The fast atom bombardment mass spectrometric analysis of the carbamate pesticide carbaryl

The carbamate pesticide, carbaryl, was quantitatively studied using fast atom bombardment mass spectrometry (FAB-MS). Mass spectra were obtained in the positive ion-mode using both 2-nitrophenyloctyl ether (NPOE) and 3-nitrobenzyl alcohol (NBA) as matrix liquids. The sample was applied by three different techniques; simple mixing, solvent mixing and surface precipitation. Smaller volumes of matrix liquid were found to produce more favourable ion currents. Detection limits were largely independent of the matrix or application technique used. The relationship between ion current and the mass of analyte was found to be intricately related to the choice of matrix liquid.

Ancaster Treason Trials proceedings, 1814 [photocopy]

The commission was charged with indicting those individuals who had committed acts of treason during the War of 1812. The commission appointed Thomas Scott, William Dummer Powell and William Campbell to preside over the proceedings. The grand jury met at Ancaster, Ont. over 18 days in May and June of 1814 to hear the testimony of those charged with treason as well as any pertinent witnesses. On June 21, 1814 the commission indicted 15 individuals and ordered them to be hanged and quartered. This commission came to be commonly known as the Ancaster Bloody Assize of 1814.

A Psychosocial Approach to Understanding Causality Assessment in Early Phase Oncology Clinical Trials: A Phenomenological Study

Research Question: What are the psychosocial factors that affect causality assessment in early phase oncology clinical trials? Methods: Thirty-two qualitative interviews were explicated with the aid of “Naturalistic Decision Making”. Data explication consisted of phenomenological reduction, delineating and clustering meaning units, forming themes, and creating a composite summary. Participants were members of the National Cancer Institute of Canada’s Clinical Trial Group Investigative New Drug committee. Results: The process of assigning causality is extremely subjective and full of uncertainty. Physicians had no formal training, nor a tool to assist them with this process. Physicians were apprehensive about their decisions and felt pressure from their patients, as well as the pharmaceutical companies sponsoring the trial. Conclusions: There are many problem areas when attributing causality, all of which have serious consequences, but clinicians used a variety of methods to cope with these problem areas.