Quantifying Potential Human Health Impacts of Animal Antibiotic Use: Enrofloxacin and Macrolides in Chickens

Use of similar or identical antibiotics in both human and veterinary medicine has come under increasing scrutiny by regulators concerned that bacteria resistant to animal antibiotics will infect people and resist treatment with similar human antibiotics, leading to excess illnesses and deaths. Scientists, regulators, and interest groups in the United States and Europe have urged bans on nontherapeutic and some therapeutic uses of animal antibiotics to protect human health. Many regulators and public health experts have also expressed dissatisfaction with the perceived limitations of quantitative risk assessment and have proposed alternative qualitative and judgmental approaches ranging from "attributable fraction" estimates to risk management recommendations based on the precautionary principle or on expert judgments about the importance of classes of compounds in human medicine. This article presents a more traditional quantitative risk assessment of the likely human health impacts of continuing versus withdrawing use of fluoroquinolones and macrolides in production of broiler chickens in the United States. An analytic framework is developed and applied to available data. It indicates that withdrawing animal antibiotics can cause far more human illness-days than it would prevent: the estimated human BENEFIT:RISK health ratio for human health impacts of continued animal antibiotic use exceeds 1,000:1 in many cases. This conclusion is driven by a hypothesized causal sequence in which withdrawing animal antibiotic use increases illnesses rates in animals, microbial loads in servings from the affected animals, and hence human health risks. This potentially important aspect of human health risk assessment for animal antibiotics has not previously been quantified.     

试论媒体评论的效益

媒体评论的效益研究,一直比较薄弱。现有的媒体评论效益研究,主要从宏观层面分析其积极的一面,缺乏应有的维度和深度。实际上,评论的社会效益有“正”、“负”两类。媒体评论不仅具有显著的社会意义,也能够给媒体和作者带来直接或间接的经济收益,其社会责任和效益是媒体评论的客观属性,二者只有协调共存,才能有助于和谐社会的构建。     

农民专业合作社成员参与行为、效果及作用机理

农民专业合作社成员参与行为包含了业务参与、资本参与和管理参与三维度,成员的业务和资本参与能使成员获得不错的经济收益,而成员管理参与是维护成员在合作社中合法收益的制度保障。依托路径分析方法,实证分析研究结果支持成员收益程度更加取决于成员的业务和资本参与水平,成员满意程度更加依托于成员的管理参与水平,研究结果也支持了股东成员更加积极进行管理参与。为推进农民专业合作社的规范可持续发展,促进成员增收致富等,需要考虑鼓励成员进行资本、业务和管理三维度的全面参与,限定单个成员最高入股比例,多途径吸引成员进行产品惠顾;鼓励成员参与成员大会、进行重大事项投票等,并正视成员的非经济期望与需求。     

Where do we stand? Recent AEA member views on professionalization

The professionalization of evaluation continues to be debated at numerous conferences in the U.S. and abroad. At this time, AEA member views on the potential benefits and negative side effects of professionalization are essential as the discussion evolves. This study provides recent views on major topics in professionalization, including potential benefits, negative side effects, processes, competencies, and procedures. Results from in-depth interviews and an online survey demonstrate that AEA members view potential benefits of professionalization to be stakeholder trust, evaluator reputation and identity, while concerns about a potential negative side effect known as the “narrowing effect” (i.e., some evaluators will be alienated based on their background, competencies, etc.) were expressed by participants. These recent findings can inform the ongoing discussion of professionalization, and suggest new directions for future research on evaluation.     

金陵大学农学院农业推广及其效益

金陵大学农学院举世注目的科研成就,为农业推广提供了丰富的物质材料;完善的农业推广体制,保证了推广工作的顺利进行,从而增加了作物产量,促进了农村改良。建立的一套完善的农业推广体制,成为中国近代建立从中央到地方基层的全国农业推广体制的良好开端;从中摸索出的一套农业推广经验,为中国近代其它农业院校及农业机构在农业推广中所借鉴。对于我国当今的高等农林院校科研成果的推广也有借鉴意义。     

比较与反思:村民社区参与对社区认同影响之实证研究

随着农村城镇化、村民市民化的推进,许多学者开始关注我国农村社区公共空间的萎缩以及由此引发的参与不足和认同缺失问题.这些问题在江苏Y村和贵州L村、G村均呈现出不同特点.受公共空间和利益关联的影响,江苏村民社区参与度大大高于贵州村民.而无论在江苏还是贵州,村民志愿主义参与、私人网络参与和公共事务参与的程度都依次递减,但贵州村民递减的幅度更大.同时,江苏村民的情感认同和行为认同都明显高于贵州村民.不同地域的多元线性回归发现,参与不一定促进认同.在封闭性、同质性强的贵州L村和G村,村民社区参与对社区认同的正向影响十分显著;而在开放性、异质性强的江苏Y村,村民社区参与对社区认同的影响却非常微弱且不均衡.逻辑斯蒂回归发现,村民背景变量中的民族、收入水平是村民社区认同的显著影响因素.     

Involvement of Ministries of Health in Health Service Coverage Decisions: Is England an Aberrant Case?

This article examines the involvement of ministries of health in making health service coverage decisions in Denmark, England, France and Germany. The study aims to inform debate in England about the feasibility of reducing perceived ministerial and bureaucratic ‘interference’ in decisions affecting the National Health Service, based on interviews with senior government officials and other health system stakeholders. Ministries of health differ in their involvement in health system governance and coverage decisions (‘the benefits package’), reflecting differences in institutional arrangements. In all four countries, organizations at arm's length or independent from government are either involved in providing technical advice to the ministry of health or have been mandated to take these decisions themselves. However, ministries of health occasionally intervene in the decision‐making process or ignore the advice of these organizations. The Department of Health in England is not an aberrant case, at least in relation to coverage decisions. Indeed, ministries of health in Denmark and France play a larger role in making these decisions. Public pressure, often amplified by the media, is a shared reason for ministerial and ministry involvement in all four countries. This dynamic may thus limit the feasibility of attempts to further separate the NHS from both the Department of Health and wider political pressures.