This paper argues for two propositions. (I) Large asymmetries of power, status and influence exist between economists. These asymmetries constitute a hierarchy that is steeper than it could be and steeper than hierarchies in other disciplines. (II) This situation has potentially significant epistemic consequences. I collect data on the social organization of economics to show (I). I then argue that the hierarchy in economics heightens conservative selection biases, restricts criticism between economists and disincentivizes the development of novel research. These factors together constrain economics’ capacity to develop new beliefs and reduce the likelihood that its outputs will be true.

The Fontan Outcomes Network was created to improve outcomes for children and adults with single ventricle CHD living with Fontan circulation. The network mission is to optimise longevity and quality of life by improving physical health, neurodevelopmental outcomes, resilience, and emotional health for these individuals and their families. This manuscript describes the systematic design of this new learning health network, including the initial steps in development of a national, lifespan registry, and pilot testing of data collection forms at 10 congenital heart centres.

Do increasing, and increasingly diverse, immigration flows lead to declining support for redistributive policy? This concern is pervasive in the literatures on immigration, multiculturalism and redistribution, and in public debate as well. The literature is nevertheless unable to disentangle the degree to which welfare chauvinism is related to (a) immigrant status or (b) ethnic difference. This paper reports on results from a web-based experiment designed to shed light on this issue. Representative samples from the United States, Quebec, and the “Rest-of-Canada” responded to a vignette in which a hypothetical social assistance recipient was presented as some combination of immigrant or not, and Caucasian or not. Results from the randomized manipulation suggest that while ethnic difference matters to welfare attitudes, in these countries it is immigrant status that matters most. These findings are discussed in light of the politics of diversity and recognition, and the capacity of national policies to address inequalities.

We argue that widely accepted elitist and “clientelist” models of immigration policy in the United States unduly minimize popular pressure on policy-making. These models portray majority opinion in ways that fail to recognize divergence between the public’s abstract goals for immigration policy and its support for the concrete policy changes needed to achieve them. As a result, they obscure many important instances in which immigration policy accords with public preferences despite counter-pressure from elites and organized lobbies. We demonstrate this point by identifying and explaining gaps between generalized attitudes and beliefs about specific policies in the domains of both legal and illegal immigration, showing that status quo legal admissions policies are not starkly at odds with majority preferences and that, contrary to interpretations of most commercial polling on the topic, majorities reject specific aspects of legalization programs that organized lobbies insist on as components of a “grand bargain” to overhaul an immigration system widely viewed as “broken.” Appreciating the nuance in mass opinion toward immigration policy helps explain policy stagnation that confounds elitist models and suggests that forging ahead with immigration reform will require persuading the public and not only successful bargaining among elites and interest groups.

Abstract. The relationship of national identifications to preferences about immigration is a subject of empirical controversy. The hypothesis we explore here through a comparison of Canada and the United States is that the normative content of national identity—how people define the meaning of patriotism in their country—mediates the relationship between national pride and sentiment about immigration and multiculturalism. How political elites construct what citizens should be proud of matters. In comparisons based on the 2003 International Social Survey Program's “National Identity Module,” Canadians seem more divided than Americans over their nationality and generally less chauvinist. Canadians are more receptive to maintaining the current level of immigration and see newcomers as less threatening to economic and cultural values. The relationship between identification with the country and support for immigration and multiculturalism diverges sharply between the countries: where in Canada the relationship is positive, in the US it is negative.

Résumé. Le lien entre l'identification à la nation et les préférences quant à l'immigration est un sujet de controverse. À travers une comparaison du Canada et des Etats-Unis, l'hypothèse que nous explorons ici est que le contenu normatif de l'identité nationale, c'est-à-dire le sens donné par la population au patriotisme envers leur pays, joue un rôle intermédiaire dans la relation entre la fierté nationale et les sentiments vis-à-vis l'immigration et le multiculturalisme. La façon dont les élites politiques construisent ce en quoi les citoyens devraient être fiers revêt donc une importance particulière. À titre comparatif, en se basant sur le « Module Identité Nationale » du International Social Survey Programme de 2003, les Canadiens semblent plus divisés que les Américains sur la signification de leur identité nationale et, de façon générale, sont moins chauvins. Les Canadiens sont également plus réceptifs à l'idée de maintenir l'immigration à son niveau actuel et voient les nouveaux arrivants comme étant moins menaçants pour leurs valeurs économiques et culturelles. La relation entre l'identification au pays et le support pour l'immigration et le multiculturalisme diverge nettement entre les deux pays. Alors qu'au Canada la relation est positive, aux Etats-Unis elle est négative.

Following an introduction of the importance of folates and the rationale for seeking to estimate fractional folate absorption from foods (especially for countries not having a mandatory folic acid fortification policy), scientific papers covering the mechanisms of folate absorption and initial biotransformation are discussed. There appears (post-1983) to be a consensus that physiological doses of folic acid undergo biotransformation in the absorptive cells of the upper small intestine to 5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid (as happens for all naturally-occurring reduced 1-carbon-substituted folates). This ‘validates’ short-term experimental protocols assessing ‘relative’ folate absorption in human subjects that use folic acid as the ‘reference’ dose. The underlying scientific premise on which this consensus is based is challenged on three grounds: (i) the apparent absence of a 5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid response in the human hepatic portal vein following absorption of folic acid, (ii) the low dihydrofolate reductase activity peculiar to man and (iii) the implications derived from recent stable-isotope studies of folate absorption. It is concluded that the historically accepted case for folic acid being a suitable ‘reference folate’ for studies of the ‘relative absorption’ of reduced folates in human subjects is invalid. It is hypothesised that the liver, and not the absorptive cells of the upper small intestine, is the initial site of folic acid metabolism in man and that this may have important implications for its use as a supplement or fortificant since human liver's low capacity for reduction may eventually give rise to saturation, resulting in significant (and potentially deleterious) unmetabolised folic acid entering the systemic circulation.

The purpose of the present paper is to review our current understanding of the chemistry and biochemistry of folic acid and related folates, and to discuss their impact on public health beyond that already established in relation to neural-tube defects. Our understanding of the fascinating world of folates and C1 metabolism, and their role in health and disease, has come a long way since the discovery of the B-vitamin folic acid by Wills (1931), and its first isolation by Mitchell et al. (1941). However, there is still much to do in perfecting methods for the measurement of folate bioavailability, and status, with a high extent of precision and accuracy. Currently, examination of the relationships between common gene polymorphisms involved in C1 metabolism and folate bioavailability and folate status, morbidity, mortality and longevity is evaluated as a series of individual associations. However, in the future, examination of the concurrent effects of such common gene polymorphisms may be more beneficial.