The effect of smoking nicotine tobacco versus smoking deprivation on motion sickness

BACKGROUND: The experienced smoker maintains adequate nicotine levels by 'puff-by-puff self-control' which also avoids symptomatic nauseating effects of nicotine overdose. It is postulated that there is a varying 'dynamic threshold for nausea' into which motion sickness susceptibility provides an objective toxin-free probe. Hypotheses were that: (i) nicotine promotes motion sickness whereas deprivation protects; and (ii) pleasurable effects of nicotine protect against motion sickness whereas adverse effects of withdrawal have the opposite effect. METHODS: Twenty-six healthy habitual cigarette smokers (mean±SD) 15.3±7.6cigs/day, were exposed to a provocative cross-coupled (coriolis) motion on a turntable, with sequences of 8 head movements every 30s. This continued to the point of moderate nausea. Subjects were tested after either ad-lib normal smoking (SMOKE) or after overnight deprivation (DEPRIV), according to a repeated measures design counter-balanced for order with 1-week interval between tests. RESULTS: Deprivation from recent smoking was confirmed by objective measures: exhaled carbon monoxide CO was lower (P<0.001) for DEPRIV (8.5±5.6ppm) versus SMOKE (16.0±6.3ppm); resting heart rate was lower (P<0.001) for DEPRIV (67.9±8.4bpm) versus SMOKE (74.3±9.5bpm). Mean±SD sequences of head movements tolerated to achieve moderate nausea were more (P=0.014) for DEPRIV (21.3±9.9) versus SMOKE (18.3±8.5). DISCUSSION: Tolerance to motion sickness was aided by short-term smoking deprivation, supporting Hypothesis (i) but not Hypothesis (ii). The effect was was approximately equivalent to half of the effect of an anti-motion sickness drug. Temporary nicotine withdrawal peri-operatively may explain why smokers have reduced risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

Transformation or bureaucratisation?: the changing role of community representation in local strategic partnerships in England

The debate about the need to build social capital and to engage local communities in public policy has become a central issue in many advanced liberal societies and developing countries. In many countries new forms of governance have emerged out of a growing realisation that representative democracy by itself is no longer sufficient. One of the most significant public policy trends in the UK has been the involvement of community organisations and their members in the delivery of national policy, mediated through local systems of governance and management. One such policy area is urban regeneration. Central government now requires local authorities in England to set up Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) to bring together stakeholders who can prepare Community Strategies and deliver social and economic programmes which target areas of deprivation. This paper reviews the key institutional processes which must be addressed, such as representation, accountability and transformation.

The continuing popularity of the neighbourhood and neighbourhood governance in the transition from the 'big state' to the 'big society' paradigm

The neighbourhood in both the UK and Europe continues to dominate thinking about the quality of life in local communities, representation and empowerment, and how local services can be delivered most effectively. For several decades a series of centrally funded programmes in neighbour- hood governance have targeted localities suffering deprivation and social exclusion in England. From these much can be learnt about the strengths and limitations of a local approach to achieving multiple objectives.We review the findings of a case study of neighbourhood governance in the City of Westminster and draw on evaluations of two national programmes. In the conclusions we discuss the problems arising from multiple objectives and examine the prospects for neighbourhood governance as the national paradigm moves away from `big state' solutions towards the less-well-defined `big society' approach and the reinvention of `localism'. While the rationale for neighbourhood governance may change, the `neighbourhood' as a site for service delivery and planning remains as important now as in the past.

Turning around the poorest neighbourhoods: learning the lessons from twenty years of neighbourhood-based regeneration strategies in England

In the past two decades governments in Britain have launched a series of initiatives designed to reduce the disparities between areas of affluence and deprivation. These initiatives were funded by central government and were delivered through a series of partnership boards operating at the neighbourhood level in areas with high levels of deprivation. Drawing on similar approaches in the US War on Poverty, the engagement of residents in the planning and delivery of projects was a major priority. This chapter draws on the national evaluations of three of these programmes in England: the Single Regeneration Budget, the New Deal for Communities and the Neighbourhood Management Pathfinders. The chapter begins by identifying the common characteristics of these programmes, known as area-based initiatives because they targeted areas of concentrated deprivation with a population of about 10,000 people each. It then goes on to discuss the three national programmes and summarises the main findings in relation to how far key indicators changed for the better. The final section sets out the ways in which policy objectives changed in 2010 after the election of a coalition government. This produced a shift to what was called the ‘Big Society’ where the rhetoric favoured a transfer of power away from central government towards the local, neighbourhood, level. This approach favoured self-help and a call to volunteering rather than channelling resources to the areas in greatest need. The chapter closes by reviewing the relatively modest achievements of this centralist, big-state approach to distressed neighbourhoods of 1990–2010.

Regeneration: the inner city in context

This chapter (12) reviews key publications by Sir Peter Hall in the period 1967-79. In this period he was particularly interested in the 'inner city' and how problems of deprivation, unemployment, poor housing, and increasingly immigration might best be addressed by public policy. Each chapter in the book reviews Sir Peter's publications over a long and distinguished career in research and policy advice to government in honour of his 80th birthday in 2013.