Yersinia enterocolitica: recovery and characterization of two unusual isolates from a case of acute enteritis

1977 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-345
Author(s):  
E J Bottone ◽  
T Robin

Enteritis caused by Yersinia enterocolitica appears to be an uncommon occurrence in the United States. Most of the reported cases have been caused by biochemically typical Y. enterocolitica serotype O:8, the most frequently encountered serotype in the United States. The present report describes the isolation of two biochemically and serologically unusual Y. enterocolitica isolates from a patient with acute enteritis. One strain was distinguished by the rapid fermentation of rhamnose and raffinose and by citrate utilization at 22 degrees C but not at 37 degrees C. The other isolate was sucrose negative, and at either temperature it lacked both the fermentative capability for rhamnose and raffinose and the ability to utilize sodium citrate. Neither strain was agglutinable with known Y. enterocolitica antisera. The rhamnose-positive isolate showed an increased resistance to ampicillin, cephalothin, colymycin, and penicillin when tested at 22 degrees C as compared to results obtained at 37 degrees C. The demonstration that one patient's serum contained agglutinins (1:64) against the sucrose-negative strain supports its etiological significance. The role of the rhamnose-positive strain in the patient's illness is speculative. It conceivably could have potentiated the pathogenicity of the sucrose-negative isolate.

Author(s):  
Katharina A. Byrne

SummaryThis article examines whether the characterization of a regulatory measure as expropriatory depends upon the objective intent of the state in enacting that measure. The issue of regulatory expropriation is of particular importance, given the fact that a number of recent multilateral investment treaties, including the North American Free Trade Agreement, grant investors a right of direct action against a foreign state for losses arising out of measures that are “tantamount” to expropriation.This article will first consider the respective approaches of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal and the United States to regulatory expropriation. These approaches will be then briefly contrasted with the unique jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Next, the role of intent in municipal law as a means of categorization will be addressed and a case made as to why this approach is equally viable on the international plane. In conclusion, reasons will be given as to why a test based on intent is to be preferred over other theories.


1983 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
B A Kay ◽  
K Wachsmuth ◽  
P Gemski ◽  
J C Feeley ◽  
T J Quan ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 97-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Smita C. Banerjee ◽  
Kathryn Greene ◽  
Marina Krcmar ◽  
Zhanna Bagdasarov ◽  
Dovile Ruginyte

This study demonstrates the significance of individual difference factors, particularly gender and sensation seeking, in predicting media choice (examined through hypothetical descriptions of films that participants anticipated they would view). This study used a 2 (Positive mood/negative mood) × 2 (High arousal/low arousal) within-subject design with 544 undergraduate students recruited from a large northeastern university in the United States. Results showed that happy films and high arousal films were preferred over sad films and low-arousal films, respectively. In terms of gender differences, female viewers reported a greater preference than male viewers for happy-mood films. Also, male viewers reported a greater preference for high-arousal films compared to female viewers, and female viewers reported a greater preference for low-arousal films compared to male viewers. Finally, high sensation seekers reported a preference for high-arousal films. Implications for research design and importance of exploring media characteristics are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Rigoli

Research has shown that stress impacts on people’s religious beliefs. However, several aspects of this effect remain poorly understood, for example regarding the role of prior religiosity and stress-induced anxiety. This paper explores these aspects in the context of the recent coronavirus emergency. The latter has impacted dramatically on many people’s well-being; hence it can be considered a highly stressful event. Through online questionnaires administered to UK and USA citizens professing either Christian faith or no religion, this paper examines the impact of the coronavirus crisis upon common people’s religious beliefs. We found that, following the coronavirus emergency, strong believers reported higher confidence in their religious beliefs while non-believers reported increased scepticism towards religion. Moreover, for strong believers, higher anxiety elicited by the coronavirus threat was associated with increased strengthening of religious beliefs. Conversely, for non-believers, higher anxiety elicited by the coronavirus thereat was associated with increased scepticism towards religious beliefs. These observations are consistent with the notion that stress-induced anxiety enhances support for the ideology already embraced before a stressful event occurs. This study sheds light on the psychological and cultural implications of the coronavirus crisis, which represents one of the most serious health emergencies in recent times.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-91
Author(s):  
Sally Engle Merry

This provocative question became the basis for a spirited discussion at the 2017 meeting of the American Anthropological Association. My first reaction, on hearing the question, was to ask, does anthropology care whether it matters to law? As a discipline, anthropology and the anthropology of law are producing excellent scholarship and have an active scholarly life. But in response to this forum’s provocation article, which clearly outlines the lack of courses on law and anthropology in law schools, I decided that the relevant question was, why doesn’t anthropology matter more to law than it does? The particular, most serious concern appears to be, why are there not more law and anthropology courses being offered in law schools? It is increasingly common for law faculty in the United States to have PhDs as well as JDs, so why are there so few anthropology/law PhD/JD faculty? Moreover, as there is growing consensus that law schools instil a certain way of thinking but lack preparation for the practice of law in reality and there is an explosion of interest in clinical legal training, why does this educational turn fail to provide a new role of legal anthropology, which focuses on the practice of law, in clinical legal training?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document