Practices and outcomes of self-treatment with helminths based on physicians' observations.

The successful use of helminths as therapeutic agents to resolve inflammatory disease was first recorded 40 years ago. Subsequent work in animal models and in humans has demonstrated that the organisms might effectively treat a wide range of inflammatory diseases, including allergies, autoimmune disorders and inflammation-associated neuropsychiatric disorders. However, available information regarding the therapeutic uses and effects of helminths in humans is limited. This study probes the practices and experiences of individuals 'self-treating' with helminths through the eyes of their physicians. Five physicians monitoring more than 700 self-treating patients were interviewed. The results strongly support previous indications that helminth therapy can effectively treat a wide range of allergies, autoimmune conditions and neuropsychiatric disorders, such as major depression and anxiety disorders. Approximately 57% of the self-treating patients observed by physicians in the study had autism. Physicians reported that the majority of patients with autism and inflammation-associated co-morbidities responded favourably to therapy with either of the two most popular organisms currently used by self-treaters, Hymenolepis diminuta and Trichuris suis. However, approximately 1% of paediatric patients experienced severe gastrointestinal pains with the use of H. diminuta, although the symptoms were resolved with an anti-helminthic drug. Further, exposure to helminths apparently did not affect the impaired comprehension of social situations that is the hallmark of autism. These observations point toward potential starting points for clinical trials, and provide further support for the importance of such trials and for concerted efforts aimed at probing the potential of helminths, and perhaps other biologicals, for therapeutic use.

Transcultural satire in German fiction of Turkish migration: Self-deprecation, ethnic impersonation, intertexuality

My dissertation presents a study of satire in contemporary German Fiction of Turkish migration. Engaging with a body of works hitherto neglected in scholarship, I examine how satirical texts, films, and plays intervene critically in discourses on post-unification German national identity. Drawing on the seminal work of scholars such as Leslie Adelson, Tom Cheesman, B. Venkat Mani, Petra Fachinger, and Deniz Göktürk, my dissertation expands the scholarship of Turkish German Studies by linking a discussion of satire as a critical rhetoric to the question of how we talk about what it means to be German.

Chapter one offers a novel framework of the satirical vis-à-vis standard conceptions of satire and deconstructionist theories of reading. I understand satire as a form of rhetoric that creates moments of ambiguity by bringing together intersectional categories like gender, ethnicity, race, religion, in order to challenge the audience’s practices of interpreting cultural otherness. Chapter two examines the use of ethnic self-deprecation as one such strategy in Osman Engin’s short stories and his first novel, Kanaken-Ghandi through the lens of Bakhtinian polyphony and Judith Butler’s work on hate speech. Engin, I argue, employs ethnic selfdeprecation as a narrative strategy to straddle the line between deconstructing and re-affirming cultural stereotypes. Investigating the role of ethnic impersonation in Hussi Kutlucan’s film Ich Chef, Du Turnshuh, the third chapter turns to the question of ethnicity as a visual signifier for the negotiation of cultural inclusion and exclusion in post-1990 film. In dialogue with Katrin Sieg’s work on ethnic drag and Amy Robinson’s theory of passing, I show how the film challenges ethnically-coded narratives of Germanness. In the final chapter on Nurkan Erpulat and Jens Hillje’s play Verrücktes Blut, I discuss how intertextuality and adaptation (Hutcheon, Genette) of different story and character worlds are used to create moments of ambiguity and overdeterminacy in the play, in order to challenge the audience’s perception of what an inclusive German society might look like.

An Ethical and Legal Framework for Physicians as Surrogate Decision-Makers for Their Patients.

In Western industrialized countries, it is well established that legally competent individuals may choose a surrogate healthcare decision-maker to represent their interests should they lose the capacity to do so themselves. There are few limitations on who they may select to fulfill this function. However, many jurisdictions place restrictions on or prohibit the patient's attending physician or other provider involved with an individual's care to serve in this role. Several authors have previously suggested that respect for the autonomy of patients requires that there be few (if any) constraints on whomever they may appoint as a proxy. In this essay we revisit this topic by first providing a survey of current state laws governing this activity. We then analyze the clinical and ethical circumstances in which potential difficulties could arise. We take a more nuanced and circumspect view of prior suggestions that patients should have virtually unfettered liberty to choose their healthcare proxies. We suggest a strategy to balance the freedom of patients' right to choose their surrogates with fiduciary duty of the state as regulator of medical practice. We identify six domains of possible concern with such relationships and suggest straightforward methods of mitigating their potential negative effects that could be plausibly be incorporated into physician practice.

Should Physicians be Encouraged to use Generic Names and to Prescribe Generic Drugs?

While using the brand names seems like a trivial issue at the outset, using these names is inherently problematic. Cardiovascular drugs remain the most commonly prescribed drugs by the physicians. The junior doctors are likely to introject practices of their seniors and consequently to reciprocate from the experiences learnt from their preceptors. Using the generic names may be one way to facilitate prescription of the generic drugs who have a better cost profile and similar efficacy than the more expensive branded drugs. In this editorial, we have outlined several arguments to suggest the importance of using the generic names in academic discussions and clinical documentation.

Fluid resuscitation practice patterns in intensive care units of the USA: a cross-sectional survey of critical care physicians.

BACKGROUND: Fluid resuscitation is a cornerstone of intensive care treatment, yet there is a lack of agreement on how various types of fluids should be used in critically ill patients with different disease states. Therefore, our goal was to investigate the practice patterns of fluid utilization for resuscitation of adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs) within the USA. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 502 physicians practicing in medical and surgical ICUs. Survey questions were designed to assess clinical decision-making processes for 3 types of patients who need volume expansion: (1) not bleeding and not septic, (2) bleeding but not septic, (3) requiring resuscitation for sepsis. First-choice fluid used in fluid boluses for these 3 patient types was requested from the respondents. Descriptive statistics were performed using a Kruskal-Wallis test to evaluate differences among the physician groups. Follow-up tests, including t tests, were conducted to evaluate differences between ICU types, hospital settings, and bolus volume. RESULTS: Fluid resuscitation varied with respect to preferences for the factors to determine volume status and preferences for fluid types. The 3 most frequently preferred volume indicators were blood pressure, urine output, and central venous pressure. Regardless of the patient type, the most preferred fluid type was crystalloid, followed by 5 % albumin and then 6 % hydroxyethyl starches (HES) 450/0.70 and 6 % HES 600/0.75. Surprisingly, up to 10 % of physicians still chose HES as the first choice of fluid for resuscitation in sepsis. The clinical specialty and the practice setting of the treating physicians also influenced fluid choices. CONCLUSIONS: Practice patterns of fluid resuscitation varied in the USA, depending on patient characteristics, clinical specialties, and practice settings of the treating physicians.