Studies on the Mechanism of Action of Miconazole: Effect of Miconazole on Respiration and Cell Permeability of Candida albicans

The antifungal drug, miconazole nitrate, inhibits the growth of several species of Candida. Candida albicans, one of the pathogenic species, was totally inhibited at a concentration of approximately 10 µg/ml. Endogenous respiration was unaffected by the drug at a concentration as high as 100 µg/ml, whereas exogenous respiration was markedly sensitive and inhibited to an extent of 85%. The permeability of the cell membrane was changed as evidenced by the leakage of 260-nm absorbing materials, amino acids, proteins, and inorganic cations. The results we present clearly show that the drug alters the cellular permeability, and thus the exogenous respiration becomes sensitive to the drug.

Supramolecular gels `in action'

n recent years, self-assembly has emerged as a powerful tool for the construction of functional nanostructures. Myriad applications of these nanoscale architectures, especially the supramolecular gels derived from low molecular mass compounds, in fields such as optoelectronics, light harvesting, organic–inorganic hybrid materials, tissue engineering and regenerative medicine are being envisaged. This review attempts to present a succinct overview of the current state of research on functional nano-scale systems—the design, synthesis and applications of self-assembled nanomaterials engineered to carry out precise functions, with an emphasis on supramolecular gel phase materials.

Notice on the formation of a committee for Mount Sinai Hospital

Notice on Formation of a committee for Mount Sinai Hospital. Form letter. Printed in black ink on white paper.

Names of boys and girls in the K.K.S.I school, March 8, 1795. Report of the School Committee, February 2, 1794

Digital image

Appointment of committee to superintend the baking of matzoth

Digital image

Report of committee regarding house for Gershom Seixas

Digital image

Report of committee of K. K. S. I. on several matters

Digital image

Circular by committee of Hebra Hased V'Amet regarding establishment of women's Hebra

Digital image

Report of committee to inspect Hebrew school

Digital image

Kansankirkko, uskonnonvapaus ja valtio : Suomen evankelis-luterilaisen kirkon kirkolliskokouksen tulkinta uskonnonvapaudesta 1963-2003

A national church, freedom of religion, and the state The interpretation of freedom of religion formulated by the Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland in reference to the relationship between the Church and the state from 1963 to 2003 This paper discusses the interpretation of freedom of religion formulated by the Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland during the years 1963-2003. The effect of these formulations and decisions made by the Synod on the relationship between the Church and the state is also discussed as the relationship has been a central issue in the debate about freedom of religion in Finland. Active co-operation with the state caused a dispute in the Church during this period. Another cause for concern for the Synod, a strong defender of the national church, was the weakening position of the Church in a society undergoing many changes. As the Synod of 1963 discussed the status of the Church, the Church began to reflect upon its identity as a national church, and to evaluate freedom of religion in the country, as well as the relationship between the Church and the state. Some of the radicals of the 1960s and 1970s presented the Church as an obstacle to freedom of religion. The Synod was keen to emphasize that, in accordance with international agreements on human rights, freedom of religion means the freedom to have and follow a religion, and also that freedom of religion was a right of the majority in Finnish society. As an active guardian of the rights of its members, the Synod defended such issues as the teaching of religion in schools. Throughout the dispute, the Church focused on its right to act freely and, according to its identity, to express spirituality in the society. At the end of the 1960s, several efforts to reform the law on the freedom of religion and the relationship between the Church and the state gained favour in the Synod. These formulations of the Church were the basis for the work of a parliamentary committee in the 1970s, but no significant changes resulted. Instead, freedom of religion in Finland was judged to be fairly good. The committee paper did, however, lead to preparations for greater independence of the Church. The Synod at the time chose to react to the changes presented to it, but it was not before the 1990s that the Synod became an active force of reform in these matters. Though the Synod, particularly from the 1970s onwards, began clearly to favour the improvement of the position of other religious communities in Finland, it felt it had reason to be cautious as each church and religious community had the freedom to decide individually its relationship with the state. Any changes that would have weakened the position of the Church in Finnish society were met with disapproval in the Synod. Even though some theological concerns regarding the national identity of the Church were raised, the Synod emphasized issues of church policy. Keen to preserve and protect its legal status in society, the Synod judged that this status supported the freedom of action enjoyed by the Church as well as the freedom of religion.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

Report of committee to make arrangements for matzah baking

Digital image

Committee report

Digital image

Preparation of 1-acyl-2-succinyl glycero-3-phosphorylcholine and evidence against its involvement in succinate dehydrogenase action

1-Acyl-2-succinyl glycero-3-phosphorylcholine (GPC) was synthesized and its properties described. Although 1-acyl-2-succinyl GPC is a good substrate for succinate dehydrogenase, experiments on the incorporation of [2,3-14C]succinate into mitochondrial lipids gave no evidence to indicate that it is an intermediate in the enzymic oxidation of succinate to fumarate, as has been suggested earlier.

Mode of action of antitumour antibiotics: Spectrophotometric studies on the interaction of chromomycin A3 with DNA and chromatin of normal and neoplastic tissue

The binding of chromomycin A3, an antitumour antibiotic, to various DNA and chromatin isolated from mouse and rat liver, mouse fibrosarcoma and Yoshida ascites sarcoma cells was studied spectrophotometrically at 29°C in 10−2 M Tris-HCl buffer, pH 8.0, containing small amounts of MgCl2 (4.5 · 10−5−25 · 10−5 M). An isobestic point at 415 nm was observed when chromomycin A3 was gradually titrated with Image and its spectrum shifted towards higher wavelength. The rates and extent of these spectral changes were found to be dependent on the concentration of Mg2+. The change in absorbance at 440 nm was used to calculate apparent binding constant (Ka p M−1) and sites per nucleotide (n) from Scatchard plots for various DNA and chromatins. As expected, values of n for chromatin (0.06–0.10) were found to be lower than that found for corresponding DNA (0.10–0.15). Apparently no such correlation exists between binding constants (Ka p M−1 · 10−4) of DNA (6.4–11.2) and of chromatin (3.1–8.3), but Ka p M−1 of chromatin isolated from mouse fibrosarcoma and Yoshida ascites sarcoma are 1.5–3 times higher than that found for mouse and rat liver chromatin. These differences may be taken to indicate structural difference in nucleoprotein complexes caused by neoplasia. The relevance of this finding to tumour suppressive action of chromomycin A3 is discussed.