The bentiromide test using plasma p-aminobenzoic acid for diagnosing pancreatic insufficiency in young children. The effect of two different doses and a liquid meal

The bentiromide test was evaluated using plasma p-aminobenzoic acid as an indirect test of pancreatic insufficiency in young children between 2 months and 4 years of age. To determine the optimal test method, the following were examined: (a) the best dose of bentiromide (15 mg/kg or 30 mg/kg); (b) the optimal sampling time for plasma p-aminobenzoic acid, and; (c) the effect of coadministration of a liquid meal. Sixty-nine children (1.6 ± 1.0 years) were studied, including 34 controls with normal fat absorption and 35 patients (34 with cystic fibrosis) with fat maldigestion due to pancreatic insufficiency. Control and pancreatic insufficient subjects were studied in three age-matched groups: (a) low-dose bentiromide (15 mg/kg) with clear fluids; (b) high-dose bentiromide (30 mg/kg) with clear fluids, and; (c) high-dose bentiromide with a liquid meal. Plasma p-aminobenzoic acid was determined at 0, 30, 60, and 90 minutes then hourly for 6 hours. The dose effect of bentiromide with clear liquids was evaluated. High-dose bentiromide best discriminated control and pancreatic insufficient subjects, due to a higher peak plasma p-aminobenzoic acid level in controls, but poor sensitivity and specificity remained. High-dose bentiromide with a liquid meal produced a delayed increase in plasma p-aminobenzoic acid in the control subjects probably caused by retarded gastric emptying. However, in the pancreatic insufficient subjects, use of a liquid meal resulted in significantly lower plasma p-aminobenzoic acid levels at all time points; plasma p-aminobenzoic acid at 2 and 3 hours completely discriminated between control and pancreatic insufficient patients. Evaluation of the data by area under the time-concentration curve failed to improve test results. In conclusion, the bentiromide test is a simple, clinically useful means of detecting pancreatic insufficiency in young children, but a higher dose administered with a liquid meal is recommended.

International survey of bicycling exposure, crash involvement, behaviors, and attitudes: Preliminary results

This paper presents some results from preliminary analyses of the data of an international online survey of bicycle riders, who reported riding at least once a month. On 4 July 2015, data from 7528 participants from 17 countries was available in the survey, and were subsequently cleaned and checked for consistency. The median distance ridden ranged from 30 km/week in Israel to 150 km/week in Greece (overall median 54 km/week). City/hybrid bicycles were the most common type of bicycle ridden (44%), followed by mountain (20%) and road bikes (15%). Almost half (47%) of the respondents rode “nearly daily”. About a quarter rode daily to work or study (27%). Overall, 40% of respondents reported wearing a helmet ‘always’, varying from 2% in the Netherlands to 80% in Norway, while 25% reported ‘never’ wearing a helmet. Thus, individuals appeared to consistently either use or not use helmets. Helmet wearing rates were generally higher when riding for health/fitness than other purposes and appeared to be little affected by the type of riding location, but some divergences in these patterns were found among countries. Almost 29% of respondents reported being involved in at least one bicycle crash in the last year (ranging from 12% in Israel to 53% in Turkey). Among the most severe crashes for each respondent, about half of the crashes involved falling off a bicycle. Just under 10% of the most severe crashes for each respondent were reported to police. Among the bicycle-motor vehicle crashes, only a third were reported to police. Further analyses will address questions regarding the influence of factors such as demographic characteristics, type of bicycle ridden, and attitudes on both bi-cycle use and helmet wearing rates.

Not “just words”: Exposure to homophobic epithets leads to dehumanizing and physical distancing from gay men

We examined whether homophobic epithets (e.g., faggot) function as labels of deviance for homosexuals that contribute to their dehumanization and physical distance. Across two studies, participants were supraliminally (Study 1) and subliminally (Study 2) exposed to a homophobic epithet, a category label, or a generic insult. Participants were then asked to associate human related and animal-related words to homosexuals and heterosexuals. Results showed that after exposure to a homophobic epithet, compared with a category label or a generic insult, participants associated less human-related words with homosexuals, indicating dehumanization. In Study 2, we also assessed the effect of a homophobic epithet on physical distance from a target group member and found that homophobic epithets led to greater physical distancing of a gay man. These findings indicate that homophobic epithets foster dehumanization and avoidance of gay people, in ways that other insults or labels do not.