Youth Depression Alleviation-Augmentation with an anti-inflammatory agent (YoDA-A): protocol and rationale for a placebo-controlled randomized trial of rosuvastatin and aspirin

AIM: There is growing support for the role of inflammation and oxidative stress in the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD). This has led to the development of novel strategies targeting inflammation in the treatment of depression. Rosuvastatin and aspirin have well-documented, anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. The aim of the Youth Depression Alleviation: Augmentation with an anti-inflammatory agent (YoDA-A) study is to determine whether individuals receiving adjunctive anti-inflammatory agents, aspirin and rosuvastatin experience a reduction in the severity of MDD compared with individuals receiving placebo. METHODS: YoDA-A is a 12-week triple-blind, randomized controlled trial funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia. Participants aged 15-25, with moderate-to-severe MDD, are allocated to receive either 10 mg/day rosuvastatin, 100 mg/day aspirin, or placebo, in addition to treatment as usual. Participants are assessed at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, 12 and 26. The primary outcome is change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to week 12. RESULTS: The study is planned to be completed in 2017. At date of publication, 85 participants have been recruited. CONCLUSION: Timely and targeted intervention for youth MDD is crucial. Given the paucity of new agents to treat youth MDD, adjunctive trials are not only pragmatic and 'real-world', but additionally aim to target shortfalls in conventional medications. This study has the potential to first provide two new adjunctive treatment options for youth MDD; aspirin and rosuvastatin. Second, this study will serve as proof of principle of the role of inflammation in MDD.

Training of interval type-2 fuzzy logic system using extreme learning machine for load forecasting

Extreme learning machine (ELM) is originally proposed for single- hidden layer feed-forward neural networks (SLFN). From the functional equivalence of fuzzy logic systems and SLFN, the fuzzy logic systems can be interpreted as a special case of SLFN under some mild conditions. Hence the fuzzy logic systems can be trained using SLFN's learning algorithms. Considering the same equivalence, ELM is utilized here to train interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems (IT2FLSs). Based on the working principle of the ELM, the parameters of the antecedent of IT2FLSs are randomly generated while the consequent part of IT2FLSs is optimized using Moore-Penrose generalized inverse of ELM. Application of the developed model to electricity load forecasting is another novelty of the research work. Experimental results shows better forecasting performance of the proposed model over the two frequently used forecasting models.

The HEART mobile phone trial: the partial mediating effects of self-efficacy on physical activity among cardiac patients

BACKGROUND: The ubiquitous use of mobile phones provides an ideal opportunity to deliver interventions to increase physical activity levels. Understanding potential mediators of such interventions is needed to increase their effectiveness. A recent randomized controlled trial of a mobile phone and Internet (mHealth) intervention was conducted in New Zealand to determine the effectiveness on exercise capacity and physical activity levels in addition to current cardiac rehabilitation (CR) services for people (n = 171) with ischemic heart disease. Significant intervention effect was observed for self-reported leisure-time physical activity and walking, but not peak oxygen uptake at 24 weeks. There was also significant improvement in self-efficacy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the mediating effect of self-efficacy on physical activity levels in an mHealth delivered exercise CR program.

METHODS: Treatment evaluations were performed on the principle of intention to treat. Adjusted regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the main treatment effect on leisure-time physical activity and walking at 24 weeks, with and without change in self-efficacy as the mediator of interest.

RESULTS: Change in self-efficacy at 24 weeks significantly mediated the treatment effect on leisure-time physical activity by 13%, but only partially mediated the effect on walking by 4% at 24 weeks.

CONCLUSION: An mHealth intervention involving text messaging and Internet support had a positive treatment effect on leisure-time physical activity and walking at 24 weeks, and this effect was likely mediated through changes in self-efficacy. Future trials should examine other potential mediators related to this type of intervention.

Excessive criminal punishment amounts to punishing the innocent : an argument for taking the parsimony principle seriously

Punishing the innocent is incontestably repugnant. Punishing offenders more harshly than is justified is a form of punishing the innocent, yet this practice is commonplace in the United States. This Article sets out a normative argument in favor of less severe penalties for many forms of offenses. There is already an established principle, which limits punishment to the minimum amount of hardship that is required to achieve the objectives of sentencing. The principle is termed “parsimony” and is widely endorsed. Yet, in reality, it is illusory. It has no firm content and in its current form is logically and jurisprudentially incapable of grounding a persuasive argument for more lenient sentences. This Article gives content to the principle of parsimony. It is argued that application of the principle will result in a considerable reduction in the number of offenders who are sentenced to imprisonment and shorter sentences for many offenders who are jailed. The recommendations in this Article will enhance the fairness and transparency of the sentencing system. The argument is especially important at this point in history. The United States is experiencing an incarceration crisis. The principle of parsimony, properly applied, is an important key to ameliorating the incarceration problem. The Article also examines the operation of the parsimony principle in Australia. Unlike sentencing courts in the United States, Australian judges enjoy considerable discretion in sentencing offenders. Despite the vastly different approach to sentencing in Australia, it too is experiencing a considerable increase in the incarceration rate. It emerges that the courts in a tightly regimented sentencing regime (the United States) and a mainly discretionary system (Australia) effectively ignored the parsimony principle. It is not the strictures in the United States that curtail the imposition of parsimonious sentences; rather, it is the absence of a forceful rationale underpinning the principle and a lack of clarity regarding the attainable objectives of sentencing. This Article addresses these shortcomings. In doing so, it paves the way for fundamentally fairer sentencing outcomes in the United States and Australia.

The naming of child homicide offenders in England and Wales: the need for a change in law and practice

Judicial decisions about whether or not to publicly name child homicide offenders have long ani- mated debate in the United Kingdom and internationally. This article draws on case law and in- depth interviews conducted with members of the English criminal justice system to critically analyse the viability of current domestic legislation in the context of the UK’s international human rights obligations. The article identifies ambiguities surrounding the definition of ‘public interest’ in law; the merits of equating the naming of child offenders with open justice, accountability and transpar- ency; and the increasing sabotage of the principle of rehabilitation. By identifying the complexities of this contentious area of judicial discretion, this article highlights the need for a rights-based approach to decisions about publicly naming children in conflict with the law.

Against fundamentalism: the silence of the Divine in the work of Karen Armstrong

Three and a half centuries after the treaty of Westphalia ended the bloody religious wars in Europe, religious zealots are again threatening to undo the progress of Western civilised society, the achievements of science, the Enlightenment and liberal democracy. Such is the charge of the 'new atheist' movements of which Michael Onfray is but one example. Onfray's self-confessed task is to rekindle the Enlightenment, to shine 'Atheology's dazzling light' on the tyranny and darkness of monotheism. And in just 219 pages, Onfray exposes 4,000 years of evil and darkness perpetrated by the three monotheistic religions-or so his Atheist Manifesto claims (2007: 219).It is the new atheists' rejection of the Enlightenment principle of toleration that prompted Karen Armstrong to write her book The Case for God. The Case for God is an argument and demonstration that all forms of fundamentalism represent a 'defiantly unorthodox form of faith that frequently misrepresents the tradition it is trying to defend' (2009: 7). As a modem twentieth century movement, fundamentalist movements are essentially pragmatic, 'modem, innovative, and modernizing' and have a symbiotic relationship 'with an aggressive liberalism or secularism' (Armstrong 2000: 178).

The roots of punitive damages at common law: a longer history

This Article aims to revisit the historical development of the doctrine ofexemplary or punitive damages. Punitive damages are anomalous in that they lie in both tort and crime, a matter that has led to much criticism by modern commentators. Yet, a definitive history of punitive damages does not exist to explain this anomaly. The main contribution of this Article, then, is to begin such a history by way of a meta-narrative. It identifies and links the historically significant moments that led to punitive damages, beginning with the background period of classical Roman law, its renewed reception in Western Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that coincided with the emergence of the English common law,the English statutes of the late thirteenth century, to the court cases of Wilkes v. Wood and Huckle v. Money in the eighteenth century that heralded the "first explicit articulation" of the legal principle of punitive damages. This Article argues that this history is not linear in nature but historically contingent. This is a corrective to present scholarship, which fails to adequately connect or contextualize these historical moments, or over-simplifies this development over time.

Disrupting (gendered) Islamophobia: the practice of feminist ijtihad to support the agency of young Muslim women

Muslim feminist scholars highlight, and seek to transform, racist, sexist and Islamophobic discourses through feminist interpretations of their religion. This paper reports on data gathered from an interview-based study involving four young Muslim women from the same Brisbane (Queensland) community. The focus is on how these young women are understanding, and finding spaces of agency, within these discourses with reference to their faith. The Islamic principle of ijtihad (jurisprudential interpretation of religious text) and the practice of feminist ijtihad are theorized as powerful tools in supporting the young women to counter the Islamophobia and gendered Islamophobia in their lives. Using these tools, however, as this paper argues, is not unproblematic and can reinscribe disempowering gender and ethno-cultural relations. Amid unprecedented gendered Islamophobia and the clear imperative of supporting Muslim women to access the tools of feminist ijtihad, the paper provides important insight into the possibilities and problematics of these tools.