We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Welfare Quality® (WQ) protocols are increasingly used for assessing welfare of farm animals. These protocols are time consuming (about one day per farm) and, therefore, costly. Our aim was to assess the scope for reduction of on-farm assessment time of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle. Seven trained observers quantified animal-based indicators of the WQ protocol in 181 loose-housed and 13 tied Dutch dairy herds (herd size from 10 to 211 cows). Four assessment methods were used: avoidance distance at the feeding rack (ADF, 44 min); qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA, 25 min); behavioural observations (BO, 150 min); and clinical observations (CO, 132 min). To simulate reduction of on-farm assessment time, a set of WQ indicators belonging to one assessment method was omitted from the protocol. Observed values of omitted indicators were replaced by predictions based on WQ indicators of the remaining three assessment methods, resources checklist, and interview, thus mimicking the performance of the full WQ protocol. Agreement between predicted and observed values of WQ indicators, however, was low for ADF, moderate for QBA, slight to moderate for BO, and poor to moderate for CO. It was concluded that replacing animal-based WQ indicators by predictions based on remaining WQ indicators shows little scope for reduction of on-farm assessment time of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle. Other ways to reduce on-farm assessment time of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle, such as the use of additional data or automated monitoring systems, should be investigated.
Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) is part of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle, although its inter- and intra-observer reliability have not been reported. This study evaluated inter- and intra-observer reliability of the QBA for dairy cattle in experienced and inexperienced observers using videos. Eight experienced observers performed the QBA (20 descriptors) twice for 16 video clips (60 s per clip; series 1) showing 4-17 animals. They assessed another 11 video clips showing herds (4 shots of 30 s per clip; series 2). Ten inexperienced observers performed the QBA on both video series one time. Inter-observer reliability of experienced observers ranged from slight to moderate (both assessments of series 1), and from low to high (series 2) for descriptors, and from slight to moderate for the QBA score. Inter-observer reliability of inexperienced observers ranged from low to moderate (series 1), and from low to high (series 2) for descriptors, and was moderate (both series) for the QBA score. Intra-observer correlations varied largely per descriptor and observer. They were both negative and positive, and ranged from low to very high. High correlations, however, were not necessarily associated with low paired differences. Values of half of the descriptors and the QBA score differed amongst experienced and inexperienced observers. The QBA appears insufficiently reliable as a tool for welfare assessment in dairy cattle.
Bullying victimization is common in adolescence and has been associated with a broad variety of psychopathology and alcohol use. The present study assessed time-varying associations between bullying victimization and alcohol use through internalizing and externalizing symptoms and whether this indirect association throughout time is moderated by personality. This 5-year longitudinal study (3,800 grade 7 adolescents) used Bayesian multilevel moderated mediation models: independent variable was bullying victimization; moderators were four personality dimensions (anxiety sensitivity, hopelessness, impulsivity, and sensation seeking); internalizing symptoms (anxiety, depressive symptoms) and externalizing symptoms (conduct, hyperactivity problems) were the mediators; and alcohol use, the outcome. Results indicated significant between, within, and lagged effects on alcohol use through internalizing and externalizing symptoms. There were significant between and within effects on alcohol use through internalizing symptoms for adolescents with high anxiety sensitivity and hopelessness, and significant between, within, and lagged effects on alcohol use through externalizing symptoms for adolescents with high impulsivity and sensation seeking. These findings implicate two risk pathways that account for how bullying victimization enhances alcohol use risk and emphasize the importance of personality profiles that can shape the immediate and long-term consequences of victimization.
Higher milk intake has been associated with a lower stroke risk, but not with risk of CHD. Residual confounding or reverse causation cannot be excluded. Therefore, we estimated the causal association of milk consumption with stroke and CHD risk through instrumental variable (IV) and gene-outcome analyses. IV analysis included 29 328 participants (4611 stroke; 9828 CHD) of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-CVD (eight European countries) and European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (EPIC-NL) case-cohort studies. rs4988235, a lactase persistence (LP) SNP which enables digestion of lactose in adulthood was used as genetic instrument. Intake of milk was first regressed on rs4988235 in a linear regression model. Next, associations of genetically predicted milk consumption with stroke and CHD were estimated using Prentice-weighted Cox regression. Gene-outcome analysis included 777 024 participants (50 804 cases) from MEGASTROKE (including EPIC-CVD), UK Biobank and EPIC-NL for stroke, and 483 966 participants (61 612 cases) from CARDIoGRAM, UK Biobank, EPIC-CVD and EPIC-NL for CHD. In IV analyses, each additional LP allele was associated with a higher intake of milk in EPIC-CVD (β = 13·7 g/d; 95 % CI 8·4, 19·1) and EPIC-NL (36·8 g/d; 95 % CI 20·0, 53·5). Genetically predicted milk intake was not associated with stroke (HR per 25 g/d 1·05; 95 % CI 0·94, 1·16) or CHD (1·02; 95 % CI 0·96, 1·08). In gene-outcome analyses, there was no association of rs4988235 with risk of stroke (OR 1·02; 95 % CI 0·99, 1·05) or CHD (OR 0·99; 95 % CI 0·95, 1·03). Current Mendelian randomisation analysis does not provide evidence for a causal inverse relationship between milk consumption and stroke or CHD risk.
If current food consumption patterns continue, the agriculture sector must provide significantly more food in the coming years from the available land area. Some livestock systems engage in feed–food competition as arable land is used for livestock feed rather than as crops for food; reducing the global supply of food. There is a growing argument that to meet future-food demands sustainably, feed–food competition must be minimized. To this end, we evaluated the effectiveness of two refined metrics to quantify feed–food competition in three livestock systems; dairy and its beef, suckler beef and pig production in Ireland. The metrics are edible protein conversion ratio (EPCR) and the land-use ratio (LUR). The EPCR compares the amount of human digestible protein (HDP) in livestock feed against the amount of HDP the livestock produced, calculating how efficiently it produces HDP. However, the LUR compares the potential HDP from a crop system on the land used to produce the livestock's feed against the HDP the livestock system produced. In both metrics, a value <1 demonstrates an efficient system. The EPCR values for dairy beef (0.22) and suckler beef (0.29) systems consider them efficient producers, whereas pig production (1.51) is inefficient. The LUR values designate that only the dairy beef (0.58) is a net positive producer of HDP from the land used for its feed, with crop production producing more HDP than suckler beef (1.34) and pig production (1.73). Consequently, the LUR can be deemed to be more suitable to represent feed–food competition in livestock production.
Whiteite-(MnMnMn), Mn2+Mn2+Mn2+2Al2(PO4)4(OH)2⋅8H2O, is a new whiteite-subgroup member of the jahnsite group from the Foote Lithium Company mine, Kings Mountain district, Cleveland County, North Carolina, USA. It was found in small vugs of partially oxidised pegmatite minerals on the East dump of the mine, in association with eosphorite, hureaulite, fairfieldite, mangangordonite, whiteite-(CaMnMn) and jasonsmithite. It occurs as sugary aggregates of blade-like crystals up to 0.1 mm long and as epitaxial overgrowths on whiteite-(CaMnMn). The crystals are colourless to very pale brown, with a vitreous lustre and a white streak. The blades are flattened on {001} and elongated along [010], with poor cleavage on {001}. The calculated density is 2.82 g⋅cm–3. Optically it is biaxial (–) with α = 1.599(2), β = 1.605(2), γ = 1.609(2) (white light); 2V (calc.) = 78.2°, having no observable dispersion or pleochroism, and with orientation X = b. Electron microprobe analyses and structure refinement gave the empirical formula (Mn2+0.59Ca0.38Na0.03)Σ1.00Mn1.00(Mn2+1.04Fe3+0.58Fe2+0.23Zn0.16Mg0.08)Σ2.09Al2.04(PO4)3.89(OH)3.18(H2O)7.26. Whiteite-(MnMnMn) is monoclinic, P2/a, a = 15.024(3) Å, b = 6.9470(14) Å, c = 9.999(2) Å, β = 110.71(3)°, V = 976.2(4) Å3 and Z = 2. The crystal structure was refined using synchrotron single-crystal data to wRobs = 0.057 for 2014 reflections with I > 3σ(I). Site occupancy refinements confirm the ordering of dominant Mn in the X, M1 and M2 sites of the general jahnsite-group formula XM1(M2)2(M3)2(H2O)8(OH)2(PO4)4. A review of published crystallochemical data for jahnsite-group minerals shows a consistent chemical pressure effect in these minerals, manifested as a contraction of the unit-cell parameter, a, as the mean size of the X and M1 site cations increases. This is analogous to negative thermal expansion, but with increasing cation size, rather than heating, inducing octahedral rotations that result in an anisotropic contraction of the unit cell.
This chapter inquires into the way the most prominent figure in the cyberwar discourse, Michael Schmitt, constructs his authority in his presentations. It concludes that these presentations entail a kind of map-drawing: the first part of the chapter shows how Schmitt relates to ‘time’ by positioning himself as well as the Tallinn Manual within the past, present and future of international legal thinking. The second part of the chapter shows how he constructs a spatial map of the field within which he functions and discursively relates to several ‘others’: nonlawyers; other(s) (lawyers) who, in his view, misinterpret international law as well as those he refers to as “pure academics”; third, the group of experts involved in the composition of the Manual; and finally, himself in the third person. Following the construal of all these links, what is left at the heart of the discursive map is Schmitt himself, holding the key to legal knowledge as well as functioning as gatekeeper for those he considers suitable to partake in the cyberwar debate.
This chapter provides the background to Chapters 3, 4 and 5. It demarcates the analysis by, first, elaborating on the notion of ‘war’ in cyberspace, and second, on “legal problem-solution” (Koskenniemi) as the shared aim of the international legal scholars involved. It furthermore explains the focus of chapters 3 and 4 on the debate on Article 2(4) of the UN Charter in particular, and discusses some of the problems scholars run into as they try to apply the prohibition on the use of force to cyberattacks. The last part of the chapter provides a broad sketch of these attempts, and as a contrast to 'legal problem-solution' details the work of those scholars who claim that the characteristics of cyberattacks preclude their regulation under international law.
This last chapter returns to the main point of this book: to propose a new “way of seeing” (Johns) international legal knowledge construction. It puts forward three conclusions. First, the “mundane” (Johns) only comes into view by changing the way we read or listen. This entails a willingness to attend to international law’s texts; to spend time with them and to ‘stay seated’ throughout the attempt at reading or hearing them differently. Second, considering others’ knowledge practices this closely spills over into a closer consideration of one’s own. This is in fact what follows from the book's sociological approach, and by showing what forms this (self-)reflection may take on, I argue that the knowledge practices of those involved in the cyberwar discourse are not limited to doctrinal work. Third, looking at international legal scholarship in this way also reveals the presence of its writers. In writing about international law its scholars distance themselves from it; and in so doing we come to see that there is, in fact, a writer at work (as also discussed by Pierre Schlag). What results is a view of scholars as engaged in ‘writing law’ in a very literal, textual, tangible sense.
This chapter takes a step closer to legal writing on Article 2(4) and cyberattacks, and considers the use of consensus claims: specifically, claims that there is 'general acceptance' of, 'unanimity' on, or 'a majority view' with regard to the meaning of the prohibition as armed force. It asks what is invoked when these kinds of claims are made, and seeks to account for what consensus claims signify in legal writing. The chapter then proceeds by looking at the footnotes following these claims. The ‘sources’ these footnotes list seemingly function to substantiate the consensus claim. However, as shown in the chapter appendix, in order to support their consensus claims scholars largely refer to the same publicists. Using the notion of “concept symbols” as coined by Henry Small, the chapter seeks to account for the function of these references to the most-cited scholars, and how they turn into the bearers of majority opinion. The chapter concludes that even though one single reference can appear to be quite innocuous, when considered as a more widespread practice it seriously impacts who gets a say – and thus, ultimately, what we know – in international law.
This chapter asks how scholars reconstruct the meaning of the prohibition on the use of force in light of the “novel features” (Benatar) of cyberwar. Given the range of effects cyberattacks can have the question is where scholars draw the boundary of force. By creating a dialogue between different pieces and juxtaposing the arguments scholars make, this chapter shows what legal knowledge construction at the boundaries of Article 2(4) looks like. Specifically, it identifies two argumentative turns scholars take. The first pertains explicitly to the boundaries of the norm, and the chapter shows the subsequent trajectory of an argument about the (in)sufficiency of Article 2(4) in regulating these kinds of cyberattacks. The second turn pertains to the classification of the threat. Whereas to some scholars cyberattacks simply constitute a new means to wage war, to others the change is much more fundamental. Whether a scholar opts for the first label or the second, matters to how the legal analysis proceeds towards, again, a diagnosis about the (in)sufficiency of the norm. In sum, this chapter shows how exactly legal writing constructs legal knowledge in relation to Article 2(4).
This chapter puts forward the main point of the book: to propose a new “way of seeing” (Johns) international legal scholarship. One of its principal claims is that a focus on the ‘microlevel’ of international legal scholarship changes our understanding of what it means to make law. This has significant implications for what we scrutinize and how; for what we think matters to the way international legal knowledge comes about and what it is we do as legal scholars. What it entails is an “attentiveness” (Orford) to the particular, individually spoken and written word, as well as to the part played by the individual scholar who utters it. The introduction roughly outlines the cyberwar discourse, but mostly situates the book in scholarship about doctrine as well as scholarship about the (socio)linguistics of academic knowledge construction. It also details how it takes up Anne Orford's call for a “turn to description” and relates that turn to practice theory, linguistics and ethnographic work on and in international law.
International legal scholars tend to think of their work as the interpretation of rules: the application of a law 'out there' to concrete situations. This book takes a different approach to that scholarship: it views doctrine as a socio-linguistic practice. In other words, this book views legal scholars not as law-appliers, but as constructing knowledge within a particular academic discipline. By means of three close-ups of the discourse on cyberwar and international law, this book shows how international legal knowledge is constructed in ways usually overlooked: by means of footnotes, for example, or conference presentations. In so doing, this book aims to present a new way of seeing international legal scholarship: one that pays attention to the mundane parts of international legal texts and provides a different understanding of how international law as we know it comes about.
Alcohol consumption, smoking and mood disorders are leading contributors to the global burden of disease and are highly comorbid. Yet, their interrelationships have remained elusive. The aim of this study was to examine the multi-cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between (change in) smoking and alcohol use and (change in) number of depressive symptoms.
Methods
In this prospective, longitudinal study, 6646 adults from the general population were included with follow-up measurements after 3 and 6 years. Linear mixed-effects models were used to test multi-cross-sectional and longitudinal associations, with smoking behaviour, alcohol use and genetic risk scores for smoking and alcohol use as independent variables and depressive symptoms as dependent variables.
Results
In the multi-cross-sectional analysis, smoking status and number of cigarettes per day were positively associated with depressive symptoms (p < 0.001). Moderate drinking was associated with less symptoms of depression compared to non-use (p = 0.011). Longitudinally, decreases in the numbers of cigarettes per day and alcoholic drinks per week as well as alcohol cessation were associated with a reduction of depressive symptoms (p = 0.001–0.028). Results of genetic risk score analyses aligned with these findings.
Conclusions
While cross-sectionally smoking and moderate alcohol use show opposing associations with depressive symptoms, decreases in smoking behaviour as well as alcohol consumption are associated with improvements in depressive symptoms over time. Although we cannot infer causality, these results open avenues to further investigate interventions targeting smoking and alcohol behaviours in people suffering from depressive symptoms.