A survey on intestinal parasites of livestock guardian dogs and herding dogs in Switzerland

The present study describes the occurrence of intestinal parasite infections in livestock guardian dogs and herding dogs. A total of 71 guardian dogs (more than half of the total number of guardian dogs in Switzerland) and 21 herding dogs were coprologically examined, using a combined sedimentation-flotation method. In 21 (23 %) of the dogs intestinal parasites were detected, and 8 (8.7 %) of these dogs shed either sporocysts of Sarcocystis sp. (n = 6) or taeniid eggs (n = 2). The evaluation of questionnaires providing data on age, origin and deworming schemes of the dogs completed the study.

XIAP discriminates between type I and type II FAS-induced apoptosis

FAS (also called APO-1 and CD95) and its physiological ligand, FASL, regulate apoptosis of unwanted or dangerous cells, functioning as a guardian against autoimmunity and cancer development. Distinct cell types differ in the mechanisms by which the 'death receptor' FAS triggers their apoptosis. In type I cells, such as lymphocytes, activation of 'effector caspases' by FAS-induced activation of caspase-8 suffices for cell killing, whereas in type II cells, including hepatocytes and pancreatic beta-cells, caspase cascade amplification through caspase-8-mediated activation of the pro-apoptotic BCL-2 family member BID (BH3 interacting domain death agonist) is essential. Here we show that loss of XIAP (X-chromosome linked inhibitor of apoptosis protein) function by gene targeting or treatment with a second mitochondria-derived activator of caspases (SMAC, also called DIABLO; direct IAP-binding protein with low pI) mimetic drug in mice rendered hepatocytes and beta-cells independent of BID for FAS-induced apoptosis. These results show that XIAP is the critical discriminator between type I and type II apoptosis signalling and suggest that IAP inhibitors should be used with caution in cancer patients with underlying liver conditions.

Double Standards? Veils and Crucifixes in the European Legal Order

Comparing the treatment of Islamic veils and Christian crucifixes by the European Court of Human Rights, this paper re-examines the charge of “double standards” on the part of this guardian of the European legal order, which is seen as disadvantaging Islam and favoring Christianity. While this is proved partially correct, the paper calls for a more differentiated treatment of the issue. For one, there is a modicum of consistency in the European Court’s decisions, because they are all meant to further “pluralism”. Only, Islam and Christianity fare differently in this respect, as “threat” to and “affirmation” of pluralism, respectively. This distinction hinges on Islam’s compatibility with the liberal-secular order, on which the jury is out. A possible way out of the “pluralism v. pluralism” dilemma, I argue, is signaled in the European Court’s recent decision in Lautsi v. Italy (2011), which pairs a preference for “culturalized” Christianity with robust minority pluralism.

Religion as Culture? How European and American High Courts Endorse Majority Religion

This paper examines a trend in European and American High Courts to endorse majority religion by transforming it into “culture”, and thus by secularizing it. To dissociate religion and state is the hallmark of the liberal state. However, no state has ever managed a perfect separation, not even the American. Under conditions of mounting religious pluralism and ongoing secularization, there is pressure on the state to live up to its “neutrality”. A main strategy to square the circle of neutrality and incomplete dissociation from religion is to declare it “culture”, which gives the state the license to associate or even identify with it (as guardian of nationhood). The paper compares recent American and European High Court rules on religious symbols (especially crucifixes) that exhibits this strategy, addressing similarities and differences as well as the limits and pitfalls of “culturalizing” religion.