Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among adults in the United States.

OBJECTIVE:

To estimate the prevalence and distribution of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) in the United States by age, race/ethnicity, and gender.

METHODS:

Summary prevalence estimates of OAG were prepared separately for black, Hispanic, and white subjects in 5-year age intervals starting at 40 years. The estimated rates were based on a meta-analysis of recent population-based studies in the United States, Australia, and Europe. These rates were applied to 2000 US census data and to projected US population figures for 2020 to estimate the number of the US population with OAG.

RESULTS:

The overall prevalence of OAG in the US population 40 years and older is estimated to be 1.86% (95% confidence interval, 1.75%-1.96%), with 1.57 million white and 398 000 black persons affected. After applying race-, age-, and gender-specific rates to the US population as determined in the 2000 US census, we estimated that OAG affects 2.22 million US citizens. Owing to the rapidly aging population, the number with OAG will increase by 50% to 3.36 million in 2020. Black subjects had almost 3 times the age-adjusted prevalence of glaucoma than white subjects.

CONCLUSIONS:

Open-angle glaucoma affects more than 2 million individuals in the United States. Owing to the rapid aging of the US population, this number will increase to more than 3 million by 2020.

Trends in Approval Times for Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States and the European Union

Genetically engineered (GE) crops are subject to regulatory oversight to ensure their safety for humans and the environment. Their approval in the European Union (EU) starts with an application in a given Member State followed by a scientific step (risk assessment), and ends with a political decision-making step (risk management); and in the United States (US) it starts with a scientific (field trial) step and ends with a ‘bureaucratic’ decision-making step. We investigated trends for the time taken for these steps and the overall time taken for approving GE crops in the US and the EU (traders in these commodities). Results show that from 1996-2015 the overall time trend for approval in the EU decreased and then flattened off, with an overall mean completion-time of 1,763 days. In the US in 1998 there was a break in the trend of the overall approval time: Initially, from 1988 until 1997 the trend decreased with a mean approval time of 1,321 days; from 1998-2015, the trend almost stagnated with a mean approval time of 2,467 days.

The sectionalism of the tariff bill. Speech of Hon. John L. McLaurin, of South Carolina, in the Senate of the United States

This document contains a speech by John L. McLaurin, representative of South Carolina. Sections of the speech include: sectionalism exposed, the bill might have been defeated, the south plundered of its rights, not a protectionist, fraudulent demands of New England, Hon. Randolph Tucker, Hon. W.R. Morrison, and Hon. R.Q. Mills strangers to the doctrine in 1882, a tariff for revenue against the doctrine of free raw material, don’t want Cleveland’s interpretation, contest of schedules, and my remedy.

Consolidation. An account of parties in the United States, from the convention of 1787, to the present period

This document is an account of a convention of South Carolina state representatives following the drafting of the Declaration of Independence. There were three parties involved in the convention and the account is based on the notes of Mr. Luther Martin who attended as well Mr. Justice Yates’ account. The first party wished to abolish all state governments and have one uniform monarchical government for the continent that would be restricted and limited. The second party did not wish to abolish state governments to give their own state some importance. The third party was advocating for a federal government in conjunction with state government. This document is an account of the convention.

Speech of Hon. James H. Hammond, of South Carolina, on the relation of states; delivered in the Senate of the United States, May 21, 1860

The speech is a response by Hon. James H. Hammond as to whether or not the territorial governments established by Congress have the power to define and declare what shall be and what shall not be property within the territorial boundaries. The speech goes on to discuss colonists who went to newly purchased territory and claimed land as their own. He argues whether or not these people have sovereignty of the land over the government.

Speech of Hon. John Lowndes McLaurin, of South Carolina, in the Senate of the United States, Monday, December 9, 1901

This speech is to address the statement that Mr. McLaurin has been excluded from the caucuses of his party and thus that he will be without assignment on any committee. He goes on to explain his exclusion and defend his views that led to his exclusion.

Speech of Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina, on the slavery question. Delivered in the Senate of the United States, March 4, 1850

The speech addresses the question, how can the union be preserved? He goes on to explain the threats to the union and give suggestions for how the threats can be handled.

Stable standard essential for prosperity. Speech in the Senate of the United States, February 4, 1878

This speech was given when the United States Senate was considering a bill to authorize the free coinage of the standard silver dollar and to restore its legal tender character. Mr. Bayard argues against the bill in this speech. He is interrupted during his speech multiple times and questioned about his points.

Liberalization of Labor Relations in Germany and the United States: A firm-centered comparison of cross-national labor organizing at Amazon and Volkswagen

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2015

Leverage instability and persistence: Evidence from the United States and Europe

We find that leverage behavior both in level and time-series variation is very similar between the United States and Europe throughout the 1990-2013 period. Leverage regimes are simultaneously unstable and persistent for both regions. We define instability as the extent to which firms largely deviate from their long-term leverage mean, while persistence as the extent to which today’s leverage influences its future levels. We then show that this simultaneous evidence imply a mean-reversion behavior of leverage and discuss some of its implications for future research on this field.

The relationship between liquidity and profitability in the food & beverage industry evidence from Europe and United States

This Work Project clarifies the relationship between liquidity and profitability based on a sample in the Food & Beverage (F&B) industry, and comparing the largest European and United States companies. The research concludes that liquidity, proxied by current ratio or quick ratio, correlates with return on assets taken as the measure of profitability, and so does the cash conversion cycle and its components. Moreover, company size correlates with liquidity, and indirectly affects ROA. This research contributes and addresses to managers in the F&B industry and recommends how they should act in order to improve profitability in the industry.

William Kent [membre de l'USTC, United States Tariff Commission] : [photographie de presse] / [Agence Rol]

Référence bibliographique : Rol, 58592

The law of the sea: the United States, Canada and the deep seabed

The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.