Academic literature on the topic 'Mansfield Mills'

There has always been a belief that women in general are treated oppressively, viewed as inferior to men and subject to personal and institutional discrimination. Since literature reflects the way people think and shows the relationship between linguistic choices and socially construed meanings, this paper tackles Katherine Mansfield’s “Miss Brill” through a feminist stylistic approach to find out how female characters are represented. It also aims to explore whether the writer of the text under investigation reinforces or challenges the stereotypical image of women by viewing them as inferior or equal to men. Conducting a feminist stylistic analysis, by utilizing Sara Mills’ (1995) model of analysis involves the employment of a three-tiered level of analysis i.e. the level of the word, the level of the clause and the level of discourse. From the analysis of the short story under investigation, it has been concluded that the way women are represented is socially influenced by the prevailing held beliefs that women are passive, submissive, dependent on men, inferior to and unequal to men.

Situated many thousands of miles apart, possessing very different historical experiences and occupying different positions in the world, Slovenia and New Zealand nonetheless share a number of common features as a result of the political, economic and cultural contacts that have been estab­ lished between the two countries. The author of this paper attempts to gauge the intensity of the contacts, mostly cultural, that have been forged between the two countries, with an emphasis on descriptions of New Zealand and portrayals of its people in the work of some of Slovenia's most outstanding travel writers. Alma Karlin (Samotno potovanje), Miran Ogrin (Na jugu sveta) and Tomo Križnar (Samotne sledi) have all succeeded in acquainting the Slovene reading public with New Zealand and its people and culture. So that readers might understand more fully the observa­ tions offered by these writers, the author of this paper provides background information in the{orm of a short account of the history of New Zealand and of New Zealand literature, going on to focus on those New Zealand writers whose work has been translated into Slovene, most notably Katherine Mansfield. Other writers whose work has been translated include Janet Frame, Dorothy Eden, Ngaio Marsh, Stephanie Johnson and Samuel Butler.

Humphrey Ridley, M.D. (1653–1708), is a relatively unknown historical figure, belonging to the postmedieval era of neuroanatomical discovery. He was born in the market town of Mansfield, 14 miles from the county of Nottinghamshire, England. After studying at Merton College, Oxford, he pursued medicine at Leiden University in the Netherlands. In 1688, he was incorporated as an M.D. at Cambridge. Ridley authored the first original treatise in English language on neuroanatomy, The Anatomy of the Brain Containing its Mechanisms and Physiology: Together with Some New Discoveries and Corrections of Ancient and Modern Authors upon that Subject. Ridley described the venous anatomy of the eponymous circular sinus in connection with the parasellar compartment. His methods were novel, unique, and effective. To appreciate the venous anatomy, he preferred to perform his anatomical dissections on recently executed criminals who had been hanged. These cadavers had considerable venous engorgement, which made the skull base venous anatomy clearer. To enhance the appearance of the cerebral vasculature further, he used tinged wax and quicksilver in the injections. He set up experimental models to answer questions definitively, in proving that the arachnoid mater is a separate meningeal layer. The first description of the subarachnoid cisterns, blood-brain barrier, and the fifth cranial nerve ganglion with its branches are also attributed to Ridley. This historical vignette revisits Ridley's life and academic work that influenced neuroscience and neurosurgical understanding in its infancy. It is unfortunate that most of his novel contributions have gone unnoticed and uncited. The authors hope that this article will inform the neurosurgical community of Ridley's contributions to the field of neurosurgery.

Resumen La resección transanal miniinvasiva ha mejorado los resultados de las resecciones transanales clásicas. Estas técnicas se han difundido en los últimos años debido al desarrollo del TAMIS (trans anal minimally invasive surgery), que consiste en un puerto multicanal transanal por el que se introduce instrumental laparoscópico clásico. Debido a esto, no sólo ha aumentado el número de procedimientos transanales realizados, sino también sus indicaciones, incluyendo un amplio abanico de patologías. En esta publicación destacamos su rol como procedimiento miniinvasivo de exéresis de un adenocarcinoma rectal insuficientemente resecado luego de un procedimiento endoscópico, permitiendo un estudio adecuado de la lesión. Se describirán los principales detalles de la técnica y sus resultados Introducción El equilibrio para lograr un tratamiento adecuado y mantener la calidad de vida ha derivado en el desarrollo de nuevas técnicas y tecnologías. Las técnicas transanales combinadas con el abordaje endoscópico surgen como alternativa a la resección local convencional.(1) En 1988, Buess et al.,(2) describen la microcirugía endoscópica transanal (TEM: transanal endoscopic microsurgery) como ejemplo de cirugía por orificios naturales y posteriormente surge la cirugía endoscópica transanal (TEO: transanal endoscopic operation). Estas técnicas permitieron mejorar la visibilidad y calidad de la resección, así como tratar lesiones rectales más proximales.(3) El TAMIS (trans anal minimally invasive surgery) surge a partir del desarrollo de la cirugía mininvasiva de puerto único (single port). Descrita en 2010 por Atallah y cols.(4) como una alternativa al TEM/TEO, consiste en la utilización de un puerto único multicanal transanal combinado con el uso de instrumental laparoscópico.(5) Esto ha facilitado su desarrollo y permitido ampliar las indicaciones de lesiones pasibles de resección transanal incluyendo: lesiones benignas, tumores neuroendócrinos, tumores del estroma gastrointestinal (GIST), resección con criterio curativo en adenocarcinomas rectales T1, reseccion de tumores T2 (casos individualizados), resecciones no oncológicas en pacientes con elevado riesgo quirúrgico o por elección propia, exéresis biópsica de la “cicatriz” de una lesión rectal luego del tratamiento neoadyuvante.(1) En este caso, destacamos su rol como coadyuvante de la resección endoscópica frente a resecciones insuficientes (superficiales, márgenes insuficientes, fragmentación). Método Se presenta el caso de una paciente de 68 años a la que durante una videocolonoscopia se le reseca un polipo rectal sésil localizado a 7 cm del margen anal (foto 1). El informe histológico refleja la resección endoscópica incompleta de un adenocarcinoma de recto bajo, con infiltración submucosa de 4 mm de profundidad y márgenes de resección comprometidos. Se decide realizar una resonancia nuclear magnética de recto (foto 2) y la resección de espesor parietal total por TAMIS para estudio completo de la lesión. Procedimiento bajo anestesia general. Previamente, ayuno y preparación retrógrada del recto para la correcta visualización de la lesión. Profilaxis antibiótica con Ampicilina-Sulbactam. Paciente en posición ginecológica y Trendelemburg optimizando la visión de la luz rectal. El monitor se coloca hacia la cabeza del paciente, el cirujano entre las piernas a derecha y el asistente a izquierda. El tacto rectal no evidencia lesiones. Esfínter normotónico. Dilatación anal suave para facilitar la colocación del dispositivo y disminuir el riesgo de trauma esfintérico. Introducción del GelPOINT PathÒ plegado, lubricado. Fijación a la piel para evitar su rotación o explusión, minimizando el trauma del canal anal (foto 3). Colocación de la tapa hermética de gel y los tres puertos de acceso. En el puerto central se coloca la óptica y en los otros dos, los instrumentos laparoscópicos. El insuflador se conecta en el trócar más superior para evitar que el flujo de CO2 “salpique” la óptica con el líquido acumulado en el sector declive del recto. Conexión del GelPOINT PathÒ a una bolsa de estabilización para mantener una cavidad estable. Neumorrecto a 12 mmHg. Identificación de cicatriz de polipectomía en cara posterolateral derecha, a 7cm del margen anal. Realce de la lesión con azul de Metileno (foto 4). Marcado circunferencial de la misma con electrobisturí (margen de 1 cm). La resección comienza a la hora 6 avanzando por ambos lados hasta el sector proximal. Esta maniobra facilita la disección del margen en profundidad. Se toma la pieza por mucosa sana para evitar su fragmentación, asegurando una pieza única y con margen adecuado (foto 5). Extracción de la lesión retirando la tapa del dispositivo y se repera para su estudio anatomopatológico (foto 6). Cierre de la brecha rectal con sutura barbada 3-0 (V-Loc TM, Covidien, Mansfield, MA). Postoperatorio sin incidentes. Alta el mismo día. Resultado anatomopatológico: cicatriz inflamatoria sin malignidad. Fotos 1. Se observa la cicatriz de aspecto nacarado, con fibrosis convergente. Foto 2. Obsérvese el engrosamiento mucoso en cara posterolateral izquierda. Foto 3. Colocación de la plataforma y comienzo de la cirugía. Foto 4. Realce de la lesión con azul de Metileno. Foto 5. Comienzo de la disección. Foto 6. Resección completa. Marcado de la pieza para anatomía patológica. Discusión El desarrollo del TEM/TEO, trajo un cambio en la indicación y resultados de la cirugía transanal.(3) Asimismo, permitió el tratamiento de lesiones en todos los sectores del recto y colon sigmoides distal, con mejores resultados que la cirugía transanal convencional. El TAMIS surge como alternativa al TEM/TEO presentando ciertas ventajas: menor costo; plataforma más facil de colocar; uso de instrumental laparoscópico; campo visual de 360º (vs 220º del TEM); no requiere cambios de posición del paciente (con posibilidad de abordaje intraperitoneal combinado) y curva de aprendizaje corta para cirujanos expertos en laparoscopía.(1,3,4,5,6) Además de la resección de tumores rectales, se ha descrito su uso para la reparación de fístulas rectoureterales, hemostasis de lesión de Dielafoy rectal, reparación de fallas de suturas colo o ileorrectales, extracción de cuerpos extraños y abordajes transcolostomía.(7) Actualmente, existe un renovado interés en TAMIS debido al desarrollo de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal (ta-TME) combinado con resección laparoscópica intraabdominal, facilitando la escisión completa del mesorrecto, cuya disección es dificultosa por vía abdominal exclusiva,(6,8) En esta publicación, comunicamos también su valor en la resección de cicatrices rectales de procedimientos endoscópicas insuficientes. En TAMIS, las dos plataformas más utilizadas son: SILS portÒ (Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts, EEUU) y GelPoint PathÒ (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, California, EEUU).(6) Su material flexible basado en un elastómero termoplástico permite ajustar instrumentos laparoscópicos de diferente tamaño. Se adapta al canal anal disminuyendo la distensión del esfínter y, gracias al material de confección, genera un sistema de sellado que minimiza la pérdida de CO2. La menor longitud en comparación al TEM, permite mayor angulación y movimiento de las pinzas durante el procedimiento. 4,7) Una de las dificultades técnicas relacionadas al TAMIS es la inestablidad del neumorrecto por el flujo pulsátil del insuflador. En los últimos años se han desarrollado dispositivos como el insuflador Airseal TM y las bolsas estabilizadoras de gas, como la que hemos utilizado. Esto crea un neumorrecto estable, evitando el flujo rítmico y el colapso de la luz rectal, facilitando el procedimiento.(9) El neumorrecto suele realizarse a 15 mmHg con flujo alto, para lograr una adecuada distensión.(6) Para la resección con márgenes adecuados, destacamos la utilidad del realce de la lesión con tinción vital como el azul de Metileno.(10) Esto permite diferenciar mejor el área patológica de la mucosa normal, facilitando el marcado de la lesión con un margen seguro de 5-10 mm.(3) La resección en profundidad dependerá del tipo de lesión. En las resecciones anteriores de espesor parietal completo debe tenerse cuidado de no lesionar la vagina, la uretra/próstata. Es preferible la utilización del electrobisturí para visualizar los planos de disección, si bien pueden utilizarse otros métodos de hemostasis. La pieza obtenida debe ser única y marcarse adecuadamente para su estudio anatomopatológico.(6) Un punto controversial es el cierre de la brecha rectal a nivel subperitoneal. Las últimas publicaciones recomiendan que debe intentarse siempre que sea posible. En cirujanos experimentados y centros de alto volumen se observa una tendencia a realizar el cierre parietal. Puede utilizarse una sutura barbada 2-0 o 3-0 que facilita la maniobra.(3) Como ventajas, habría menos complicaciones fundamentalmente hemorrágicas y aumentaría la velocidad de cicatrización. Sin embargo, esto no esta completamente demostrado y el cierre puede ser dificultoso.(6) En cuanto a los resultados, el TAMIS tiene resultados similares a otras técnicas endoscópicas de cirugía transanal. (18) Los porcentajes de resección incompleta o de fragmentación varían según las series, pero son mejores en comparación a la resección local clásica. Se reportan mayores márgenes de resección R0 (88-90% para la resección endoscópica vs 55% local clásica), menor fragmentación (1.4% vs 24%) y menor recurrencia local acumulada (4-6% a 20% vs 29%).(1,3,4) La morbilidad global con las resecciones endoscópicas transanales varía entre el 7 y 31% en distintos reportes. Esta variabilidad depende de los criterios utilizados para su evaluación. Afortunadamente, más de la mitad son leves y no requieren tratamiento.(3) Dentro de las complicaciones más relevantes destacamos: la hemorragia y la incontinencia. La hemorragia es la complicación más frecuente (1-13%) y se asocia a dejar abierta la brecha rectal. Generalmente es leve y se detiene espontáneamente. En cuanto a la incontinencia, se ha reportado una incidencia de 10%, de grado variable. Está dada fundamentalmente por la dilatación anal y colocación de la plataforma.(7) Sin embargo, los últimos estudios han mostrado alteraciones prinicpalmente manométricas sin traducción clínica. Se ha reportado tanto para TEM como para para TAMIS.(5) La dehiscencia de la línea de sutura y el desarrollo de abscesos perirrectales se observa en 5% de los casos. Este porcentaje aumenta en pacientes sometidos a neoadyuvancia. Las lesiones uretrales/vaginales se ven en 5,8%. La perforación intraperitoneal en resecciones altas puede repararse por abordaje transanal o laparoscópico abdominal simultáneo.(3) Otras complicaciones poco frecuentes son: estenosis anal, fístulas rectovaginales, lesiones vasculares y nerviosas, embolia gaseosa, neumoretroperitoneo, retención aguda de orina, dolor, fiebre.(7) Conclusión Gracias a la accesibilidad y familiaridad de los materiales laparoscópicos para el cirujano, el TAMIS ha permitido extender la aplicación de los procedimientos endoscópicos por vía transanal, con una mejor calidad de resección que la técnica transanal convencional. Esto permite ampliar sus indicaciones, como en este caso, que se utilizó para la resección de un tumor rectal luego de una resección endoscópica insuficiente, permitiendo su estudio anatomopatológico completo, definiendo la conducta terapéutica. Bibliografía Moreira A, Zapata G, Bollo C, Morales R, Sarotto L. TAMIS: ¿Un nuevo estándar para el tratamiento de los pólipos de recto? Revisión de la bibliografía y reporte de nuestra experiencia. Rev Argent Coloproct (2019) 30(1): 1-11. Buess G, Kipfmüller K, Hack D, Grüssner R, Heintz A, Junginger T. Technique of transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Surg Endosc (1988) 2(2): 71-75. Rossi G. Relato oficial. Resecciones transanales: pasado, presente y futuro. Rev Argent Coloproct (2019) 30(3): 1-77. Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: A giant leap forward. Surg Endosc (2010) 24: 2200-2205. Villanueva JA, Alarcón L, Jiménez B. Cirugía endoscópica transanal: nuevas alternativas con instrumentos de cirugía laparoscópica convencional. In: http://www.medigraphic.com/cirugiaendoscopica. (2011) 14(4): 174-179. Quinteros F, Thiruppathy K, Albert M. Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS): operative technique, pitfalls and tips. In: Minimally invasive approaches to colon and rectal diseases: technique and best practices. Ross HM et al. (eds), Springer Science + Buisness Media New York (2015) 25: 283-91. Heras MA, Cantero R. Cirugía transanal a través de puerto único (TAMIS). Revisión frente otras técnicas de excisión endoscópica de lesiones rectales. Rev Argent coloproct (2013) 2: 55-60. Arroyave MC, De Lacy B, Lacy AM. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer: step by step description of the surgical technique for a two-teams approach. Eur J Surg Oncol (2017) 43(2): 502-505. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.10.024.Epub 2016 Nov 20. Waheed A, Miles A, Kelly J, Monson JRT, Motl JS, Albert M. Insufflation stabilization bag (ISB): a cost-effective approach for stable pneumorectum using a modified CO2 insufflation reservoir for TAMIS and taTME. Tech Coloproctol (2017) 21: 897-900. Moreira Grecco A, Dip F, Sarotto L. Methylene blue TAMIS guided procedure facilitates adenomatous polyps resection. In: https://www.sages.org/meetings/annual-meeting/abstracts-archive/methylen-blue-tamis-guided-procedure-facilitates-adenomatous-polyps-resection/.

Photo by Jo-Anne McArthur on Unsplash ABSTRACT The UK-based campaign group Scrap Factory Farming has launched a legal challenge against industrial animal agriculture; the challenge is in the process of judicial review. While a fringe movement, Scrap Factory Farming has already accrued some serious backers, including the legal team of Michael Mansfield QC. The premise is that factory farming is a danger not just to animals or the environment but also to human health. According to its stated goals, governments should be given until 2025 to phase out industrialized “concentrated animal feeding organizations” (CAFOs) in favor of more sustainable and safer agriculture. This paper will discuss the bioethical issues involved in Scrap Factory Farming’s legal challenge and argue that an overhaul of factory farming is long overdue. INTRODUCTION A CAFO is a subset of animal feeding operations that has a highly concentrated animal population. CAFOs house at least 1000 beef cows, 2500 pigs, or 125,000 chickens for at least 45 days a year. The animals are often confined in pens or cages to use minimal energy, allowing them to put on as much weight as possible in as short a time. The animals are killed early relative to their total lifespans because the return on investment (the amount of meat produced compared to animal feed) is a curve of diminishing returns. CAFOs’ primary goal is efficiency: fifty billion animals are “processed” in CAFOs every year. The bioethical questions raised by CAFOs include whether it is acceptable to kill the animals, and if so, under what circumstances, whether the animals have rights, and what animal welfare standards should apply. While there are laws and standards in place, they tend to reflect the farm lobby and fail to consider broader animal ethics. Another critical issue applicable to industrial animal agriculture is the problem of the just distribution of scarce resources. There is a finite amount of food that the world can produce, which is, for the moment, approximately enough to go around.[1] The issue is how it goes around. Despite there being enough calories and nutrients on the planet to give all a comfortable life, these calories and nutrients are distributed such that there is excess and waste in much of the global North and rampant starvation and malnutrition in the global South. The problem of distribution can be solved in two ways: either by efficient and just distribution or by increasing net production (either increase productivity or decrease waste) so that even an inefficient and unjust distribution system will probably meet the minimum nutritional standards for all humans. This essay explores four bioethical fields (animal ethics, climate ethics, workers’ rights, and just distribution) as they relate to current industrial agriculture and CAFOs. l. Animal Ethics Two central paradigms characterize animal ethics: welfarism and animal rights. These roughly correspond to the classical frameworks of utilitarianism and deontology. Welfarists[2] hold the common-sense position that animals must be treated well and respected as individuals but do not have inalienable rights in the same ways as humans. A typical welfare position might be, “I believe that animals should be given the best life possible, but there is no inherent evil in using animals for food, so long as they are handled and killed humanely.” Animal rights theorists and activists, on the other hand, would say, “I believe non-human animals should be given the best lives possible, but we should also respect certain rights of theirs analogous to human rights: they should never be killed for food, experimented upon, etc.” Jeremy Bentham famously gave an early exposition of the animal rights case: “The question is not Can they reason?, nor Can they talk?, but Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?” Those who take an animal welfare stance have grounds to oppose the treatment of animals in CAFOs as opposed to more traditional grass-fed animal agriculture. CAFOs cannot respect the natural behaviors or needs of animals who evolved socially for millions of years in open plains. If more space was allowed per animal or more time for socialization and other positive experiences in the animal’s life, the yield of the farm would drop. This is not commercially viable in a competitive industry like animal agriculture; thus, there is very little incentive for CAFOs to treat animals well. Rampant abuse is documented.[3] Acts of cruelty are routine: pigs often have teeth pulled and tails docked because they often go mad in their conditions and attempt to cannibalize each other; chickens have their beaks clipped to avoid them pecking at each other, causing immense pain; cows and bulls have their horns burned off to avoid them damaging others (as this damages the final meat product, too); male chicks that hatch in the egg industry are ground up in a macerator, un-anaesthetized, in the first 24 hours of their life as they will not go on to lay eggs. These practices vary widely among factory farms and among jurisdictions. Yet, arguably, the welfare of animals cannot be properly respected because all CAFOs fundamentally see animals as mere products-in-the-making instead of the complex, sentient, and emotional individuals science has repeatedly shown them to be.[4] ll. Climate Ethics The climate impact of farming animals is increasingly evident. Around 15-20 percent of human-made emissions come from animal agriculture.[5] and deforestation to create space for livestock grazing or growing crops to feed farm animals. An average quarter-pound hamburger uses up to six kilograms of feed, causes 66 square feet of deforestation, and uses up to 65 liters of water, with around 4kg of carbon emissions to boot – a majority of which come from the cattle themselves (as opposed to food processing or food miles).[6] According to environmentalist George Monbiot, “Even if you shipped bananas six times around the planet, their impact would be lower than local beef and lamb.”[7] The disparity between the impact of animal and plant-based produce is stark. Not all animal products are created equally. Broadly, there are two ways to farm animals: extensive or intensive farming. Extensive animal farming might be considered a “traditional” way of farming: keeping animals in large fields, as naturally as possible, often rotating them between different areas to not overgraze any one pasture. However, its efficiency is much lower than intensive farming – the style CAFOs use. Intensive animal farming is arguably more environmentally efficient. That is, CAFOs produce more output per unit of natural resource input than extensive systems do. However, environmental efficiency is relative rather than absolute, as the level of intensive animal agriculture leads to large-scale deforestation to produce crops for factory-farmed animals. CAFOs are also point-sources of pollution from the massive quantities of animal waste produced – around 1,000,000 tons per day in the US alone, triple the amount of all human waste produced per day – which has significant negative impacts on human health in the surrounding areas.[8] The environmental impacts of CAFOs must be given serious ethical consideration using new frameworks in climate ethics and bioethics. One example of a land ethic to guide thinking in this area is that “[it] is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”[9] It remains to be seen whether CAFOs can operate in a way that respects and preserves “integrity, stability, and beauty” of their local ecosystem, given the facts above. The pollution CAFOs emit affects the surrounding areas. Hog CAFOs are built disproportionately around predominantly minority communities in North Carolina where poverty rates are high.[10] Animal waste carries heavy metals, infectious diseases, and antibiotic-resistant pathogens into nearby water sources and houses. lll. Workers’ Rights The poor treatment of slaughterhouse workers has been documented in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic, where, despite outbreaks of coronavirus among workers, the White House ordered that they remain open to maintain the supply of meat. The staff of slaughterhouses in the US is almost exclusively people with low socioeconomic status, ethnic minorities, and migrants.[11] Almost half of frontline slaughterhouse workers are Hispanic, and a quarter is Black. Additionally, half are immigrants, and a quarter comes from families with limited English proficiency. An eighth live in poverty, with around 45 percent below 200 percent of the poverty line. Only one-in-forty has a college degree or more, while one-in-six lacks health insurance. Employee turnover rates are around 200 percent per year.[12] Injuries are very common in the fast-moving conveyor belt environment with sharp knives, machinery, and a crowd of workers. OSHA found 17 cases of hospitalizations, two body part amputations per week, and loss of an eye every month in the American industrial meat industry. This is three times the workplace accident rate of the average American worker across all industries. Beef and pork workers are likely to suffer repetitive strain at seven times the rate of the rest of the population. One worker told the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that “every co-worker I know has been injured at some point… I can attest that the line speeds are already too fast to keep up with. Please, I am asking you not to increase them anymore.”[13] Slaughterhouses pose a major risk to public health from zoonotic disease transmission. 20 percent of slaughterhouse workers interviewed in Kenya admit to slaughtering sick animals, which greatly increases the risk of transmitting disease either to a worker further down the production line or a consumer at the supermarket.[14] Moreover, due to poor hygienic conditions and high population density, animals in CAFOs are overfed with antibiotics. Over two-thirds of all antibiotics globally are given to animals in agriculture, predicted to increase by 66 percent by 2030.[15] The majority of these animals do not require antibiotics; their overuse creates a strong and consistent selection pressure on any present bacterial pathogens that leads to antibiotic resistance that could create devastating cross-species disease affecting even humans. The World Health Organization predicts that around 10 million humans per year could die of antibiotic-resistant diseases by 2050.[16] Many of these antibiotics are also necessary for human medical interventions, so antibiotics in animals have a tremendous opportunity cost. The final concern is that of zoonosis itself. A zoonotic disease is any disease that crosses the species boundary from animals to humans. According to the United Nations, 60 percent of all known infections and 75 percent of all emerging infections are zoonotic.[17] Many potential zoonoses are harbored in wild animals (particularly when wild animals are hunted and sold in wet markets) because of the natural biodiversity. However, around a third of zoonoses originate in domesticated animals, which is a huge proportion given the relative lack of diversity of the animals we choose to eat. Q fever, or “query fever,” is an example of a slaughterhouse-borne disease. Q fever has a high fatality rate when untreated that decreases to “just” 2 percent with appropriate treatment.[18] H1N1 (swine flu) and H5N1 (bird flu) are perhaps the most famous examples of zoonoses associated with factory farming. lV. Unjust Distribution The global distribution of food can cause suffering. According to research commissioned by the BBC, the average Ethiopian eats around seven kilograms of meat per year, and the average Rwandan eats eight.[19] This is a factor of ten smaller than the average European, while the average American clocks in at around 115 kilograms of meat per year. In terms of calories, Eritreans average around 1600kcal per day while most Europeans ingest double that. Despite enough calories on the planet to sustain its population, 25,000 people worldwide starve to death each day, 40 percent of whom are children. There are two ways to address the unjust distribution: efficient redistribution and greater net production, which are not mutually exclusive. Some argue that redistribution will lead to lower net productivity because it disincentivizes labor;[20] others argue that redistribution is necessary to respect human rights of survival and equality.[21] Instead of arguing this point, I will focus on people’s food choices and their effect on both the efficiency and total yield of global agriculture, as these are usually less discussed. Regardless of the metric used, animals always produce far fewer calories and nutrients (protein, iron, zinc, and all the others) than we feed them. This is true because of the conservation of mass. They cannot feasibly produce more, as they burn off and excrete much of what they ingest. The exact measurement of the loss varies based on the metric used. When compared to live weight, cows consume somewhere around ten times their weight. When it comes to actual edible weight, they consume up to 25 times more than we can get out of them. Cows are only around one percent efficient in terms of calorific production and four percent efficient in protein production. Poultry is more efficient, but we still lose half of all crops we put into them by weight and get out only a fifth of the protein and a tenth of the calories fed to them.[22] Most other animals lie somewhere in the middle of these two in terms of efficiency, but no animal is ever as efficient as eating plants before they are filtered through animals in terms of the nutritional value available to the world. Due to this inefficiency, it takes over 100 square meters to produce 1000 calories of beef or lamb compared to just 1.3 square meters to produce the same calories from tofu.[23] The food choices in the Western world, where we eat so much more meat than people eat elsewhere, are directly related to a reduction in the amount of food and nutrition in the rest of the world. The most influential theory of justice in recent times is John Rawls’ Original Position wherein stakeholders in an idealized future society meet behind a “veil of ignorance” to negotiate policy, not knowing the role they will play in that society. There is an equal chance of each policymaker ending up poverty-stricken or incredibly privileged; therefore, each should negotiate to maximize the outcome of all citizens, especially those worst-off in society, known as the “maximin” strategy. In this hypothetical scenario, resource distribution would be devised to be as just as possible and should therefore sway away from animal consumption. CONCLUSION Evidence is growing that animals of all sorts, including fish and certain invertebrates, feel pain in ways that people are increasingly inclined to respect, though still, climate science is more developed and often inspires more public passion than animal rights do. Workers’ rights and welfare in slaughterhouses have become mainstream topics of conversation because of the outbreaks of COVID-19 in such settings. Environmentalists note overconsumption in high-income countries, also shining a light on the starvation of much of the low-income population of the world. At the intersection of these bioethical issues lies the modern CAFO, significantly contributing to animal suffering, climate change, poor working conditions conducive to disease, and unjust distribution of finite global resources (physical space and crops). It is certainly time to move away from the CAFO model of agriculture to at least a healthy mixture of extensive agriculture and alternative (non-animal) proteins. - [1] Berners-Lee M, Kennelly C, Watson R, Hewitt CN; Current global food production is sufficient to meet human nutritional needs in 2050 provided there is radical societal adaptation. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene. 6:52, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.310 [2] : Lund TB, Kondrup SV, Sandøe P. A multidimensional measure of animal ethics orientation – Developed and applied to a representative sample of the Danish public. PLoS ONE 14(2): e0211656. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0211656 [3] Fiber-Ostrow P & Lovell JS. Behind a veil of secrecy: animal abuse, factory farms, and Ag-Gag legislation, Contemporary Justice Review, 19:2, p230-249. 2016. DOI: 10.1080/10282580.2016.1168257 [4] Jones RC. Science, sentience, and animal welfare. Biol Philos 28, p1–30 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-012-9351-1 [5] Twine R. Emissions from Animal Agriculture—16.5% Is the New Minimum Figure. Sustainability, 13, 6276. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su13116276 [6] Capper JL. "Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Impact of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Production Systems" Animals 2, no. 2: 127-143. 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani2020127 [7] Monbiot, George. “In Trying to Reduce the Impact of Our Diets, … Their Impact Would Be Lower than Local Beef and Lamb.” Twitter, Twitter, 24 Jan. 2020, twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1220691168012460032. [8] Copeland C. Resources, Science, and Industry Division. "Animal waste and water quality: EPA regulation of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs)." Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, 2006. [9] Leopold A. A Sand County Almanac, and Sketches Here and There. 1949. [10] Nicole W. “CAFOs and environmental justice: the case of North Carolina.” Environmental health perspectives vol. 121:6. 2013: A182-9. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.121-a182 [11] Fremstad S, Brown H, Rho HJ. CEPR’s Analysis of American Community Survey, 2014-2018 5-Year Estimates. 2020. Accessed 08/06/21 at https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections [12] Broadway, MJ. "Planning for change in small towns or trying to avoid the slaughterhouse blues." Journal of Rural Studies 16:1. P37-46. 2000. [13] Wasley A. The Guardian. 2018. Accessed 08/06/2021 at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/05/amputations-serious-injuries-us-meat-industry-plant [14] Cook EA, de Glanville WA, Thomas LF, Kariuki S, Bronsvoort BM, Fèvre EM. Working conditions and public health risks in slaughterhouses in western Kenya. BMC Public Health. 17(1):14. 2017. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-016-3923-y. [15] Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals. Van Boeckel TP, Brower C, Gilbert M, Grenfell BT, Levin SA, Robinson TP, Teillant A, Laxminarayan R. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences May 2015, 112 (18) 5649-5654; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1503141112 [16] Resistance, IICGoA. "No Time to Wait: Securing the future from drug-resistant infections." Report to the Secretary-General of the United Nations: p1-36. 2019. [17] Espinosa R, Tago D, Treich N. Infectious Diseases and Meat Production. Environ Resource Econ 76, p1019–1044. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-020-00484-3 [18] “Q Fever Fact Sheet.” Pennsylvania Department of Health, 4 Jan. 2003. https://www.health.pa.gov/topics/Documents/Diseases%20and%20Conditions/Q%20Fever%20.pdf [19] Ritchie, Hannah. “Which Countries Eat the Most Meat?” BBC News, BBC, 4 Feb. 2019, www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47057341. [20] Reynolds, Alan. “The Fundamental Fallacy of Redistribution.” Cato.org, 11 Feb. 2016, 1:22 pm, www.cato.org/blog/fundamental-fallacy-redistribution. [21] Patricia Justino Professor and Senior Research Fellow. “Welfare Works: Redistribution Is the Way to Create Less Violent, Less Unequal Societies.” The Conversation, 20 Aug. 2021, theconversation.com/welfare-works-redistribution-is-the-way-to-create-less-violent-less-unequal-societies-128807. [22] Cassidy E, et al, “Redefining Agricultural Yields: From Tonnes to People Nourished Per Hectare.” Environmental Research Letters, V. 8(3), p2-3. IOPScience. 2013, http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/3/034015 [23] Poore J, Nemecek T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), p987-992. 2018.

The aim of this chapter is to situate the unique discoveries of cave art at the Creswell Crags caves in the context of what is known of the cave archaeology and palaeontology of the caves of the southern Magnesian Limestone outcrop. The long history of archaeological research at Creswell Crags and the spectacular discoveries that continue to be made in the Creswell caves have tended to overshadow the widespread though less prominent distribution of cave archaeological sites along the limestone outcrop to the north and south of Creswell, a region known as the Creswell Crags Limestone Heritage Area (Mills 2001). Recent audits of the archaeology of the region have drawn attention to the large number of cave sites within the Limestone Heritage Area as well as the considerable potential that these sites have for further research into the history of Ice Age people and their environments (Mills 2001; Davies et al. 2004).While the focus of this chapter is on the Pleistocene deposits and Palaeolithic artefacts that have been preserved in the region’s caves, fissures, and rock shelters, these sites were used throughout prehistory by humans and animals and they contain much important cultural and environmental evidence for these later time periods after the end of the last Ice Age. Creswell Crags is located in the southern part of the Magnesian Limestone, a geological term for deposits of Upper Permian age that includes a series of formations of well-bedded oolitic to dolomitic limestones. The Magnesian Limestone forms a narrow north–south oriented outcrop that runs from near Nottingham in the south to the North Sea coast near Tynemouth in the north (Fig. 6.1). About 30 km to the west of the southern part of the Magnesian Limestone is the older Carboniferous Limestone outcrop of the White Peak, which, like the Magnesian Limestone, contains many archaeological caves. The southern part of the Magnesian Limestone outcrop, between Doncaster and Mansfield, is cut through by a series of vales and gorges which expose caves, fissures, and rockshelters along the cliff lines.

This transcript of a talk given by Ali Smith at the National Portrait Gallery in London on 23 October 2014 is published here for the first time. A recording of the talk may be heard at https://soundcloud.com/npglondon/getting-virginia-woolfs-goat-a-lecture-by-ali-smith ‘Well it is five minutes to ten: but where am I, writing with pen & ink? Not in my studio.’ No, unusually, in this diary entry from May 1932, Woolf is miles from home and miles from England, a foreigner on holiday in Greece, sitting in a dip of land ‘at Delphi, under an olive tree […] on dry earth covered with white daisies’. Leonard is next to her. His holiday reading is a Greek grammar. She sees a butterfly go past. ‘I think, a swallow tail.’ It’s all part of the desire to catalogue where we are. She describes simply for her diary what’s around her: the bushes and rocks and trees, the ‘huge bald gray & black mountain’, the earth, the flies, the flowers, the sound of goat bells....

Locomotives produce vibrations and mechanical shocks from irregularities in the track, structural dynamics, the engines, the trucks, and train slack movement (Mansfield, 2005). The different directions of the irregularities give rise to car-body vibrations in multiple axes including the following: • Longitudinal, or along the length of the train (x); • Lateral, or the side-to-side direction of the train (y); • Vertical (z). Some reports suggest that acceleration at the seat pan is greater than that at the floor, indicating that the seat may amplify the vibration (Johanning, et al., 2006; Mansfield, 2005; Oborne & Clarke, 1974; Transport, 1980). The magnitude of vertical vibration in rail vehicles is reportedly well below many other types of vehicles (Dupuis & Zerlett, 1986; Griffin, 1990; Johanning, 1998). However, some research reports that rail vehicles experience far more lateral vibratory motion than cars and trucks (Lundstrom & Lindberg, 1983). Many factors influence the impact of shock felt by the engineer including train speed, consist, engineer control skills, anticipation of the shock, motion amplitude, shock duration, and body posture. Shock events and vibration affect ride quality; however, shocks are less controllable by locomotive design. Common sources of mechanical shock are coupling and slack run-ins and run-outs (Multer, et al., 1998). While there are investigations of whole-body vibration (WBV) in locomotive cabs reported in the literature, there have been no studies to date that have examined long-haul continuous vibrations (> 16 hr). The authors describe a long-haul WBV study collected on a 2007 GE ES44DC locomotive. It is the first in a series of studies sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to examine WBV and shock in locomotive cabs. The researchers recorded vibration data using 2 triaxial accelerometers on the engineers’ seat: a seat pad accelerometer placed on the seat cushion and a frame accelerometer attached to the seat frame at the base. Data collection occurred over 550 track miles for 16hr 44min. ISO 2631-1 defines methods for the measurement of periodic, random and transient WBV. The focus of ISO 2631-5 is to evaluate the exposure of a seated person to multiple mechanical shocks from seat pad measurements. The research team collected and analyzed vibrations in accordance with ISO 2631-1 and ISO 2631-5. The results from the study as well as future planned long-haul studies will provide a benchmark set of WBV metrics that define the vibration environment of present-day locomotive operations.

Locomotives produce vibrations and mechanical shocks from irregularities in the track, structural dynamics, the engines, the trucks, and train slack movement (Mansfield, 2005). The different directions of the irregularities give rise to car-body vibrations in multiple axes including the following: • longitudinal, or along the length of the train (x); • lateral, or the side-to-side direction of the train (y); • vertical (z). The structural dynamics of rail vehicles give rise to several resonances in the 0.5–20Hz frequency range (Andersson, et al., 2005). Resonances are frequencies in the locomotive that cause larger amplitude oscillations. At these frequencies, even small-amplitude input vibration can produce large output oscillations. Further exacerbating the vibration environment, coupling of the axes of movement occurs: Motions in one direction contribute to motion in a different direction. The magnitude of vertical vibration in rail vehicles is reportedly well below many other types of vehicles (Dupuis & Zerlett, 1986; Griffin, 1990; Johanning, 1998). However, a lack of data from long-haul freight operations prevents an adequate characterization of the vibration environment of locomotive cabs. The authors describe results from 2 long-haul whole-body vibration (WBV) studies collected on a 2009 GE ES44C4 locomotive and a 2008 EMD SD70ACe. These WBV studies sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) examined WBV and shock in locomotives over 123 hours and 2274 track miles. The researchers recorded vibration data using 2 triaxial accelerometers on the engineers’ seat: a seat pad accelerometer placed on the seat cushion and a frame accelerometer attached to the seat frame at the base. The research team collected and analyzed vibrations in accordance with ISO 2631-1 and ISO 2631-5. ISO 2631-1 defines methods for the measurement of periodic, random and transient WBV. The focus of ISO 2631-5 is to evaluate the exposure of a seated person to multiple mechanical shocks from seat pad measurements. Exposure to excessive vibration is associated with an increased occupational risk of fatigue-related musculoskeletal injury and disruption of the vestibular system. While this is not an established causal relationship, it is possible that vibration approaching the ISO 2631-1 health caution guidance zones may lead to an increased occupational risk. The results from these rides show that the frequency-weighted ISO 2631 metrics are below the established health guidance caution zones of the WBV ISO 2631 standards. The goals of these studies are to: • collect data in accordance with international standards so results can be compared with similar findings in the literature for shorter duration rides as well as vibration studies in other transportation modes, • to characterize vibration and shock in a representative sample of locomotive operations to be able to generalize the results across the industry, and • collect benchmark data for future locomotive cab ride-quality standards.