding sites. Using data from both The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC), we showed that rs62331150 was associated with level of expression of TET2 in breast normal and tumor tissue. Conclusion: Our study identified two independent association signals at 4q24 in relation to breast cancer risk and suggested that observed association in this locus may be mediated through the regulation of TET2. Impact: Fine-mapping study with large sample size warranted for identification of independent loci for breast cancer risk

Limits of imagineering: a case study of Penang

Penang Development Corporation, tasked with placing Penang at the forefront of Malaysia's economic development, has imagineered Penang into a city of vibrance and innovation. Besides manufacturing, tourism is promoted as a mainstay of the economy. Consequently, the themes of culture, heritage, sun and sea, adventure/nature and agro-tourism have been selected and attractions have been appropriated and strategically amplified to fit into the themes. At each of these themed sites, symbols and signifiers make the consumption of the landscape easier, bolstered by a carnival spirit that will heighten the fun tourists come to expect. Tourists can also safely consume the exotic beaches without exposure to danger because they are 'protected' from the locals. The imagineering has excluded Penangites whose lived landscapes have been ignored in favor of images which tourists can easily consume. Penangites have rallied together to challenge the conservation program which they claim is biased to tourism, to assert their rights to the maintenance of public roads, and to their use of public places such as Batu Ferringhi beach. The article exemplifies the contestation that occurs when places are commodified into a few recognizable and marketable characteristics that are devoid of the socio-spatial contexts from which they evolved. Copyright Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2003.