Expression of the human cachexia-associated protein (HCAP) in prostate cancer and in a prostate cancer animal model of cachexia

Prostate cancer (CaP) patients with disseminated disease often suffer from severe cachexia, which contributes to mortality in advanced cancer. Human cachexia-associated protein (HCAP) was recently identified from a breast cancer library based on the available 20-amino acid sequence of proteolysis-inducing factor (PIF), which is a highly active cachectic factor isolated from mouse colon adenocarcinoma MAC16. Herein, we investigated the expression of HCAP in CaP and its potential involvement in CaP-associated cachexia. HCAP mRNA was detected in CaP cell lines, in primary CaP tissues and in its osseous metastases. In situ hybridization showed HCAP mRNA to be localized only in the epithelial cells in CaP tissues, in the metastatic foci in bone, liver and lymph node, but not in the stromal cells or in normal prostate tissues. HCAP protein was detected in 9 of 14 CaP metastases but not in normal prostate tissues from cadaveric donors or patients with organ-confined tumors. Our Western blot analysis revealed that HCAP was present in 9 of 19 urine specimens from cachectic CaP patients but not in 19 urine samples of noncachectic patients. HCAP mRNA and protein were also detected in LuCaP 35 and PC-3M xenografts from our cachectic animal models. Our results demonstrated that human CaP cells express HCAP and the expression of HCAP is associated with the progression of CaP and the development of CaP cachexia. © 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Progress in the development of in vitro human-based alternatives to animal models

Editorial

Intellectual disability and being human:a care ethics model

This pioneering book, in considering intellectually disabled people's lives, sets out a care ethics model of disability that outlines the emotional caring sphere, where love and care are psycho-socially questioned, the practical caring sphere, where day-to-day care is carried out, and the socio-political caring sphere, where social intolerance and aversion to difficult differences are addressed. This book draws from an understanding of how intellectual disability is represented in all forms of media, a feminist ethics of care, and capabilities, as well as other theories, to provide a critique and alternative to the social model of disability.

Human resource development professionals' perceptions about the Academy of Human Resource Development Standards on Ethics and Integrity

Professional standards of ethics proclaim the core values of a profession, describe expected professional duties and responsibilities, and provide a framework for ethical practice and ethical decision-making. The purpose of this mixed, quantitative and qualitative, survey study was to examine HRD professionals' perceptions about the AHRD Standards on Ethics and Integrity, how HRD professionals used the Standards for research and decision-making, and the extent to which the Standards provided guidance for ethical decision-making. Through an on-line survey instrument, 182 members of AHRD were surveyed. The open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic analysis to expand on, inform, and support the quantitative findings. The close-ended questions were analyzed with frequency distributions, descriptive statistics, cross tabulations, and Spearman rank correlations. The results showed a significant relationship between (a) years of AHRD membership and level of familiarity with the Standards, (b) years of AHRD membership and use of the Standards for research, and (c) level of familiarity with the Standards and use of the Standards for research. There were no significant differences among scholars, scholar practitioners, practitioners, and students regarding their perceptions about the Standards. The results showed that the Standards were not well known or widely used. Nevertheless, the results indicated overall positive perceptions about the Standards. Seventy percent agreed that the Standards provided an appropriate set of ethical principles and reflected respondents' own standards of conduct. Seventy-eight percent believed that the Standards were important for defining HRD as a profession and 54% believed they were important for developing a sense of belonging to the HRD profession. Fifty-one percent believed the Standards should be enforceable and 61% agreed members should sign the membership application form showing willingness to adhere to the Standards. Seventy-seven percent based work-related ethical decisions on personal beliefs of right and wrong and 56% on established professional values and rules of right and wrong. The findings imply that if the professional standards of ethics are to influence the profession, they should be widely publicized and discussed among members, they should have some binding power, and their use should be encouraged.

Humanism is a violence typical of the beasts. Philosozing with a Hammer, using Levinas and Derrida, the Measure of the Human and the Human as a measure

Levinas’s reflections arose as a critique of traditional philosophy which, since it was based on presence and identity, leads to the exclusion of the other. Instead of an onto-logical thought the Lithuanian proposes that the ipseity of the human being be constituted by alterity, and that it be so ethically, because the subject is sub-ject, that is, that which upholds, responsibility. In an attempt to take the obligatory attention to the otherness of the other even further, Derrida would develop a radical critique of the Levinasian posture. Deconstruction of every trace of ipseity and sovereignty in the relationship with the other, the reading that we have done of the work of Derrida opts for a no definable understanding of the human. That is why every de-limitation of an ethical field as a properly human implies a brutal violence that the levinasian humanism of the other tried to exceed.

Rabbits, stoats and the predator problem: Why a strong animal rights position need not call for human intervention to protect prey from predators

Animal rights positions face the ‘predator problem’: the suggestion that if the rights of nonhuman animals are to be protected, then we are obliged to interfere in natural ecosystems to protect prey from predators. Generally, rather than embracing this conclusion, animal ethicists have rejected it, basing this objection on a number of different arguments. This paper considers but challenges three such arguments, before defending a fourth possibility. Rejected are Peter Singer’s suggestion that interference will lead to more harm than good, Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka’s suggestion that respect for nonhuman sovereignty necessitates non-interference in normal circumstances, and Alasdair Cochrane’s solution based on the claim that predators cannot survive without killing prey. The possibility defended builds upon Tom Regan’s suggestion that predators, as moral patients but not moral agents, cannot violate the rights of their prey, and so the rights of the prey, while they do exist, do not call for intervention. This idea is developed by a consideration of how moral agents can be more or less responsible for a given event, and defended against criticisms offered by thinkers including Alasdair Cochrane and Dale Jamieson.