Full of Hot Air? Three Examinations of Climate Change in the American Political Information Environment

Climate change is thought to be one of the most pressing environmental problems facing humanity. However, due in part to failures in political communication and how the issue has been historically defined in American politics, discussions of climate change remain gridlocked and polarized. In this dissertation, I explore how climate change has been historically constructed as a political issue, how conflicts between climate advocates and skeptics have been communicated, and what effects polarization has had on political communication, particularly on the communication of climate change to skeptical audiences. I use a variety of methodological tools to consider these questions, including evolutionary frame analysis, which uses textual data to show how issues are framed and constructed over time; Kullback-Leibler divergence content analysis, which allows for comparison of advocate and skeptical framing over time; and experimental framing methods to test how audiences react to and process different presentations of climate change. I identify six major portrayals of climate change from 1988 to 2012, but find that no single construction of the issue has dominated the public discourse defining the problem. In addition, the construction of climate change may be associated with changes in public political sentiment, such as greater pessimism about climate action when the electorate becomes more conservative. As the issue of climate change has become more polarized in American politics, one proposed causal pathway for the observed polarization is that advocate and skeptic framing of climate change focuses on different facets of the issue and ignores rival arguments, a practice known as “talking past.” However, I find no evidence of increased talking past in 25 years of popular newsmedia reporting on the issue, suggesting both that talking past has not driven public polarization or that polarization is occurring in venues outside of the mainstream public discourse, such as blogs. To examine how polarization affects political communication on climate change, I test the cognitive processing of a variety of messages and sources that promote action against climate change among Republican individuals. Rather than identifying frames that are powerful enough to overcome polarization, I find that Republicans exhibit telltale signs of motivated skepticism on the issue, that is, they reject framing that runs counter to their party line and political identity. This result suggests that polarization constrains political communication on polarized issues, overshadowing traditional message and source effects of framing and increasing the difficulty communicators experience in reaching skeptical audiences.

A systematic review of evidence for silver nanoparticle-induced mitochondrial toxicity

© The Royal Society of Chemistry 2016.Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) are extensively used for their antibacterial properties in a diverse set of applications, ranging from the treatment of municipal wastewater to infection control in hospitals. However, the properties of AgNPs that render them conducive to bactericidal use in commerce may influence their potential toxicity to non-bacterial organisms. Based on the physiological and phylogenetic similarities between bacteria and mitochondria within eukaryotic cells, mitochondria are a likely intracellular target of AgNP toxicity. Mitochondria-specific outcomes of AgNP exposures have been identified in multiple cell types, including (but not limited to) loss of membrane potential, inhibition of enzymes involved in oxidative phosphorylation, and changes in calcium sequestration. However, the biological significance of mitochondrial toxicity due to AgNP exposure is currently incompletely understood. This review examines the existing evidence of mitochondrial toxicity induced by AgNP exposure, with discussions of the role of the physicochemical properties of the nanoparticles themselves in mitochondrial toxicity. The impacts of potentially differential cell- and tissue-specific significance of AgNP-induced mitochondrial dysfunction are also discussed.

Promoting faculty professionalism: a case-based approach.

INTRODUCTION: Professionalism is a key attribute for health professionals. Yet, it is unknown how much faculty development is directed toward skills and behaviours of faculty professionalism. Faculty professionalism includes boundaries in teacher-student relationships, self-reflection, assuring one's own fitness for duty, and maintaining confidentiality when appropriate. METHODS: For five years, we have incorporated faculty professionalism as a routine agenda item for the monthly Physician Assistant Programme faculty meetings, allowing faculty members to introduce issues they are comfortable sharing or have questions about. We also have case discussions of faculty professionalism within faculty meetings every three months. RESULTS: Faculty professionalism is important in the daily work lives of faculty members and including this as part of routine agendas verifies its importance. A faculty survey showed that a majority look forward to the quarterly faculty professionalism case discussions. These have included attempted influence in the admissions process, student/faculty social boundaries, civic professionalism, students requesting medical advice, and self-disclosure. CONCLUSION: A preventive approach works better than a reactionary approach to faculty missteps in professionalism. Routine discussion of faculty professionalism normalizes the topic and is helpful to both new and experienced faculty members. We recommend incorporation of faculty professionalism as a regular agenda item in faculty meetings.

"I Use Weed for My ADHD": A Qualitative Analysis of Online Forum Discussions on Cannabis Use and ADHD.

BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for problematic cannabis use. However, clinical and anecdotal evidence suggest an increasingly popular perception that cannabis is therapeutic for ADHD, including via online resources. Given that the Internet is increasingly utilized as a source of healthcare information and may influence perceptions, we conducted a qualitative analysis of online forum discussions, also referred to as threads, on the effects of cannabis on ADHD to systematically characterize the content patients and caregivers may encounter about ADHD and cannabis. METHODS: A total of 268 separate forum threads were identified. Twenty percent (20%) were randomly selected, which yielded 55 separate forum threads (mean number of individual posts per forum thread = 17.53) scored by three raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.74). A final sample of 401 posts in these forum threads received at least one endorsement on predetermined topics following qualitative coding procedures. RESULTS: Twenty-five (25%) percent of individual posts indicated that cannabis is therapeutic for ADHD, as opposed to 8% that it is harmful, 5% that it is both therapeutic and harmful, and 2% that it has no effect on ADHD. This pattern was generally consistent when the year of each post was considered. The greater endorsement of therapeutic versus harmful effects of cannabis did not generalize to mood, other (non-ADHD) psychiatric conditions, or overall domains of daily life. Additional themes emerged (e.g., cannabis being considered sanctioned by healthcare providers). CONCLUSIONS: Despite that there are no clinical recommendations or systematic research supporting the beneficial effects of cannabis use for ADHD, online discussions indicate that cannabis is considered therapeutic for ADHD-this is the first study to identify such a trend. This type of online information could shape ADHD patient and caregiver perceptions, and influence cannabis use and clinical care.