Articles de revues sur le sujet « Charles Emmanuel I »

In 1581 Antoinette de La Marck, the devout duchesse de Montmorency made a pilgrimage to the shrine of the Virgin at Montserrat in Catalonia. The next year her husband Henri de Montmorency, the governor of Languedoc, corresponded with the viceroy of Catalonia about the problem of banditry which was rife on both sides of the frontier. In 1583, Montmorency's servant carried letters to Charles Emmanuel, duke of Savoy, hidden in the soles of his shoes. During the festivities for the wedding of Charles Emmanuel to the infanta Catalina in 1585, Giuseppe Lercaro, Montmorency's Genoese-born intendant desfinances, spent some ten days in Barcelona concealed in the lodgings of Savoy's ambassador and had several clandestine interviews with both the duke and his new father-in-law Philip II. In 1588 Philip offered 100,000 francs towards the dowry of Montmorency's daughter Charlotte, provided that she married the son of the due de Guise and thus reconciled the two families whose rivalry had dominated the French political scene since the 1540s. These incidents, unremarkable as they may individually appear, formed part of the negotiations between Henri due de Montmorency and Philip II which, in notable contrast to those of the Spanish king with the Guise family, have been little studied by historians. Consequently, Montmorency's reputation now is generally that of a politique and patriot. This paper offers a rather different appraisal of him.

This article explores the controversies triggered by Freud's metapsychology, specifically the American critiques of the 1970s – Heinz Hartmann, Merton Gill and David Rapaport, Robert Waelder, and Lawrence Kubie for ego-psychology, leading into Roy Schafer, George Klein and again Merton Gill for hermeneutics, Emmanuel Peterfreund and Charles Brenner for positivism, before concluding with a summary of more inventive engagements with metapsychology including that of Joseph Sandler and André Green. The article argues that in the name of empirical or clinical evidence, the American critiques tried to reintroduce a subjectivity made of data into the heart of psychoanalytic theory and as a result, replaced the subject of the unconscious with a new figure of the subject not only transparent to itself, but also transparent to two main forms of discourse: the hermeneutic discourse, on the one hand, and the positivist discourse, on the other.

This essay begins and ends with the question: what is the meaning and purpose of religious thought today? In response to this query, the paper outlines the critical significance of the socio-cultural fragmentation of contemporary religious thought by: first, reclaiming an ethical moment within the critical theory of Max Horkheimer; second, justifying the significance of that moment by expanding our understanding of morality as explained by Charles Taylor; and third, cultivating its religio-ethical content in relation to Emmanuel Levinas' understanding of God as an ethical force that interrupts, subverts and throws into question. It is this juxtaposition of themes that points toward a critical theory necessarily informed by religious insights. What it represents is an untried form of critical theory whose religio-ethical cast and substance contributes to the venture of contemporary thinking by working with the fragility of religious thought today.

The start of the presidential cycle opens up a new period of French domestic and foreign policies. It is typical for the domestic school of Frenсh studies to correlate the foreign policy of a new president with the main historical reference of the Fifth republic – the diplomacy of its founder Charles de Gaulle, despite the fact that the international situation that determined it is a thing of the past. The profound transformations of the international environment have shattered the foundations of the foreign policy equilibrium formed by de Gaulle, therefore it seems an anachronism to predict the foreign policy course of Paris based solely on tradition. During three and a half years of E. Macron's rule, the main directions of adjusting geopolitical approaches were determined, which did not diminish the acuteness of the question of the role of France and the EU in the world, where a new hierarchy of centers of power is being built. New features of French geopolitics testify to the transformations of geopolitical identity, in which sovereignty was transferred to the European (EU) level, and strategic identity from the national / European to the European / Atlantic level. In this dual ensemble, France intends to play the role of a leader capable of promoting national interests through the establishment of the EU as an independent center of power. The purpose of this study is to analyze the foundations of current French geopolitics, which allows to outline the direction and framework of the country's foreign policy for the medium, possibly for the long term.

Historically, France is home to a number of concepts and practices for the creation of the welfare state (État providence). The state social policy is organically woven into the economic mechanism of this country and, it seemed, is its integral part. The purpose of the article is to identify the main directions of the revision of the social French paradigm. The generalization of the bibliography, historical and statistical analysis made it possible to identify a number of factors of such a revision, including the processes of transnationalization of French business, the scaling of trade, and the crisis of the post-industrial phase of global capitalism. The conclusion is substantiated that the shocks of the 2019 pandemic at the beginning of 2021 accelerated the evolution of French social policy in favor of the communitarian level due to the limited opportunities for social reforms at the country level. The antithesis of the initiatives of Emmanuel Macron is the growth of nationalist sentiments and ideas of Charles de Gaulle against the background of the crisis of convergence of the economies of the member countries.

AbstractThe contribution that may come from the general science of signs, semiotics, to the planning and development of education and learning at all levels, from early schooling through to university education and learning should not be neglected. As Umberto Eco claims in the “Introduction” to the Italian edition of his book Semiotica and Philosophy of Language (1984: xii, my trans.), “[general semiotics] is Semiotica e filosofia del linguaggio. Turin: Einaudi; in nature, because it does not study a particular system, but posits the general categories in light of which different systems can be compared. And for general semiotics philosophical discourse is neither advisable nor urgent: it is simply constitutive.” To the title of their book Semiotic Theory of Learning, at the centre of our attention in the present text, Andrew Stables, Winfried Nöth, Alin Olteanu, Sébastien Pesce, and Eetu Pikkarainen, rightly add the subtitle New Perspectives in the Philosophy of Education. This multivoiced contribution to research in learning and education in a semiotic framework has a unifying reference in the semiotics of Charles S. Peirce, but without disregarding an array of other distinguished exponents of the teaching and education sciences from different disciplines, semioticians and philosophers alike. This book, a polyphonic effort, with its appeal to “act otherwise,” and to do so investing in learning and education, no doubt makes a significant contribution in such a direction: education for transformation, for humanizing social change. Beyond evidencing what to us are particularly interesting aspects of the topics under discussion in Semiotic Theory of Learning, we also propose to continue and amplify this multivoiced dialogue. While highlighting still other aspects and contributions made by the same semioticians and philosophers presented by the authors of this book, involving such figures as Charles Peirce, Charles Morris, Thomas Sebeok, John Deely, etc., we have further introduced other voices made to resound throughout, whether directly or indirectly, like that of Victoria Welby, Mikhail Bakhtin, Emmanuel Levinas, Adam Schaff, Ferruccio Rossi-Landi, Marcel Danesi, Augusto Ponzio, and Genevieve Vaughan.

The Dutch-Swiss writer Belle de Zuylen/Isabelle de Charrière (1740-1805) was born in the Dutch noble family Van Tuyll van Serooskerken, but married (in 1771) outside of nobility. As a child she had a Swiss gouvernante, like so many children of the European elites, and in spite of being quite familiar also with the Dutch language, she would continue using French all her life, both for private correspondence and for her literary works. Most of these were published in Switzerland. Indeed, once she had married Charles-Emmanuel de Charrière, former tutor of her brothers, she went to live with him in his family house near Neuchâtel. This is where she started publishing and found recognition with her contemporary readers. In her novels and plays, she tends to confront characters representing different social classes – the reasons of which are often formulated in exchanges of letters with family members or friends who either helped her copying the texts, or were enthusiastic readers. As she wrote to her German translator, in these fictions she could illustrate the potential ‘nobility’ of the ‘so-called lower classes’. This is what she considered ‘her own democracy’.

The main approaches to semiotic inquiry today contradict the idea of the individual as a separate and self-sufficient entity. The body of an organism in the micro- and macrocosm is not an isolated biological entity, it does not belong to the individual, it is not a separate and self-sufficient sphere in itself. The body is an organism that lives in relation to other bodies, it is intercorporeal and interdependent. This concept of the body finds confirmation in cultural practices and worldviews based on intercorporeity, interdependency, exposition and opening, though nowadays such practices are almost extinct. An approach to semiotics that is global and at once capable of surpassing the illusory idea of definitive and ultimate boundaries to identity presupposes dialogue and otherness. Otherness obliges identity to question the tendency to totalizing closure and to reorganize itself always anew in a process related to ‘infinity’, as Emmanuel Levinas teaches us, or to ‘infinite semiosis’, to say it with Charles Sanders Peirce. Another topic of this paper is the interrelation in anthroposemiosis between man and machine and the implications involved for the future of humanity. Our overall purpose is to develop global semiotics in the direction of “semioethics”, as proposed by S. Petrilli and A. Ponzio and their ongoing research.

Introduction. As part of French foreign policy, arms trade is currently considered to be a specific way to promote national influence in the world and support defense industry at home. This approach has been already exercised for several decades, but the last presidency was an entirely new and interesting point in this respect because in 2015 and 2016 French arms trade attained the highest income rates. Methods. The key notion of this article is French ‘strategic autonomy’ which remains a pivotal point of any diplomatic activity of France since Charles de Gaulle’s presidency. Arms export perfectly corresponds to this point because it helps to maintain French autonomy in economic and political ways. To prove it, several methods were provided such as functional method, comparative analysis and SWOT-analysis. Analysis. This article aims to identify the specifics of contemporary French arms export policy. In this regard, the text is divided in three parts. The first one defines military export as a part of ‘strategic autonomy’ concept. To explain the recent growth, the second part explores a new governmental approach to arms trade. The third part brings together the issues and prospects of French military export expected for Emmanuel Macron’s term. Results. The main conclusion is that the new president seems to conduct the same policy as his predecessor. The government has reaffirmed its main principles in the field and renewed a political support for arms contracts. Military cooperation with foreign countries still officially depends on the idea of ‘strategic autonomy’ of France and its defense industry.

Abstracttitle SUMMARY /title Vitaliano Donati, physician and naturalist, born in Padua in 1717, around the mid-eighteenth century played a significant role among the leading Italian philosophers, performing in Italy and in the Balkans some important naturalistic research that set the basis for the geographical map, the new theory of Carl Linn. In 1751, King Charles Emmanuel of Savoy called him to the chair of Botany in Turin University. During the permanence of Vitaliano Donati in the Kingdom of Sardinia he continued his important activities in botany, mineralogy and geology and made relevant observations about climate, earthquakes, and mining-sites in Piedmont always having the aim of increasing the knowledge of local resources and their potential for exploitation. In 1759 the king entrusted Vitaliano Donati with the direction of a scientific and commercial mission in Egypt and in the East Indies. This voyage had a double purpose: to collect samples for a Museum and for the Botany Garden, and to observe in those countries the processes of mineral extraction, of agricultural cultivation and of livestock breeding. The travel started in Venice in June 1759, and among critical events and diplomatic plots, continued to the Middle East and Egypt, from where it continued until wriving at the Indian Ocean. But this adventure ended in February 1762 when Donati died on a Turkish boat not far away the Indian coast near Mangalore. This article, which trace the complete transcription of the correspondence concerning the voyage, also reports the text of the "instructive memory", issued by the king to Vitaliano Donati, and summarises the scientific and political scopes of this unfortunate enterprise.

The article examines the evolution of the French foreign policy towards the Latin America in the period of the Fifth Republic. It is noted that this policy was uneven, because it depended on the preferences of each president who plays a major role in determining the country’s foreign policy priorities. Charles de Gaulle, in the framework of his policy of restoring the «greatness» France, attached great importance to political, economic and cultural ties with Latin America and made a very important personal contribution to building up such ties. Georges Pompidou and Valery Giscard d’Estaing did not show much interest towards the region, although they encouraged trade and economic exchanges with it, allowing to sell French goods there, and in return receive row materials and semi-finished products for their own industry. On the contrary, François Mitterrand developed political and cultural relations with the Latin America countries, with the focus on supporting the «progressive» forces and democratization processes. Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy took a more pragmatic approach, but they did a lot to develop economic and political co-operation with the region both at the bilateral level and trough the EU. François Holland, who believed that the Latin America had a «great future», promoted the relations with it even more actively. At the same time, protecting the interests of French agricultural producers he practically blocked negotiations between the EU and the common market MERCOSUR on a free trade zone and association. Under Emmanuel Macron Latin America «dropped out» of French policy priorities, which led to the loss of the former dynamics of relations. The coronavirus pandemic has dealt a severe blow to mutual trade and economic exchanges. However, some prospects of enhancing co-operation still exist.

The author of the article analyzes the reports of Russian diplomats and synchronous documents from the French archives about the socio-political and military situation in Piedmont in the period from May 1799 to June 1800. During these months, under the patronage of the Austro-Russian troops in Turin, the provisional royal government was recreated under. The council or “giunta” was led by marquis C. F. Thaon de Revel de Saint-Andrea. This government was forced to search for a way out of the total crisis in the most difficult conditions, but instead only worsened the social and economic situation. This was facilitated by disagreements with the Austrian military administration and personally by general M. Melas. As can be seen from the reports to St. Petersburg by D. Mozenigo and A. Czartoryski, the real state of affairs was even worse than it was reported in the press and official Austrian and Italian proclamations. During this period the Russian court, however, was in no hurry to listen to the requests of the Sardinian court and its temporary cabinet. The last months of the existence of the Ancien Régime in Piedmont were marked by an acute financial crisis, which was caused by the March reform of count Prospero Balbo. Anti-French sentiments among the population were replaced by anti-Austrian ones, and in an atmosphere of general chaos in May 1800, the government ceased to control the situation. Peasant uprising again spread across several provinces. Analysis of the situation and Czartoryski’s predictions about the imminent return of the French and the republican regime were fully justified after the Battle of Marengo. The Restoration regime in Piedmont could have lasted longer if it had pursued a more balanced policy, initially abandoning the independent political role that ministers and advisers of the king Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia tried to play throughout the year. But the severity of the Austrian occupation and unsuccessful financial experiments of this cabinet undermined the confidence of the subjects and eventually contributed to the annexation of Piedmont by Napoleonic France in 1802.

Background:Fibrotic diseases are characterized by excessive extracellular matrix production as a result of immune-mediated permanent fibroblast activation. Innate lymphoid cells type II (ILC2) are an only recently discovered cell type involved in barrier integrity and tissue homeostasis. There is upcoming evidence that ILC2s play a central role in mediating fibrotic diseases.Objectives:The aim of the study was to further elucidate the role of ILC2s in fibrotic tissue remodeling and fibroblast activation.Methods:Skin biopsies of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) or sclerodermatous chronic graft versus host disease (scGvHD) as well as lung biopsies of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) were analyzed by immunofluorescence (IF) staining. Single cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) was performed on ILCs from fibrotic skin and lung of bleomycin-challenged mice. Further characterization of ILC2 phenotypes in fibrosis models was done by flow cytometry.In vitroculture of fibroblasts and ILC2s was used to study cellular interaction and fibrotic activation. Quantitative realtime-PCR, western blot, IF staining and ELISA were used as readouts.Results:Two different subtypes of ILC2s were found in skin of SSc and scGvHD patients as well as in lungs of IPF patients with one subpopulation being particularly increased in fibrotic tissue. Single cell RNA-sequencing confirmed the existence of two major populations of ILC2s in experimental fibrosis. One subtype showed features of immature ILC2 progenitors and was actively recruited from the bone marrow during fibrotic tissue remodeling. The other ILC2 subset was highly activated and expressed pro-fibrotic cytokines. These profibrotic ILC2s directly interacted with fibroblasts in a cell contact dependent manner. Semaphorin 4A (SEMA4A) expressed by ILC2s bound to Plexin D1 (PLXND1) on fibroblasts. This interaction resulted into fibrotic imprinting with high expression levels of the transcription factor PU.1 which was recently described as central regulator of the pro-fibrotic gene expression program (Wohlfahrt et al. 2019). Signaling through Jagged 1 (JAG1) and Notch receptor 2 (NOTCH2) was identified as a second mechanism of interaction between fibroblasts and ILC2s. JAG1 expressed by fibroblasts activated NOTCH2 signaling in ILC2s which emphazised the secretion of pro-fibrotic cytokines.Conclusion:We identified a bidirectional interaction between ILCs and fibroblasts incorporating a vicious circle of fibrotic tissue remodelling. As ILCs are still not accessible as therapeutic targets these results might contribute to the development of new strategies for anti-fibrotic therapies.References:[1]Wohlfahrt, Thomas, Simon Rauber, Steffen Uebe, Markus Luber, Alina Soare, Arif Ekici, Stefanie Weber, Alexandru-Emil Matei, Chih-Wei Chen, Christiane Maier, Emmanuel Karouzakis, Hans P. Kiener, Elena Pachera, Clara Dees, Christian Beyer, Christoph Daniel, Kolja Gelse, Andreas E. Kremer, Elisabeth Naschberger, Michael Stürzl, Falk Butter, Michael Sticherling, Susetta Finotto, Alexander Kreuter, Mark H. Kaplan, Astrid Jüngel, Steffen Gay, Stephen L. Nutt, David W. Boykin, Gregory M. K. Poon, Oliver Distler, Georg Schett, Jörg H. W. Distler, and Andreas Ramming. 2019. ‘PU.1 controls fibroblast polarization and tissue fibrosis’,Nature, 566: 344-49.Disclosure of Interests:Stefanie Weber: None declared, Charles Gwellem Anchang: None declared, Simon Rauber: None declared, Markus Luber: None declared, Maria Gabriella Raimondo Grant/research support from: Celgene, Partner Fellowship, Yuko Ariza Employee of: Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Aleix Rius Rigau: None declared, Alexander Kreuter: None declared, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB, Jörg Distler Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Paid instructor for: Boehringer Ingelheim, Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Andreas Ramming Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis, Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Gilead, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Janssen

Abstract Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children is usually treated with 10 days of antibiotics. Shorter antibiotic courses may be beneficial if proven effective, with potentially fewer antibiotic adverse effects and decreased antibiotic exposure. Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled superiority trial (NCT02891915) compared a strategy of short vs standard course ß-lactam therapy for outpatient CAP in children ages 6–71 months. Children demonstrating clinical improvement by day 3–5 of initial therapy were considered for enrollment. Enrolled children were randomized 1:1 to receive either 5 additional days of the originally prescribed antibiotic (standard) or matching placebo (short). The Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR; PMID: 26113652) was the primary outcome, and was defined by classifying the global experience of children into an ordinal clinical response (OCR) that combined the response to CAP treatment and antibiotic adverse effects 11–15 days after the start of therapy. For those subjects with equivalent OCR, documented days of antibiotic administration was used to further rank the desirability of the outcome with the a priori assumption that shorter antibiotic exposure was more desirable. The OCR was a secondary outcome. The intention to treat population was used to estimate the probability of a more desirable outcome for the strategy of short vs. standard course therapy for both outcomes. Results 385 children were enrolled; 380 had complete data for analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two strategies. In both strategies, > 90% of children had an adequate response to CAP treatment and most antibiotic adverse effects were minor (Table). In the OCR analysis, short course therapy had a 48% probability (95% CI: 42%-53%) of a more desirable outcome. In the DOOR analysis, short course therapy was superior to standard therapy with a 69% probability (95% CI: 63%-72%; p< 0.001) of a more desirable outcome. Conclusion Among children with CAP demonstrating initial clinical improvement with outpatient therapy, both strategies had a similar response to CAP treatment and antibiotic adverse effects, but short course therapy was superior in our a priori defined outcome that incorporated decreased antibiotic exposure. Disclosures Emmanuel B. Walter, MD, MPH, Moderna (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support) Jason Newland, MD, MEd, FPIDS, Merck (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Other Financial or Material Support, Industry funded clinical trial) Vance G. Fowler, Jr., MD, MHS, Achaogen (Consultant)Actavis (Grant/Research Support)Advanced Liquid Logics (Grant/Research Support)Affinergy (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Affinium (Consultant)Allergan (Grant/Research Support)Ampliphi Biosciences (Consultant)Basilea (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Bayer (Consultant)C3J (Consultant)Cerexa (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Contrafect (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Cubist (Grant/Research Support)Debiopharm (Consultant)Destiny (Consultant)Durata (Consultant)Forest (Grant/Research Support)Genentech (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Integrated Biotherapeutics (Consultant)Janssen (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Karius (Grant/Research Support)Locus (Grant/Research Support)Medical Biosurfaces (Grant/Research Support)Medicines Co. (Consultant)Medimmune (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Merck (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)NIH (Grant/Research Support)Novadigm (Consultant)Novartis (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support)Regeneron (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Tetraphase (Consultant)Theravance (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Trius (Consultant)xBiotech (Consultant) W. Charles Huskins, MD, MSc, ADMA Biologics (Consultant)Pfizer, Inc (Consultant)

This article focuses on the portrayal of Australia by two female French travel writers at the turn of the twenty-first century. Based upon Charles Forsdick’s theory of a set of uncertainties locatable in Francophone travel writing at the fin de siècle, this article analyzes how such uncertainties are played out in an Australian setting. It argues that while these texts ostensibly exoticize Australia in stereotypical manners, they gradually complicate these views, especially through their representation of rural Australia. Both writers find in rural Australia the means of recovery from the trauma that has spurred them to travel, which they locate in fast-paced, urban European life. Yet their texts are not simple celebrations of Australia as a site of return to simpler or “primitive” lifestyles, as they uncover links between supposedly exotic Australia and long-repressed aspects of their home cultures.

In France, as in the Anglo-Saxon world, social history has undergone a sea change in recent years with the growth of interest in issues of culture and representation, with the result that historians have come to ask rather different questions about cities and their social fabric. The change was not, of course, achieved overnight: since the 1930s the Annalistes have been opening up new approaches to the analysis of power and status, while in the development of micro-history Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie's Montaillou occupies an honoured place. In this the lingering influence of a Marxist model has played an important part. For decades Marxist theory provided the key which opened up issues of social power and class division, the methodology which led to a widespread study of urban structures and social dominance. And though in some hands it might be criticized for leading to an over-arching concern with the urban economy and the growth of the industrial city, the same Marxist perspective also encouraged studies of such questions as the identity of urban elites, the extent of social mobility within cities and the development of suburbs. More recently French historians have been among the most innovative in exploring the culture of urban life in a variety of different contexts, whether – and here I shall simply cite representative examples – by the study of individual professions (Christophe Charle), of dress and public appearance (Daniel Roche), or of the appropriation of urban space (Bernard Lepetit). The three books under review here all, in their different ways, contribute to our understanding of that urban culture and of the changes which it has undergone. Yannec Le Marec takes up Charle's arguments through a micro-history of the professional development of lawyers and doctors in the south Breton city of Nantes during the nineteenth century. Natacha Coquery, looking at the eighteenth century, explains the representation of social power implicit in the transfer of sumptuous Paris hôtels from private use to that of government ministries and their fast-multiplying staff. And Claude Petitfrère presents an edited collection of papers, emanating from a conference organized by the highly influential Centre d'histoire de la ville moderne et contemporaine in his own university at Tours, which illuminates across time and place the ways in which an urban patriciate was first constructed, then reproduced and represented to contemporaries. Taken together the three volumes go far to illustrate current developments in historiography and offer an overview of the present state of urban social history in France.

AbstractAccording to the ICTR, Emmanuel Bagambiki is an innocent man. The trial chamber and the Appeals Chamber have each unanimously acquitted the former Prefect of Cyangugu of crimes relating to Rwanda's horrific 1994 genocide. And on 19 July 2007 Bagambiki was reunited with his wife in children in Belgium, having been granted asylum a few days earlier. It is tempting to conclude that justice has been done in Bagambiki's case. That conclusion, however, would be too facile: Bagambiki was acquitted in February 2006, nearly 18 months before his family reunion. In the interim he lived in a safe house in Arusha paid for by the United Nations, wanted by Rwanda for trial on related charges and unable to convince Belgium that he posed no danger to its peace and security. Bagambiki, moreover, is one of the lucky ones: the nightmare of being free but having nowhere to go continues for two of his acquitted roommates in the safe house, Andre Ntagerura and Andre Rwamakuba, Rwanda's Minister of Transport and former Minister of Education respectively. Bagambiki's ordeal and Rwamakuba and Ntagerura's ongoing plight illustrate one of the basic problems facing international criminal tribunals: what to do with the acquitted. An acquitted defendant normally has two options: return to his country of origin, or find a third country that will grant him asylum. Both options, however, have been problematic for defendants acquitted by the ICTR and are likely to prove equally problematic for defendants who may be acquitted in the future by the ICC. This short essay explains why – and identifies what the international community should do about it.

Cada cierto tiempo surgen intelectuales que ponen en la discusión pública temáticas de gran relevancia para las élites políticas y empresariales, a la vez que generan cierta suspicacia en las cúspides académicas: hacen que se sientan convocadas transversalmente a debatir y reflexionar sobre el porvenir del planeta y la humanidad que lo habita. Es en este contexto que el profesor Yuval Noah Harari pasó de ser un desconocido académico de la Universidad Hebrea de Jerusalén a convertirse en una especie de oráculo o profeta del mañana. Diversos medios lo posicionan como uno de los intelectuales de moda, un rockstar de las famosas charlas TED bajo el lema “ideas que vale la pena difundir”, al punto que sus recientes libros son recomendados por el expresidente de Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, el empresario fundador de Microsoft, Bill Gates, y el informático creador de Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg. Un tipo de gurú al que líderes mundiales, como Angela Merkel y Emmanuel Macron, desean consultar y con el cual intercambiar ideas. Hoy por hoy lleva vendidos cerca de quince millones de ejemplares de sus ensayos en todo el mundo. Los más famosos son una trilogía sobre la historia de la humanidad contada sin convencionalismos, en la que encontramos Sapiens, de animales a dioses (Editorial Debate, 2014), el que triunfó primero en Israel en 2011 y luego en todo el mundo, y se convirtió en un best seller internacional tras ser publicado en inglés el año 2014. Actualmente ha sido traducido a unoscincuenta idiomas. Este éxito vino seguido por Homo Deus, breve historia del mañana, libro abordado por la presente reseña. Y, más recientemente, 21 Lecciones para el siglo XXI (Editorial Debate, 2018), en el que reflexiona sobre el mundo actual y realiza advertencias para este siglo.

<p><em>Mariconcitos</em> es prueba de que puto no se nace; de que se llega a serlo. Nos volvemos maricas a fuerza de escribir y reescribir una narración que comienza fallada. Somos ese relato que se teje desde el inicio con retazos de un guión heterocentrado en el que no tenemos lugar alguno; nos criamos eludiendo un mandato sexo-genérico en el que está previsto <em>otro</em> hijo, <em>otro</em> hermano, <em>otro</em> nieto, <em>otro</em> alumno, <em>otro</em> paciente, ese <em>otro</em> niño que no fuimos y que por suerte nunca logramos interpretar. Pero en ese trance de cartonear los materiales de nuestro relato, esas narraciones que hoy se comparten en <em>Mariconcitos</em>, se armaron a partir de las telenovelas que vimos, de los superhéroes que nos calentaron, de los deseos que no pudimos expresar, de las charlas de mujeres que escuchamos, de los desprecios que nos fortalecieron, del miedo y la rabia que desde esa época todavía nos acompaña. En la compilación de Burgos y Theumer se resumen las pedagogías maricas que alumbraron el presunto fracaso identitario que hoy encarnamos; se explicitan las gramáticas emocionales en las que conviven tanto los deleites que algunas otras maricas nos legaron, como los resabios impotentes de una secreta vergüenza que nunca nos abandona por completo.</p>

A reflective observation of a 40-year drawing practice (from the 1970s to the present day), from observational drawing in outdoor environments, to performing Driftsong sound drawings through place, leading to the author’s current concern, woandering to bridge drawing and painting in a pareidolian archaeology. Her practice, rooted for its first decade in observational drawing in outdoor spaces, intensified her awareness of the environment and led her to undertake a research degree investigating whether an interaction between the environment and the practitioner during the process of drawing could be identified. This review follows the author’s practice, highlighting essential influencers, including Linda Kitson, Charles Baudelaire, Jacques Derrida on Emmanuelle Levinas, Astronaut Chris Hadfield and Performance artist Phil Smith. Identifying how the development of the author’s understanding of the environment impacts on her drawing led her to question whether while making work in the outside environment, she may also impact the environment in return. The author later expanded this idea further to wonder if while we make drawings of the environment we may be drawn by the environment too. A significant conversation with her research supervisor the artist David Cross, in which he stated that mass displacement is ‘a defining condition of our times’, together with the planets approaching environmental catastrophe, prompted the author to give a paper proposing Psychogeography be updated to Reciprocalgeography, and that the stories of the journeys undertaken by those displaced persons be heard as a ‘gift for the common treasury for all’ (Gerard Winstanley 1649). This review concludes with a response to an invitation to write on the thinking and making of her current practice. The author, combining the physical, emotional and conceptual process of making, proposes to woander on a pareidolian archaeology, allowing serendipitous happenstance and the unconscious, to have a hand in the making process.

Abstract Introduction. One of the challenges in the management of patients with cancer of the digestive tract is to prevent relapse. Epigenetic modifications (i.e. DNA methylation and histone marks) have been proven to be involved in the generation and maintenance of a subset of cells with stemness properties, that resist to conventional therapies. Our aim is to identify complexes of chromatin modifier enzymes (epienzymes) that are involved in acquired chemoresistance/aggressiveness of colon and pancreatic cancer cells. Experimental procedures/Methods. A meta-analysis performed on public transcriptomics data from colorectal cancer (CRC) patients cross-referenced with our own data including basal-like pancreatic cancer samples identified a limited number of epienzymes associated with aggressive subtypes of digestive cancers. Among them, the demethylase KDM4B, specific of the lysine 9 of Histone 3, and the transcriptional repressor PRDM1 where found correlated to the expression of several typical markers of cancer stemness. To confirm the role of these epienzymes in colon and pancreatic cancer cell chemoresistance, we have developed several in vivo and in vitro 2D and 3D models of acquired resistance to oxaliplatin-based combined chemotherapies, including FOLFIRINOX and FOLFOX. In this work, these models as well as patient samples have been used to study (i) the dynamic expression profile of these epienzymes (RT-qPCR, immunofluorescent multiplex staining, single-cell analysis and spatial transcriptomics), (ii) the gene regulons that are bound by these epienzymes (CUT&RUN-seq) and (iii) the functional role of these epienzymes in cancer stemness (organoid and sphere-forming assays). Results. We have shown that PRDM1 and KDM4B are expressed heterogeneously in cancer cell populations and overexpressed during specific time frames along the acquisition of resistance to oxaliplatin-based combined therapies both in colon and pancreatic cancer cells. Furthermore, we have obtained promising results regarding the binding of PRDM1 and KDM4B to key players of pluripotency/differentiation in chemoresistant colon cancer cells. Conclusions. Altogether, our data indicate that specific expression of chromatin modifier enzymes, most likely acting as epigenetic complexes, are key milestones of acquired resistance to conventional therapies. This work will pave the way for considering epienzyme-epienzyme interactions as potent drug targets that could circumvent cancer cell aggressiveness. Citation Format: Elsa Hadj Bachir, Charles Poiraud, Hugo Claux, Soumaya El Moghrabi, Sonia Paget, Belinda Duchêne, Nicolas Jonckheere, Bernadette Neve, Emmanuelle Leteurtre, Isabelle Van Seuningen, Audrey Vincent. Epigenetic mechanisms involved in acquired resistance to combined chemotherapies in digestive cancer cells [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 2965.

Background:One of the 3 features of obstetrical antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is severe preeclampsia (PE). Its time of occurrence, the associated risk of thromboses and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have not been reported yet.Objectives:We analyzed severe PE in a series of women with APS.Methods:We retrospectively collected data of female patients from 5 French internal medicine and 1 Italian rheumatology units. Inclusion criteria were: a severe PE/eclampsia(1), that occurred before 34 weeks of gestation (WG) in patients who met the APS classification criteria(2).Results:40 patients were enrolled (Table 1). Because of known APS/positive aPL/previous obstetrical complications, 23(57.5%) patients were treated during the index PE: 4 with low dose aspirin (LDA), 4 with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), and 15 with a combination of both. 7 patients were also treated with hydroxychloroquine, 8 with corticosteroids and 3 with immunosuppressants. 17(42.5%) patients received no treatment. 24(60%) live births were observed. During a follow-up period of 3 years, 26(65%) patients had at least 1 new pregnancy, with a total of 38 pregnancies which resulted in 33(86.8%) live births. 57.5% pregnancies who resulted in live births occurred without any maternal or fetal complications. All 26 patients who had at least 1 pregnancy after index PE were treated with LDA; LMWH was given at prophylactic and therapeutic dosage in 13(50%) patients, respectively. No patient experienced 3 consecutive miscarriages.Table 1.40 APS patients with severe PEOverall features (n, %)Patients40 (100)Age at PE, (median, IQR)30.5 (27-33)PE term, WG (median, IQR)25.5 (23-29) Live births24 (60) Birth term, WG (median, IQR)25.5 (23.7-30.3) Associated SLE12 (30)Maternal complications (n, %)25 (62.5) HELLP18 (45) E6 (15) CAPS3 (7.5) Placental abruptions3 (7.5)Fetal complications (n, %)31 (77.5) IUGR18 (45) IUFD11 (2.5) Preterm delivery22 (55)Obstetrical history (n, %) Primiparous21 (52.5) Index PE before APS12 (30)Thrombosis (n, %) Thrombosis before PE index14 (35.0) Thrombosis after PE index2 (5.0)Abs at APS diagnosis (n, %) aPL triple positivity21 (52.5) IgG/IgM anti-cardiolipin34 (85.0) IgG/IgM anti-β2GPI25 (62.5) LAC33 (82.5)Legend to Table 1:PE: preeclampsia; APS: antiphospholipid syndrome; IQR: interquartile range; WG: weeks of gestation; SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus; HELLP: Hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelet; E: eclampsia; CAPS: catastrophic APS; IUGR: intrauterine growth restriction; IUFD: intrauterine fetal death; CHB: congenital atrioventricular block; aPL: antiphospholipid antibodies; LAC: lupus anticoagulant.Conclusion:Among the APS criteria, “3 consecutive miscarriages criterion” was not found. The majority of patients also experienced thrombosis and SLE before the index PE.References:[1]Diagnosis and Management of preeclampsia and eclampsia. International Journal of Gynecology &Obestetrics 2002;77:67-75.[2]Miyakis S, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost 2006;4:295e 306.Disclosure of Interests:Maddalena Larosa: None declared, Nathalie Morel: None declared, Meriem BELHOCINE: None declared, Amelia Ruffatti: None declared, Nicolas Martin Silva: None declared, Romain Paul: None declared, Luc Mouthon: None declared, Michel DREYFUS: None declared, Jean-Charles PIETTE: None declared, Odile Souchaud-Debouverie: None declared, Catherine Deneux-Tharaux: None declared, Vassilis Tsatsaris: None declared, Emmanuelle Pannier: None declared, Gaêlle Guettrot Imbert: None declared, Véronique LE GUERN Grant/research support from: UCB for GR2 study (to our institution), Andrea Doria Consultant of: GSK, Pfizer, Abbvie, Novartis, Ely Lilly, Speakers bureau: UCB pharma, GSK, Pfizer, Janssen, Abbvie, Novartis, Ely Lilly, BMS, Nathalie Costedoat-Chalumeau Grant/research support from: UCB to my institution

Background:Sarilumab, an anti-IL-6R antibody, is approved for the treatment of moderate to severe RA and shown efficacy on disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Detailed analyses of drug efficacy from the patient point of view is important. SariPRO is a pragmatic interventional study close to the daily practice.Objectives:To assess the effectiveness of sarilumab on several PROs using the RAID (Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease) score.Methods:The SariPRO study (NCT 03449758) was a French multicenter interventional study assessing the effects of sarilumab 200 mg on PROs in patients with moderately to severely active RA with an inadequate response or intolerance to conventional synthetic or biologic DMARDs. The primary endpoint was change in total RAID score from baseline to week 24 (RAID ranges 0-10 where 10 is maximal impact). Changes from baseline for RAID, DAS28-ESR and CDAI according to baseline disease activity were analyzed as secondary outcomes. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AE). All statistical analyses were descriptive, 95% CI was given when appropriate.Results:84 patients were included in 31 centers and 62 were evaluable and analyzed for effectiveness. They had similar characteristics to the 84 patients at baseline and were as expected for an RA population initiating a biologic: mean (SD) age: 59.9 (12.4) years, 71.0% female, disease duration 9.7 (10.3) years, rheumatoid factor positivity 82.5%, ACPA positivity 86.4%, and DAS28=4.9 (11). Total RAID score decreased significantly from 5.7 (2.0) at baseline to 3.3 (2.5) at W24; mean change was -2.4 [95% CI: -3.0; -1.8]. Furthermore, this improvement was noted both for highly and less active patients at baseline: for patients with DAS28-ESR < 5.1 (n=31), mean change was -1.56 [-2.28; -0.83] and for patients with DAS28-ESR≥5.1 (n=27), mean change was -1.98 [-2.91; -1.05]. Changes in DAS28-ESR and CDAI were significant (-2.8 [-3.2; -2.4] and -15.2 [-18.5; -11.8], respectively). AEs were consistent with the safety profile of anti-IL-6R antibodies and with results from RCTs (data not shown).Conclusion:In this real world study, treatment with sarilumab during 24 weeks in RA patients led to an improvement in the total RAID score irrespective of baseline levels of disease activity. This is the first time RAID score is used as the primary endpoint in a study.References:[1]Study was sponsored by Sanofi GenzymeDisclosure of Interests:Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, René-Marc Flipo Consultant of: Johnson and Johnson, MSD France, Novartis, Sanofi, Speakers bureau: Johnson and Johnson, MSD France, Novartis, Sanofi, Thierry Schaeverbeke: None declared, Christine Albert: None declared, Athan Baillet Consultant of: Athan BAILLET has received honorarium fees from Abbvie for his participation as the coordinator of the systematic literature review, marie-Christophe Boissier: None declared, Cyrille Confavreux: None declared, Gregoire CORMIER: None declared, Emmanuelle Dernis Speakers bureau: Lilly, Novartis, Elisabeth Gervais Solau: None declared, Sophie Godot: None declared, Jacques-Eric Gottenberg Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer, Consultant of: BMS, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Co., Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Philippe Goupille Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD France, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD France, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD France, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Slim Lassoued: None declared, Thierry Lequerre: None declared, Frederic Lioté Consultant of: CME: Nordic Pharma, Christian Marcelli: None declared, Yves Maugars: None declared, Minh Nguyen: None declared, Aleth Perdriger: None declared, Yves-Marie Pers: None declared, Edouard Pertuiset: None declared, Lucile Poiroux: None declared, Carole Rosenberg: None declared, Christian Roux: None declared, Adeline Ruyssen-Witrand Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, Martin SOUBRIER: None declared, Pascale Vergne-Salle: None declared, Charles Zarnitsky: None declared, Eric Fakra Consultant of: Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Sanofi, Hubert MAROTTE Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Sqibb, Lilly France, MSD, Novartis, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, SanofiAventis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Sqibb, Lilly France, MSD, Novartis, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, SanofiAventis, Paid instructor for: Sanofi-Aventis, Speakers bureau: Sanofi-Aventis, Florence E Lévy-Weil Employee of: Sanofi Genzyme employee

(francuski) Le monast?re de Treskavac, dont l'?glise remonte vraisemblablement au XIII?me si?cle, a connu un net essor sous le r?gne du roi Dusan. Son entr?e dans le cadre de l'Etat serbe en 1334, a ?t? suivie, dans le bref intervalle d'une d?cennie, par l'octroi de trois (voire quatre) chrysobulles d?livr?s par Dusan. Par ces chartes ce monast?re s'est notamment vu rattacher de nombreux biens et privil?ges. Simultan?ment, son sanctuaire originel ? nef unique, d?di? ? la Dormition de la Vierge, a ?t? agrandi par l'?rection du c?t? ouest d'un exonarthex, dont une partie forme une branche s'avan?ant au sud, et ult?rieurement peint. D'apr?s une inscription appos?e au sud de l'entr?e dans l'?glise, cet ?difice aurait pu avoir pour ktitor le roi Dusan. Les peintures alors r?alis?es ? Treskavac, aujourd'hui partiellement conserv?es, peuvent ?tre dat?es entre 1334-1335 et les ann?es cinquante de ce si?cle. Un premier groupe ornant les murs, la calotte aveugle, la coupole et le tambour de l'exonarthex constitue une remarquable r?alisation picturale de la fin des ann?es trente et du d?but des ann?es quarante du XIV?me si?cle. D'autres, dispos?es sur la fa?ade ouest de l'ancienne chapelle venue s'appuyer sur le mur sud de la branche sud de l'exonarthex et sur les fa?ades ouest et sud de ce dernier, doivent plus vraisemblablement ?tre dat?es des ann?es cinquante de ce m?me si?cle. D'apr?s les restes d'une inscription, le ktitor de cette chapelle aurait port? le haut titre aulique de tepcija. Compte tenu de la raret? de ce titre en Serbie vers le milieu du XIV?me si?cle, et au vu des donn?es historiques il semble que ce ktitor puisse ?tre identifi? avec le tepcija Gradislav. Entre les ann?es trente et les ann?es quatre-vingts du XIV?me si?cle celui-ci est en effet le seul tepcija mentionn? pour ce qui est des environs de Prilep, et nous savons qu'il a rattach? des biens aux monast?res de Treskavac, aux Saints-Archanges ? Prizren et ? l'h?pital de Chilandar. Imm?diatement apr?s la con?struction de la chapelle venue jouxter l'exonarthex on a entrepris la d?coration des fa?ades ouest et sud de l'exonarthex puis de l'adjonction d'un portique ouvert. Dans la calotte de la coupole aveugle surmontant la partie sud de l'exonarthex, autour de la figure du Christ Emmanuel, et sur les murs des parties sud, centrale et nord de l'exonarthex, se d?veloppent les sc?nes du calendrier eccl?siastique le plus souvent accompagn?es de distiques iambiques. Par des jeux de mots bas?s sur des radicaux similaires, ces vers attribu?s ? Christophore de Mytil?ne po?te byzantin du Xl?me si?cle, expliquent la mort en martyrs des saints et annoncent la r?compense qui les attend dans l'autre monde. Sont aujourd'hui conserv?es les illustrations correspondant ? une partie du mois de janvier (du 20 au 30), au mois de mars (du 1er au 31), une partie du mois d'avril (le 5, du 10 au 15 et du 22 au 26), puis deux figures correspondant ? la fin du mois de mai et, finalement, une partie des mois de juin (du 1er au 7) et d'ao?t (du 22 au 29). Ce calendrier peint, accompagn? de distiques iambique trouve ses plus nettes analogies dans les sc?nes d'un calendrier partiellement conserv?es dans l'?glise Saint-Nicolas Orphanos ? Thessalonique, dont les compositions reprennent ?galement les vers de Christophore de Mytil?ne. La coupole surmontant la partie nord de l'exonarthex accueille une repr?sentation de la Cour c?leste, compos?e de trois parties. Au sommet de la coupole se tient le Christ roi des rois audessous duquel se d?veloppe une vaste composition incluant 1' H?timasie avec le tr?ne appr?t?, la Vierge et le roi David rev?tu de ses habits royaux. Tous sont entour?s, conform?ment ? la hi?rarchie c?leste, de s?raphin, ch?rubin et des tr?nes du premier ordre, des seigneuries puissances et forces du deuxi?me ordre et des principaut?s, archanges et anges du troisi?me ordre. La troisi?me partie de cet ensemble est compos? par les figures en pied de huit saints guerriers et martyrs rev?tus de v?tements auliques luxueux, dispos?s dans le tambour de la coupole. Cette composition a pour fondements premiers la lecture des psaumes ainsi que la Hi?rarchie c?leste de Dionysos l'Ar?opagite, auxquels se sont ?galement raccroch?es certaines influences venant d'autres textes liturgiques et th?ologiques. Certains ?l?ments ou d?tails, ainsi que des repr?sentations quelque peu diff?rentes de la Cour c?leste peuvent ?galement ?tre relev?s ? Zaum, dans le Monast?re de Marko, ? Nicolas Sisevski et dans les contr?es proches de Thessalonique. Au registre inf?rieur l'exonarthex accueille respectivement, dans sa partie centrale, les figures en pied de quatre saints guerriers et de quatre saints ermites, dans sa partie nord les figures en pied de quatre saints ermites, et dans la branche sud celles de quatre jeunes saints. Le portrait de ktitor du roi Dusan, ult?rieurement recouvert par une nouvelle fresque laissant appara?tre 1' inscription de l'?poque de la d?coration de l'exonarthex, a trouv? place au registre inf?rieur de la fa?ade de l'?glise, au sud de l'entr?e. Le coloris des fresques situ?es dans la partie sud de l'exonarthex est plut?t ?touff? alors que dans la partie nord il est plus clair et plus chaud. Des fresques datant des ann?es cinquante du XIV?me si?cle sont ?galement conserv?es sur l'ancienne fa?ade ouest de la chapelle jouxtant la branche sud de l'exonarthex et, partiellement, sur les fa?ades ouest et sud de ce dernier. L'ancienne fa?ade de la chapelle est orn?e des portraits du ktitor et de son ?pouse tenant le mod?le de leur fondation qu'ils remettent au Christ et ? la Vierge repr?sent?s dans deux niches. D'apr?s la partie conserv?e de l'inscription accompagnant son portrait, ce ktitor portait le titre de tepcija, de sorte qu'en se fondant sur les sources ?crites il est tr?s probable qu'il s'agit du tepcija Gradislav, ? savoir le dernier personnage connu ? avoir port? ce titre. Peu de temps apr?s l'?rection de la chapelle jouxtant le mur sud de l'exonarthex, on a ?galement orn? de fresques plusieurs niches dispos?es sur les fa?ades ouest et sud de l'exonarthex et vraisemblablement, ?rig? un portique ouvert qui a ?t? plus tard mur?. Sur la fa?ade ouest sont partiellement conserv?es les repr?sentations de saint D?m?trios ou saint Georges ? cheval, au nord de l'entr?e, de la Vierge ? l'Enfant, dans la niche surmontant l'entr?e, et d'une Vierge ? l'Enfant sur un tr?ne, au sud de cette m?me entr?e. Quand au mur sud, il accueille, dans une niche situ?e ? l'ouest de la porte donnant acc?s ? la branche sud de l'exonarthex, les figures en pied de saint Jean le Pr?curseur et de saint Jean Chrysostome qui s'adressent au Christ sur le tr?ne, repr?sent? dans une niche situ?e ? l'est de cette entr?e. Au-dessus de cette m?me porte appara?t le buste d'un ange, alors que plus ? l'est, au-dessus d'une ancienne porte a trouv? place un buste de l'archange Gabriel. Toutes ces peintures ornant les fa?ades ouest et sud de l'exonarthex ne sont que partiellement conserv?es et de qualit? quelque peu inf?rieure. Sur la repr?sentation de saint D?m?trios ou saint Georges ? cheval, fortement mutil?e, on note toutefois la qualit? du dessin et la r?alisation de la t?te de sa monture. Elles sont d'un coloris clair, quelque peu p?li, dans lequel pr?dominent les tons chauds et la couleur marron. Les peintures r?alis?es au XTV?me ? Treskavac, au cours de trois phases chronologiquement proches, d?notent certaines particularit?s tant du point de vue de leurs th?mes que de leur style. En tant que fondation du roi Dusan, le plus ancien groupe de ces fresques illustraient deux th?mes plut?t inhabituels: la Cour c?leste et le calendrier eccl?siastique. Bien que chacun d'eux ait eu des prototypes ou mod?les ant?rieurs, ils pr?sentent ici des solutions uniques. La Cour c?leste a ?t? enrichie de plusieurs niveau de signification symbolique alors que le calendrier eccl?siastique est, pour sa plus grande partie accompagn? de distiques iambiques repris de Christophore de Mytil?ne. Ces deux th?mes peuvent trouver quelques parall?les, plus ou moins partiels dans des monuments situ?s aux environs de Thessalonique. Les distiques iambiques complexes accompagnant les fresques et l'emploi exclusif du grec dans ces inscriptions attestent l'engagement de peintres ayant une parfaite connaissance de cette langue. De m?me, par son style, cette peinture pourrait trouver des ressemblances dans la peinture du milieu thessalonicien. Enfin, les fresques, ? pr?sent passablement endommag?es datant des ann?es cinquante du XFV?me si?cle ou quelque peu ult?rieures d?notent une certaine baisse de qualit? survenue avec le temps.

Este trabalho tem como objetivo escutar e dialogar com e sobre a obra de Manoel de Barros, mais especificamente seu Livro Sobre Nada, como produção poético-musical. Com exemplos didáticos e mesmo um diálogo da construção poética manoelina com a inovadora des-construção da forma tradicional sinfônica realizada por Beethoven em sua “Nona Sinfonia”, buscamos observar o apelo da construção manoelina de realizar-se como música – pensada aqui como essa pro-dução do homem, criando e realizando para se relacionar com o real. Apoiando nossas reflexões, estruturadas na questão da linguagem, em autores como Heidegger e Emmanuel Carneiro Leão, Charles Rosen e Joaquim Zamacois, buscamos dialogar com a própria palavra “música” em sua concretude ontológica originária, não representacional ou dependente da mediação de sistemas de representação da experiência concreta com o fenômeno musical: dialogar no lugar em que não há a cisão entre poesia e música. Pensamos Barros em seu musicar das coisas, sua busca por esse “nada” criativo que o leva a compõe sua des-sinfonia do ser. Concluímos com a questão de que compreender essa construção manoelina no seu apelo de realizar música, no seu lugar de des-limite e estranheza inovadora e criativa, amplia as nossas próprias fronteiras do pensar música e poesia.

The article examines Genoese responses to plague during the old regime. Much like the Venetian, the Genoese ruling class understood the nexus between plague, poverty, and famine, and how these, in turn, tied in with political unrest. Some of the Republic’s main political and diplomatic crises were indeed followed by severe outbreaks of plague. Thus, the 1528 plague marked the proclamation of the oligarchic Republic, as a Spanish protectorate, masterminded by Andrea Doria, whereas the 1579-1580 plague closed the civil wars (a struggle of the old patriciate against an alliance of the new patriciate with the popular faction, 1575-1576). While the plague that swept through northern Italy in 1628-1630 narrowly missed Genoa, it became a metaphor with Genoese political thinkers for the narrowly escaped annexation of the Republic by Charles Emmanuel I of Savoy (who died of plague in his encampment, together with scores of the heretics on his payroll). The 1656-1657 epidemic was the most severe in the Genoese old regime, capping an acute political and jurisdictional crisis with Rome and with archbishop Stefano Durazzo. Remarkable documents of this enduring state of conflict are the prayer composed by Paolo Foglietta (poet and brother to Oberto, who was a leader in the civil wars and later a historian of the Republic) invoking an end to the 1579-1580 epidemic, and the anonymous preghiera repubblicana (held at the Vatican Apostolic Archive) which the government of the Republic included in the official religious liturgy in response to a heated jurisdictional crisis with the Holy See (1605-1607). Rome ordered archbishop Orazio Spinola to have the prayer banned, but the ‘Collegi’ of the Republic attempted to have it reinstated following the 1656-1657 plague. D. Fiasella, La peste a Genova, Courtesy of Archivio Fotografico Fondazione Franzoni, ETS – Genova

Une recherche menée en 2021 dans les archives de l’Académie des sciences, belles-lettres et arts de Lyon, société savante datant du début du xviiie siècle, a mis en évidence un ensemble de textes témoignant de l’existence de liens entre la Russie et Lyon avant la fondation de l’université locale (1896) et avant la création de la première chaire de slavistique lyonnaise (1920). Ces documents sont de trois natures différentes : lettres (de Russie ou sur la Russie), mémoires manuscrits et enfin discours, ayant donné lieu à publication ou non. Parmi ces textes, on trouve trace de deux ardents patriotes russes, l’un venu d’Ukraine et l’autre de Pologne. Le médecin Danilo Samojlovič (1742-1805) devient en 1785 associé de l’Académie de Lyon pour assurer la promotion et la diffusion de ses idées nouvelles sur le traitement de la peste. Karolina Oleśkiewicz est pour sa part l’auteur d’un long manuscrit intitulé Révélations sur la Russie, portrait légitimiste de sa patrie d’adoption rédigé entre 1839 et 1845, peut-être en réponse aux attaques de Custine ou Henningsen contre la Russie. Inversement, plusieurs Lyonnais ont eu à faire avec la Russie au xviiie et au xixe siècle, sans même parler du diplomate et écrivain marseillais Claude-Charles de Peyssonnel (1727-1790), auteur d’une Dissertation sur la langue Sclavone, prétendument Illyrique (1765), dont on trouve un fragment manuscrit dans les archives de l’Académie. Le médecin et naturaliste Jean-Emmanuel Gilibert (1741-1814) tire de son long séjour en Pologne-Lituanie, à la veille du dernier partage de la Pologne, la matière de mémoires pour l’Académie (sur la géographie de la région, ses mœurs, ses habitants), de même que son confrère le naturaliste et minéralogiste Louis Patrin (1742-1815), à propos de la Sibérie. Le contexte change radicalement avec Philippe Benoit (1793-1881), fait prisonnier lors de la campagne de Russie de 1812 : il rapporte de son séjour forcé une longue relation de captivité (Souvenirs d’un Ardéchois prisonnier de guerre en Russie de 1812 à 1814), des poèmes et une pièce de théâtre inédite (Fëdor ou une révolte de serfs en Russie). Deux lettres de Charles de Pougens (pour l’impératrice douairière Marie et son fils le grand-duc Constantin) et d’Alexandre Moreau de Jonnès (sur la propagation du choléra dans le Sud de la Russie) complètent au xixe siècle la collection des documents de l’Académie touchant à la Russie. La Révolution russe de 1917 fait une remarquable irruption dans deux discours de réception à l’Académie, ceux des avocats Pierre Villard (1857-1930) et Jules Millevoye (1852-1930), en 1918 et 1922. Après 1930 et jusqu’au xxie siècle, la Russie disparaît pratiquement des activités de l’Académie de Lyon où elle aura été surtout présente, logiquement, pendant la période où cette dernière avait pris l’initiative d’intensifier ses échanges avec l’Europe occidentale.

Resume :Ce texte est une enquête réalisée auprès de 16 auteurs et autrices sur les enjeux et usages des formes prescriptives dans leur pratique littéraire. Il réunit les réponses de François Bon, Gérard Gavarry, Jacques Jouet, Cécile Mainardi, Jean-Charles Massera, François Matton, Jérôme Meizoz, Valérie Mréjen, Martin Page, Emmanuelle Pireyre, Nathalie Quintane, Olivia Rosenthal, Pierre Senges, Pascale Seys, Pierre Vinclair et Martin Winckler.

Classical ethics tells us is that we know through our reason acting as an intellect whether what we do is good or bad. By our nature, then, we can know what's ethically correct. That we do evil is not so much because we do not know it to be wrong; rather, we do wrong despite our knowledge. Thus, if MacIntyre is correct that the Enlightenment philosophers share merely "in the project of constructing valid arguments which will move from premises concerning human nature as they understand it to be to conclusions about the authority of moral rules and precepts," if the project is merely to translate one knowledge to another knowledge, that is, from the knowledge of human nature to the knowledge of moral rules and precepts, then we can very well agree that "any project of this form was bound to fail." Any such project is bound to fail, not only for the reason stated by MacIntyre, that these philosophers are inevitably going to come up with ineradicable discrepancies and divergences, but also because, even should such discrepancies and divergences not occur, the defect lies not so much in its being a matter of knowledge as in its being a matter of desire, that is, not in the intellect but in the will. References Ardrey, Robert. After Genesis. London: Collins Fontana, 1968. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Trans. J.A.K. Thompson. London: Penguin Books, 1965. Arkush, Allan. Moses Mendelssohn and the Enlightenment. New York: State University of New York Press, 1994. Augustine, St. The Confessions. Trans. Rex Warner. New York: Signet Classics, 2001. Bergson, Henri. Creative Evolution. Trans. Arthur Mitchell. New York: The Modern Library,1944. Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. New York: New American Library Mentor Books, 1958. Descartes, René. Key Philosophical Writings. Trans. Elizabeth S. Haldane and G.R.T. Ross. Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Classics of World Literature, 1997. _____________. Principles of Philosophy. Trans. Elizabeth Haldane and G.R.T. Ross. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Donceel, Joseph, trans. A Marechal Reader. New York: Herder and Herder, 1970. Fletcher, Joseph. Situation Ethics: The New Morality. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966. Gaarder, Jostein. Sophie’s World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy. Trans. Paulette Moller. New York: Farrar Strauss Giroux, 2007. Gadamer, Hans Georg. Truth and Method. Trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald Marshall. New York: Continuum, 1988. Gaskin, J.C.A., ed. Varieties of Unbelief: From Epicurus to Sartre. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1989. Hadas, Moses, ed. Essential Works of Stoicism. New York: Bantam Books, 1966. Hegel, G.W.F. Philosophy of Right. Trans. T.M. Knox. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967. Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. Trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Thought, 2008. _______________. Preview to Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning), trans. Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999. _______________. Parmenides. Trans. Andre Schuwer and Richard Rojcewicz. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. London: Penguin Books, 1980. Husserl, Edmund. Cartesian Meditation: An Introduction to Phenomenology. Trans. Dorion Cairns. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973.______________. Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. Trans. W.R. Gibson. New York: Collier Books, 1962. Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Lewis White Beck. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Library of Liberal Arts, 1977. _____________. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics that will be Able to come Forward As a Science. Trans. Paul Cairns. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1977. Levinas, Emmanuel. Otherwise Than Being. Trans. Alphonso Lingis. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1981. McKeon, Richard, ed. Basic Works of Aristotle. New York: Random House, 1941. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future. Trans. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Random Vintage Books, 1966. Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue 2, trans. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Penguin Books, 1978. Lau, D.C., trans. Mencius. London: Penguin Books, 1976. Lyotard, John Francois. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993. MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981. McCool, Gerald, ed. A Karl Rahner Reader. New York: Seabury Press, 1975. Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. Ed. Mary Warnock. London: Fontana Library Collins, 1965. Plato. The Republic. Trans. Allan Bloom. U.S.A.: Basic Books, 1968. Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli and Charles A. Moore, eds. Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1973. Rawls, John. Theory of Justice. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1999. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Emile, trans. Barbara Foxley. London: Everyman’s Library, 1976. ___________________. Social Contract and Discourses on the Origin and Foundation of Inequality Among Mankind. Ed. Lester G. Crocker. New York: Washington Square Press, 1967. Scheler, Max. Formalism in Ethics and Non Formal Ethics of Values. Trans. Manfred Frings and Roger Funk. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1973. Sen, Amartya. Development of Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Spinoza, Benedictus de. Ethics. Trans. Amelia Hutchinson. New York: Hafner Publishing Co., 1949. Thomas Aquinas, St. Summa Theologica. Trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Maryland: Christian Classics, 1981. Ware, James, ed. Sayings of Confucius. New York: New American Library Mentor Books, 1955.

Do you remember Harambe, the 17-year-old silverback who was shot dead after a boy fell into the gorilla enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo, Cecil, the lion who was shot with an arrow by an American dentist in Zimbabwe, and Marius, the giraffe who was killed and fed to other animals at the Copenhagen Zoo?Every once in a while, a news story about the human-caused death of an animal sparks global outrage, briefly lights up the comments sections on the internet, and reminds us of the inconsistency in how think about non-human animals. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, we kill approximately two thousand animals for food per second, not including fish and other marine animals. All of these animals have rich emotional lives that matter to them, and what we do to them is as bad, and often much worse, than what was done to Harambe, Cecil, and Marius. Most farm animals are raised in filthy and unnatural conditions, and are subject to routine mutilations and other mistreatment. They are transported in ways that are at best unpleasant and at worst horrific, and they die violent deaths. Yet, most of us – while expressing our moral indignation about the treatment of Harambe, Cecil, and Marius – rarely spare a thought for the animals we eat.Morally speaking, there does not seem to be much of a difference between what happened in Cincinnati, Zimbabwe, and Denmark and what happens in factory farms and slaughterhouses in every part of the world, every day. If anything, there was a better reason to kill Harambe – namely, to avert danger from a child – than there is to kill animals for food. We do not need to consume animal products to live a healthy and fulfilled life. In fact, careful studies have found that a well-balanced plant-based diet decreases the chances of suffering from diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and some cancers, and benefits the environment.The way we think about and treat non-human animals is deeply confused, and scholars are in a unique position to provide some clarity. The Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics hence decided to dedicate two special issues to the relationship between human beings and other animals, and asked me to be the guest editor. This is the second of the two special issues, and contains the following five articles:The number of fish killed annually by the fishing industry, even on the most conservative estimate, is more than ten times larger than the number of terrestrial animals killed annually for food, and yet animal advocates largely focus on the latter in their efforts to reduce animal suffering. Bob Fischer (“Wild Fish and Expected Utility”) does the math and argues that considerations of expected utility call that focus into question. He concludes that animal advocacy organizations owe an explanation of why they are not directing more of their resources to fish.Akande Michael Aina and Ofuasia Emmanuel (“The Chicken Fallacy and the Ethics of Cruelty to Non-Human Animals”) challenge the common view that non-human animals are mere resources that we can use as we please, and ask whether Peter Singer’s ethics of animal liberation is a plausible alternative. They think it is not, in part because it denies moral status to non-sentient life, and take another approach that draws from Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. They argue that cruelty to non-human animals, with whom they claim we are on an equal moral footing, betrays our trusting and neighborly relationship with them.Iván Ortega Rodríguez (“Animal Citizenship, Phenomenology, and Ontology: Some reflections on Donaldson’s & Kymlicka’s Zoopolis”) provides a brief summary of the position Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka defend in their ground-breaking book Zoopolis, and argues that they are mistaken in failing to consider an important metaphysical difference between human beings and other animals. While human and non-human animals share a common environment, only human interaction constitutes what he calls a “world.” That difference, however, does not undermine the case for animal rights but rather strengthens it.Rhyddhi Chakraborty (“Animal Ethics and India: Understanding the Connection through the Capabilities Approach”) takes a critical look at a wide range of legal provisions in Indian law designed to protect non-human animals. She argues that, despite such provisions, nonhuman animals continue to suffer greatly at the hands of human beings in India, which is partly due to the lack of a comprehensive ethical vision. She suggests that the capabilities approach can provide such a vision, and concludes by making a number of policy recommendations to improve animal welfare in India.Robin Attfield and Rebekah Humphreys (“Justice and Non-Human Animals”) complete their argument for the claim that our treatment of non-human animals is a matter of justice, the first part of which can be found in the previous issue of this journal.I thank the contributors for choosing this journal to share their exciting ideas, and the reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions. I am also indebted to Professor Shamima Parvin Lasker and Ms. Tahera Ahmed for their cooperation and trust.If you, dear reader, are new to the academic debate over the moral status of non-human animals, and if the two Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics special issues on animal ethics have made you curious, as I hope they did, I would like to recommend to you two classics of the animal ethics literature: Peter Singer, Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals (New York: New York Review/Random House, 1975); and Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1983).I hope you will enjoy reading through this issue, and I am sending you my warm regards.Rainer Ebert Guest Editor, Bangladesh Journal of BioethicsDepartment of Philosophy, University of Johannesburg, South AfricaEmail: rainerebert@gmail.com Webpage: http://www.rainerebert.com

Alex Abou-Chebl, MD Michael Abraham, MD Joseph E. Acker, III, EMT-P, MPH Robert Adams, MD, MS, FAHA Eric Adelman, MD Opeolu Adeoye, MD DeAnna L. Adkins, PhD Maria Aguilar, MD Absar Ahmed, MD Naveed Akhtar, MD Rufus Akinyemi, MBBS, MSc, MWACP, FMCP(Nig) Karen C. Albright, DO, MPH Felipe Albuquerque, MD Andrei V. Alexandrov, MD Abdulnasser Alhajeri, MD Latisha Ali, MD Nabil J. Alkayed, MD, PhD, FAHA Amer Alshekhlee, MD, MSc Irfan Altafullah, MD Arun Paul Amar, MD Pierre Amarenco, MD, FAHA, FAAN Sepideh Amin-Hanjani, MD, FAANS, FACS, FAHA Catherine Amlie-Lefond, MD Aaron M. Anderson, MD David C. Anderson, MD, FAHA Sameer A. Ansari, MD, PhD Ken Arai, PhD Agnieszka Ardelt, MD, PhD Juan Arenillas, MD PhD William Armstead, PhD, FAHA Jennifer L. Armstrong-Wells, MD, MPH Negar Asdaghi, MD, MSc, FRCPC Nancy D. Ashley, APRN,BC, CEN,CCRN,CNRN Stephen Ashwal, MD Andrew Asimos, MD Rand Askalan, MD, PhD Kjell Asplund, MD Richard P. Atkinson, MD, FAHA Issam A. Awad, MD, MSc, FACS, MA (hon) Hakan Ay, MD, FAHA Michael Ayad, MD, PhD Cenk Ayata, MD Aamir Badruddin, MD Hee Joon Bae, MD, PhD Mark Bain, MD Tamilyn Bakas, PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN Frank Barone, BA, DPhil Andrew Barreto, MD William G. Barsan, MD, FACEP, FAHA Nicolas G. Bazan, MD, PhD Kyra Becker, MD, FAHA Ludmila Belayev, MD Rodney Bell, MD Andrei B. Belousov, PhD Susan L. Benedict, MD Larry Benowitz, PhD Rohit Bhatia, MBBS, MD, DM, DNB Pratik Bhattacharya, MD MPh James A. Bibb, PhD Jose Biller, MD, FACP, FAAN, FAHA Randie Black Schaffer, MD, MA Kristine Blackham, MD Bernadette Boden-Albala, DrPH Cesar Borlongan, MA, PhD Susana M. Bowling, MD Monique M. B. Breteler, MD, PhD Jonathan Brisman, MD Allan L. Brook, MD, FSIR Robert D. Brown, MD, MPH Devin L. Brown, MD, MS Ketan R. Bulsara, MD James Burke, MD Cheryl Bushnell, MD, MHSc, FAHA Ken Butcher, MD, PhD, FRCPC Livia Candelise, MD S Thomas Carmichael, MD, PhD Bob S. Carter, MD, PhD Angel Chamorro, MD, PhD Pak H. Chan, PhD, FAHA Seemant Chaturvedi, MD, FAHA, FAAN Peng Roc Chen, MD Jun Chen, MD Eric Cheng, MD, MS Huimahn Alex Choi, MD Sherry Chou, MD, MMSc Michael Chow, MD, FRCS(C), MPH Marilyn Cipolla, PhD, MS, FAHA Kevin Cockroft, MD, MSc, FACS Domingos Coiteiro, MD Alexander Coon, MD Robert Cooney, MD Shelagh B. Coutts, BSc, MB.ChB., MD, FRCPC, FRCP(Glasg.) Elizabeth Crago, RN, MSN Steven C. Cramer, MD Carolyn Cronin, MD, PhD Dewitte T. Cross, MD Salvador Cruz-Flores, MD, FAHA Brett L. Cucchiara, MD, FAHA Guilherme Dabus, MD M Ziad Darkhabani, MD Stephen M. Davis, MD, FRCP, Edin FRACP, FAHA Deidre De Silva, MBBS, MRCP Amir R. Dehdashti, MD Gregory J. del Zoppo, MD, MS, FAHA Bart M. Demaerschalk, MD, MSc, FRCPC Andrew M. Demchuk, MD Andrew J. DeNardo, MD Laurent Derex, MD, PhD Gabrielle deVeber, MD Helen Dewey, MB, BS, PhD, FRACP, FAFRM(RACP) Mandip Dhamoon, MD, MPH Orlando Diaz, MD Martin Dichgans, MD Rick M. Dijkhuizen, PhD Michael Diringer, MD Jodi Dodds, MD Eamon Dolan, MD, MRCPI Amish Doshi, MD Dariush Dowlatshahi, MD, PhD, FRCPC Alexander Dressel, MD Carole Dufouil, MD Dylan Edwards, PhD Mitchell Elkind, MD, MS, FAAN Matthias Endres, MD Joey English, MD, PhD Conrado J. Estol, MD, PhD Mustapha Ezzeddine, MD, FAHA Susan C. Fagan, PharmD, FAHA Pierre B. Fayad, MD, FAHA Wende Fedder, RN, MBA, FAHA Valery Feigin, MD, PhD Johanna Fifi, MD Jessica Filosa, PhD David Fiorella, MD, PhD Urs Fischer, MD, MSc Matthew L. Flaherty, MD Christian Foerch, MD Gregg C. Fonarow, MD, FAHA Andria Ford, MD Christine Fox, MD, MAS Isabel Fragata, MD Justin Fraser, MD Don Frei, MD Gary H. Friday, MD, MPH, FAAN, FAHA Neil Friedman, MBChB Michael Froehler, MD, PhD Chirag D. Gandhi, MD Hannah Gardener, ScD Madeline Geraghty, MD Daniel P. Gibson, MD Glen Gillen, EdD, OTR James Kyle Goddard, III, MD Daniel A. Godoy, MD, FCCM Joshua Goldstein, MD, PhD, FAHA Nicole R. Gonzales, MD Hector Gonzalez, PhD Marlis Gonzalez-Fernandez, MD, PhD Philip B. Gorelick, MD, MPH, FAHA Matthew Gounis, PhD Prasanthi Govindarajan, MD Manu Goyal, MD, MSc Glenn D. Graham, MD, PhD Armin J. Grau, MD, PhD Joel Greenberg, PhD, FAHA Steven M. Greenberg, MD, PhD, FAHA David M. Greer, MD, MA, FCCM James C. Grotta, MD, FAHA Jaime Grutzendler, MD Rishi Gupta, MD Andrew Gyorke, MD Mary N. Haan, MPH, DrPH Roman Haberl, MD Maree Hackett, PhD Elliot Clark Haley, MD, FAHA Hen Hallevi, MD Edith Hamel, PhD Graeme J. Hankey, MBBS, MD, FRCP, FRCP, FRACP Amer Haque, MD Richard L. Harvey, MD Don Heck, MD Cathy M. Helgason, MD Thomas Hemmen, MD, PhD Dirk M. Hermann, MD Marta Hernandez, MD Paco Herson, PhD Michael D. Hill, MD, MSc, FRCPC Nancy K. Hills, PhD, MBA Robin C. Hilsabeck, PhD, ABPP-CN Judith A. Hinchey, MD, MS, FAHA Robert G. Holloway, MD, MPH William Holloway, MD Sherril K. Hopper, RN Jonathan Hosey, MD, FAAN George Howard, DPH, FAHA Virginia J. Howard, PhD, FAHA David Huang, MD, PhD Daniel Huddle, DO Richard L. Hughes, MD, FAHA, FAAN Lynn Hundley, RN, MSN, ARNP, CCRN, CNRN, CCNS Patricia D. Hurn, PhD, FAHA Muhammad Shazam Hussain, MD, FRCPC Costantino Iadecola, MD Rebecca N. Ichord, MD M. Arfan Ikram, MD Kachi Illoh, MD Pascal Jabbour, MD Bharathi D. Jagadeesan, MD Vivek Jain, MD Dara G. Jamieson, MD, FAHA Brian T. Jankowitz, MD Edward C. Jauch, MD, MS, FAHA, FACEP David Jeck, MD Sayona John, MD Karen C. Johnston, MD, FAHA S Claiborne Johnston, MD, FAHA Jukka Jolkkonen, PhD Stephen C. Jones, PhD, SM, BSc Theresa Jones, PhD Anne Joutel, MD, PhD Tudor G. Jovin, MD Mouhammed R. Kabbani, MD Yasha Kadkhodayan, MD Mary A. Kalafut, MD, FAHA Amit Kansara, MD Moira Kapral, MD, MS Navaz P. Karanjia, MD Wendy Kartje, MD, PhD Carlos S. Kase, MD, FAHA Scott E. Kasner, MD, MS, FAHA Markku Kaste, MD, PhD, FESO, FAHA Prasad Katakam, MD, PhD Zvonimir S. Katusic, MD Irene Katzan, MD, MS, FAHA James E. Kelly, MD Michael Kelly, MD, PhD, FRCSC Peter J. Kelly, MD, MS, FRCPI, ABPN (Dip) Margaret Kelly-Hayes, EdD, RN, FAAN David M. Kent, MD Thomas A. Kent, MD Walter Kernan, MD Salomeh Keyhani, MD, MPH Alexander Khalessi, MD, MS Nadia Khan, MD, FRCPC, MSc Naim Naji Khoury, MD, MS Chelsea Kidwell, MD, FAHA Anthony Kim, MD Howard S. Kirshner, MD, FAHA Adam Kirton, MD, MSc, FRCPC Brett M. Kissela, MD Takanari Kitazono, MD, PhD Steven Kittner, MD, MPH Jeffrey Kleim, PhD Dawn Kleindorfer, MD, FAHA N. Jennifer Klinedinst, PhD, MPH, MSN, RN William Knight, MD Adam Kobayashi, MD, PhD Sebastian Koch, MD Raymond C. Koehler, PhD, FAHA Ines P. Koerner, MD, PhD Martin Köhrmann, MD Anneli Kolk, PhD, MD John B. Kostis, MD Tobias Kurth, MD, ScD Peter Kvamme, MD Eduardo Labat, MD, DABR Daniel T. Lackland, BA, DPH, FAHA Kamakshi Lakshminarayan, MD, PhD Joseph C. LaManna, PhD Catherine E. Lang, PT, PhD Maarten G. Lansberg, MD, PhD, MS Giuseppe Lanzino, MD Paul A. Lapchak, PhD, FAHA Sean Lavine, MD Ronald M. Lazar, PhD Marc Lazzaro, MD Jin-Moo Lee, MD, PhD Meng Lee, MD Ting-Yim Lee, PhD Erica Leifheit-Limson, PhD Enrique Leira, MD, FAHA Deborah Levine, MD, MPh Joshua M. Levine, MD Steven R. Levine, MD Christopher Lewandowski, MD Daniel J. Licht, MD Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH David S. Liebeskind, MD, FAHA Shao-Pow Lin, MD, PhD Weili Lin, PhD Ute Lindauer, PhD Italo Linfante, MD Lynda Lisabeth, PhD, FAHA Alice Liskay, RN, BSN, MPA, CCRC Warren Lo, MD W. T. Longstreth, MD, MPH, FAHA George A. Lopez, MD, PhD David Loy, MD, PhD Andreas R. Luft, MD Helmi Lutsep, MD, FAHA William Mack, MD Mark MacKay, MBBS, FRACP Jennifer Juhl Majersik, MD Marc D. Malkoff, MD, FAHA Randolph S. Marshall, MD John H. Martin, PhD Alexander Mason, MD Masayasu Matsumoto, MD, PhD Elizabeth Mayeda, MPH William G. Mayhan, PhD Avi Mazumdar, MD Louise D. McCullough, MD, PhD Erin McDonough, MD Lisa Merck, MD, MPH James F. Meschia, MD, FAHA Steven R. Messe, MD Joseph Mettenburg, MD,PhD William Meurer, MD BA Brett C. Meyer, MD Robert Mikulik, MD, PhD James M. Milburn, MD Kazuo Minematsu, MD, PhD J Mocco, MD, MS Yousef Mohammad, MD MSc FAAN Mahendranath Moharir, MD, MSc, FRACP Carlos A. Molina, MD Joan Montaner, MD PhD Majaz Moonis, MD, MRCP Christopher J. Moran, MD Henry Moyle, MD, PhD Susanne Muehlschlegel, MD, MPH Susanne Muehlschlegel, MD, MPH Yuichi Murayama, MD Stephanie J. Murphy, VMD, PhD, DACLAM, FAHA Fadi Nahab, MD Andrew M. Naidech, MD, MPh Ashish Nanda, MD Sandra Narayanan, MD William Neil, MD Edwin Nemoto, PhD, FAHA Lauren M. Nentwich, MD Perry P. Ng, MD Al C. Ngai, PhD Andrew D. Nguyen, MD, PhD Thanh Nguyen, MD, FRCPC Mai Nguyen-Huynh, MD, MAS Raul G. Nogueira, MD Bo Norrving, MD Robin Novakovic, MD Thaddeus Nowak, PhD David Nyenhuis, PhD Michelle C. Odden, PhD Michael O'Dell, MD Christopher S. Ogilvy, MD Jamary Oliveira-Filho, MD, PhD Jean Marc Olivot, MD, PhD Brian O'Neil, MD, FACEP Bruce Ovbiagele, MD, MSc, FAHA Shahram Oveisgharan, MD Mayowa Owolabi, MBBS,MWACP,FMCP Aditya S. Pandey, MD Dhruvil J. Pandya, MD Nancy D. Papesh, BSN, RN, CFRN, EMT-B Helena Parfenova, PhD Min S. Park, MD Matthew S. Parsons, MD Aman B. Patel, MD Srinivas Peddi, MD Joanne Penko, MS, MPH Miguel A. Perez-Pinzon, PhD, FAHA Paola Pergami, MD, PhD Michael Phipps, MD Anna M. Planas, PhD Octavio Pontes-Neto, MD Shyam Prabhakaran, MD, MS Kameshwar Prasad, MD, DM, MMSc, FRCP, FAMS Charles Prestigiacomo, MD, FAANS, FACS G. Lee Pride, MD Janet Prvu Bettger, ScD, FAHA Volker Puetz, MD, PhD Svetlana Pundik, MD Terence Quinn, MD, MRCP, MBChb (hons), BSc (hons) Alejandro Rabinstein, MD Mubeen Rafay, MB.BS, FCPS, MSc Preeti Raghavan, MD Venkatakrishna Rajajee, MD Kumar Rajamani, MD Peter A. Rasmussen, MD Kumar Reddy, MD Michael J. Reding, MD Bruce R. Reed, PhD Mathew J. Reeves, BVSc, PhD, FAHA Martin Reis, MD Marc Ribo, MD, PhD David Rodriguez-Luna, MD, PhD Charles Romero, MD Jonathan Rosand, MD Gary A. Rosenberg, MD Michael Ross, MD, FACEP Natalia S. Rost, MD, MA Elliot J. Roth, MD, FAHA Christianne L. Roumie, MD, MPH Marilyn M. Rymer, MD, FAHA Ralph L. Sacco, MS, MD, FAAN, FAHA Edgar A. Samaniego, MD, MS Navdeep Sangha, BS, MD Nerses Sanossian, MD Lauren Sansing, MD, MSTR Gustavo Saposnik, MD, MSc, FAHA Eric Sauvageau, MD Jeffrey L. Saver, MD, FAHA, FAAN Sean I. Savitz, MD, FAHA Judith D. Schaechter, PhD Lee H. Schwamm, MD, FAHA Phillip Scott, MD, FAHA Magdy Selim, MD, PhD, FAHA Warren R. Selman, MD, FAHA Souvik Sen, MD, MS, MPH, FAHA Frank Sharp, MD, FAHA, FAAN George Shaw, MD, PhD Kevin N. Sheth, MD Vilaas Shetty, MD Joshua Shimony, MD, PhD Yukito Shinohara, MD, PhD Ashfaq Shuaib, MD, FAHA Lori A. Shutter, MD Cathy A. Sila, MD, FAAN Gisele S. Silva, MD Brian Silver, MD Daniel E. Singer, MD Robert Singer, MD Aneesh B. Singhal, MD Lesli Skolarus, MD Eric E. Smith, MD Sabrina E. Smith, MD, PhD Christopher Sobey, PhD, FAHA J David Spence, MD Christian Stapf, MD Joel Stein, MD Michael F. Stiefel, MD, PhD Sophia Sundararajan, MD, PhD David Tanne, MD Robert W. Tarr, MD Turgut Tatlisumak, MD, PhD, FAHA, FESO Charles H. Tegeler, MD Mohamed S. Teleb, MD Fernando Testai, MD, PhD Ajith Thomas, MD Stephen Thomas, MD, MPH Bradford B. Thompson, MD Amanda Thrift, PhD, PGDipBiostat David Tong, MD Michel Torbey, MD, MPH, FCCM, FAHA Emmanuel Touze, MD, PhD Amytis Towfighi, MD Richard J. Traystman, PhD, FAHA Margaret F. Tremwel, MD, PhD, FAHA Brian Trimble, MD Georgios Tsivgoulis, MD Tanya Turan, MD, FAHA Aquilla S. Turk, DO Michael Tymianski, MD, PhD, FRCSC Philippa Tyrrell, MB, MD, FRCP Shinichiro Uchiyama, MD, FAHA Luis Vaca, MD Renee Van Stavern, MD Susan J. Vannucci, PhD Dale Vaslow, MD, PHD Zena Vexler, PhD Barbara Vickrey, MD, MPH Ryan Viets, MD Anand Viswanathan, MD, PhD Salina Waddy, MD Kenneth R. Wagner, PhD Lawrence R. Wechsler, MD Ling Wei, MD Theodore Wein, MD, FRCPC, FAHA Babu Welch, MD David Werring, PhD Justin Whisenant, MD Christine Anne Wijman, MD, PhD Michael Wilder, MD Joshua Willey, MD, MS David Williams, MB, BAO, BCh, PhD, Dip.Med.Tox, FRCPE, FRCPI Linda Williams, MD Olajide Williams, MD, MS Dianna Willis, PhD John A. Wilson, MD, FACS Jeffrey James Wing, MPH Carolee J. Winstein, PhD, PT, FAPTA Max Wintermark, MD Charles Wira, MD Robert J. Wityk, MD, FAHA Thomas J. Wolfe, MD Lawrence Wong, MD Daniel Woo, MD, MS Clinton Wright, MD, MS Guohua Xi, MD Ying Xian, MD, PhD Dileep R. Yavagal, MD Midori A. Yenari, MD, FAHA William L. Young, MD Darin Zahuranec, MD Allyson Zazulia, MD, FAHA Adina Zeki Al Hazzouri, PhD John H. Zhang, MD, PhD Justin Zivin, MD, PhD, FAHA Richard Zorowitz, MD, FAHA Maria Cristina Zurru, MD

The first week of October is the season to announce the winners of the Nobel Prizes of sciences such as Physics, Physiology or Medicine and Chemistry. CientMed celebrates this occasion by inviting two well known Venezuelan scientists to comment on the significance of the last two prizes, and share their corresponding deep knowledge and experience on the techniques, yes, techniques, based on the discoveries recognized this year. We are very fortunate to have among us, here in Caracas, Dr. Flor Pujol, a graduate in biology from Universidad Simón Bolívar, with an MSc and Phil. Sc., from the Venezuelan Institute of Scientific Research, IVIC. As a full Professor at IVIC, Flor is widely recognized as a leader on the molecular epidemiology and evolution of hepatitis viruses, with singular works on viruses infecting Amerindians from Venezuela. With such a background, Dr. Pujol is in a unique position to comment on the significance of the Nobel Prize of Medicine or Physiology awarded this year to, Harvey J Alter, Michael Houghton, and Charles M Rice, “For the discovery of hepatitis C virus”. On the same level of expertise but on the novel technique of CRISPR and the Nobel Prize of Chemistry this year, we also invited, Dr. José Luis Ramírez, a well known molecular biologist and a graduate from Universidad Central de Venezuela, with a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University, who for many years is recognized as the undisputed leader of genomic studies, on the telomeres of the parasite, Trypanosoma cruzi, the causative agent of Chagas Disease. The readers of ScienMed may remember the very first article of this journal, on August 5th, 2020, authored by Dr. Ramirez, which anticipated the Nobel Prize of Chemistry 2020, the CRISPR technologies, awarded jointly to, Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna, “For the development of a method for genome editing”. We hope that our readers may enjoy both Commentaries by Drs. Pujol and Dr. Ramírez, respectively.

Los cambios que se produjeron en las actividades de la Universidad a partir de marzo de 2020 por la pandemia del COVID 19, entre ellas las de investigación y desarrollo, no impidieron que se continuara con el espacio de las Jornadas de Jóvenes Investigadores Tecnológicos, tanto en la octava (2020) como en la novena edición (2021). El evento se llevó a cabo los días 6 y 7 de octubre de 2021, con sede en la Facultad Regional Santa Fe, y fue organizada en conjunto con las otras cuatro Facultades Regionales de la UTN pertenecientes a la Provincia de Santa Fe: Rafaela, Reconquista, Venado Tuerto y Rosario. Los integrantes del Area TICS de la FR Santa Fe desarrollaron la plataforma virtual, tomando como modelo la que se usó en las JIT 2020, con sede en la FR Venado Tuerto, y brindada por la FR San Francisco. Se presentaron 62 trabajos de I+D escritos en 12 de los Programas de I+D de la UTN, cuyos autores fueron 101 alumnos y graduados recientes. En el proceso de evaluación de dichos trabajos participaron 20 coordinadores y más de 90 docentes investigadores. Las exposiciones virtuales se presentaron online en un arreglo de 3 sesiones en paralelo (usando reuniones Zoom y un canal de YouTube para su difusión masiva). Además los trabajos fueron presentados en una sesión de videos pregrabados, dispuestos en la plataforma del evento. Las charlas en vivo y los videos pregrabados se encuentran disponibles online en la dirección https://jit2021.frsf.utn.edu.ar/. Durante el evento, se realizó la conferencia plenaria “Profesiones tecnológicas vinculadas a las áreas de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación. Casos presentes y oportunidades del futuro”, donde participaron los egresados de UTN Dr. Emiliano Reynares, quien actualmente trabaja en la empresa alemana multinacional Boehringer Ingelheim con filial radicada en Barcelona (España), y Mg. Leonardo Cristalli, CEO de la Empresa Okaratech (Uruguay), de agricultura digital. La charla se encuentra disponible en la dirección https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPD8K7GW-aw. Al final de las Jornadas se realizaron menciones especiales de los 5 videos más populares y de los 12 trabajos mejor escritos. El Comité Organizador y las autoridades de la FR Santa Fe agradecemos la participación de los asistentes, expositores, evaluadores, moderadores, coordinadores, auspiciantes, técnicos de TICS y todos los que hicieron posible realizar esta novena edición de las JIT, cuya próxima sede será la FR Reconquista en 2022. COMITÉ ORGANIZADOR Autoridades (al momento del evento): Rector UTN: Ing. Héctor Aiassa Secretario de Ciencia, Tecnología y Posgrado UTN: Ing. Miguel Sosa Decanos de las Facultades Regionales organizadoras: Facultad Regional Rafaela: Ing. Jorge David Facultad Regional Rosario: Ing. Rubén Ciccarelli Facultad Regional Reconquista: Ing. Santiago Arnulphi Facultad Regional Venado Tuerto: Ing. Jorge Amigo Facultad Regional Santa Fe: Ing. Rudy Grether Secretarios de CyT de las Facultades Regionales organizadoras: Facultad Regional Rosario: Dr. Nicolás Scenna Facultad Regional Rafaela: Ing. Marcelo Laorden Facultad Regional Reconquista: Ing. Brian Moschen Facultad Regional Venado Tuerto: Dr. Leandro Prevosto Facultad Regional Santa Fe: Dra. Ana Rosa Tymoschuk Invitada EspecialLic. Marina Baima, Secretaria de Ciencia y Tecnología, Ministerio de Producción, Ciencia y Tecnología de la Provincia de Santa Fe Colaboradores de las Facultades Regionales organizadoras: Facultad Regional Rosario: Dra. Ana Marisa Arias Facultad Regional Rafaela: Lic. Alejandra Mahieu Facultad Regional Santa Fe: Dra. Anabela Guilarducci, Mg. José Luis Torres, Dr. Ariel Loyarte, Ing. María Elvira Rodríguez Facultad Regional Santa Fe, Área TIC: Ing. Gustavo Pighin, Ing. Juan Carlos Ramos, Ing. Leopoldo Oronel. Facultad Regional Santa Fe, Área Comunicaciones: Téc. Nahuel Gastón Zabala, Téc. Germán Saudejaud, Téc. Rodrigo Castillo.Facultad Regional Santa Fe, Secretaría de Ciencia y Tecnología: Ing. Patricia Acevedo, Téc. Mauro Avalo, Téc. Marcela Tulián Comité Académico Científico Javier Acosta, Alejandro Albanesi, Marcela Ambrosini, Jorge Amigo, Ana Marisa Arias, Luciana Ballejos, María Florencia Balzarini, Juan Marcos Banegas, Loreley Beltramini, Sonia Benz, Paola Biscotti, María Julia Blas, Rosana Boglione, Santiago Cabrera, María Fernanda Carrasco, Eva Casco, Mariel Ale, Juan Camilo Chamorro, Maria cristina Ciappini, Ángel Ciarbonetti, Patricia Mores, Rossana Crudeli, Roberto Pablo Da Graca, Adrian D’Andrea, Evangelina Delfratte, Felipe Diaz, Erica Fernandez, Liliana Ferranti, María Cecilia Filippetti, Mauren Fuentes Mora, Silvio Gonnet, Ariel González, Dianela González, Anabela Guilarducci, Alfredo Anibal Guillaumet, María De Los Milagros Gutiérrez, Raúl Hurani, Fernando Imaz, Juan Jaurena, Susana Keller, Pablo A. Kler, Rodrigo Leurino, Román Rafael Llorens, Diego López, Jacinto Diab Losada, Ariel Loyarte, Alejandra Mahieu, Juan Ignacio Manassaldi, Ulises Manassero, Luciano Marani, Santiago Márquez Damián, Héctor Martín, Sandra M. Mendoza, Héctor Mónaco, Brian Moschen, Sergio Mussati, Miguel Mussati, Juan José Nittmann, Diego Gabriel Oliva, Matías Orué, Cecilia Panigatti, Mara Jaquelina Papa, Rosana Marcela Portillo, Leandro Prevosto, Pedro Querini, Sandra Cristina Ramírez, María Reinheimer, Fabiana María Riva, María Elvira Rodríguez, María Luciana Roldán, Nadia Román, Omar Romero, Mariano Rubiolo, Sebastián Russillo, Emmanuel Sangoi, Carlos Ignacio Sanseverinatti, Judith Santa Cruz, Alejandro Santa Cruz, Nicolás José Scenna, María Celeste Schierano, Mariano Serenelli, Fabricio Sfulcini, Irene Steinmann, José Luis Torres, Néstor Ulibarrie, Marcela Vegetti, Marcela Vera, Darío Weitz, Laura Zanitti, Lara Zingaretti, David Zumoffen

Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash INTRODUCTION More than 20 cell and gene therapies are now available to safely minimize genetic diseases such as retinal dystrophy (LUXTURNA), some B-cell lymphomas (YESCARTA), and B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia (KYMRIAH).[1] One such gene-editing tool is Clustered Regular Inter Spaced Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) and its associated proteins or CRISPR-Cas. Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier described CRISPR’s potential as an accurate genome editing tool in 2012. The FDA approved the first cell and gene therapy in 2017.[2] The FDA is continually approving more CRISPR clinical trials, including therapies to treat sickle cell anemia, cancer, and HIV.[3] Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the broad potential applications of CRISPR have extended beyond gene editing. CRISPR is being used in rapid diagnostic testing to determine not only whether an individual becomes infected with SARS-Cov-2 but also the specific variant.[4] As with many diagnostic tests, scientists still face challenges like speed, sensitivity (the ability of the test to detect viral load), and robustness (the ability of the test to give accurate results in the field). Nonetheless, these tests could revolutionize surveillance of the virus and help curb the spread of new variants as they arise. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there are SARS-CoV-2 variants of interest, variants of concern, and variants of high consequence. In varying degrees, these may impact the efficacy of different vaccines and treatment plans.[5] Knowing which variant an individual has or is circulating within a population informs public health policy. l. Public Perceptions of Gene Editing Throughout the Decades Perceptions about gene editing have fluctuated, especially since the 1970s. Support has varied for recombinant DNA in which editing a bacterial genome produces human insulin to treat diabetes, genetically modified plants such as antibiotic-resistant tobacco, and other genetically modified organisms. Human gene editing has a tainted past: consider the teenager Jesse Gelsinger who tragically died in a gene therapy clinical trial in 1999.[6] Another gene therapy trial led to the development of leukemia in several young children.[7] In the last two decades, there have been significant improvements in safety and reliability. Though scientists have developed various gene therapies over the years, such as viral vector delivery of therapeutic transgenes, transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENS), and zinc finger nucleotides, CRISPR far surpasses them by safety, accuracy, and ease of use.[8] ll. Shifting Perceptions and Broader Applications CRISPR is controversial due to concerns of safety, misuse for non-therapeutic purposes, and uncertainty about the science and technology. Yet, there is also an underlying assumption that gene editing for therapeutic purposes would be a good use of CRISPR. There is an ethical imperative to use CRISPR therapeutically to safely reduce suffering for people with debilitating genetic diseases if proven safe. However, there is more variation in what would be considered good about uses beyond therapeutic applications, such as enhancement purposes. Enhancement is a broad and conceptually laden term. For example, Julian Savulescu defines enhancement as any change in the person’s state – biological or psychological – which in turn is experienced or judged by the person or people as good.[9] Thus, enhancement could include any gene-editing relating to physical, cognitive, aesthetic, or moral enhancement. For example, the public and the scientific community reacted with outrage to the 2018 scandal of He Jiankui, a Chinese scientist who gene-edited two baby girls to make them HIV resistant. Rather than therapeutic gene-editing, this example was widely considered enhancement. The public may perceive the uses of CRISPR for enhancement as negative, but improved public perception of CRISPR overall would be beneficial to promote its therapeutic uses. CRISPR opened an array of possibilities and consequential decisions that lie in the hands of the consumer. A qualitative study done to gauge opinions on Twitter found that “#CRISPR babies” elicited responses of sentiments ranging from positive and neutral to negative, spiking in 2018 with mostly neutral and negative sentiments.[10] As cell and gene therapies move to market treating a small number of people with rare genetic diseases, public perceptions of these technologies are already shifting and may shift more over time. The factors influencing this shift toward acceptance might include trust in science,[11] trust in the technology or the brand[12] that brings it to market, and proven safety and efficacy over time. Meanwhile, in this COVID-19 pandemic, CRISPR's beneficial services for the detection of different variants in individuals and populations may positively impact the way it is perceived and accepted by the public. Mammoth Biosciences [13] and Nanyang Technological University have developed rapid diagnostic tests called DETECTR and VaNGuard, respectively, to detect variants.[14] CRISPR and its associated proteins act as molecular scissors that have the ability to cut a specific section of genetic material with accuracy. It is the exploitation of a bacterial defense mechanism. When a virus infects bacteria, it uses CRISPR-associated proteins to cut out the bacteriophage’s RNA. The bacteria then insert some of the virus RNA into its own genome to detect and destroy it in the future. In the VaNGuard diagnostic test, the enzyme enAsCas12a targets specific sections of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Guided by two guide RNAs, it snips a section of the virus and can detect the virus as well as two mutation sites in the virus. CONCLUSION CRISPR’s application as a diagnostic testing tool is different from its gene-editing use. However, people may not distinguish the different applications when forming their perceptions of CRISPR. Public confidence in certain technology needs only a push in a certain direction to sway opinion toward mass consumption or disapproval. Research investigating people’s perceptions is becoming central to the debates about new technologies.[15] The WHO’s Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing, in their Position Paper (2021), calls for “education, engagement, and empowerment.”[16] They call on the United Nations to establish an interagency working group to facilitate global dialogue. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Consensus Study Report (2020), also calls for public engagement and education about these technologies.[17] DIY and biohacking communities have shown an inclination to understand and apply these technologies with or without the guidance of regulators, scientists, or academia.[18] Perhaps as CRISPR is used to saved lives during the pandemic, this is a pivotal moment to educate people about CRISPR and its broad applications. [1] “Approved Cellular and Gene Therapy Products,” Food and Drug Administration, June 15, 2021, https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/approved-cellular-and-gene-therapy-products. Jim Daley, “Gene Therapy Arrives,” Scientific American, January 1, 2020, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gene-therapy-arrives/. [2] Broad Institute, “CRISPR Timeline,” n.d., https://www.broadinstitute.org/what-broad/areas-focus/project-spotlight/crispr-timeline. “Who Owns CRISPR in 2021? It’s Even More Complicated Than You Think,” April 27, 2021, https://synbiobeta.com/who-owns-crispr-in-2021-its-even-more-complicated-than-you-think/. [3] Robert Sanders, “FDA Approves First Test of CRISPR to Correct Genetic Defect Causing Sickle Cell Disease,” March 30, 2021, https://news.berkeley.edu/2021/03/30/fda-approves-first-test-of-crispr-to-correct-genetic-defect-causing-sickle-cell-disease/. Laura Brzyski, “Excision BioTherapeutics Has Secured $60M to Proceed with HIV Clinical Trial,” Philadelphia Magazine, March 5, 2021, https://www.phillymag.com/healthcare-news/2021/03/05/excision-biotherapeutics-temple-hiv-clinical-trial/. [4] “A COVID-19 Test to Detect Virus Variants,” Nanyang Technological University, March 29, 2021, https://www.ntu.edu.sg/news/detail/a-covid-19-test-to-detect-virus-variants. [5] “SARS-CoV-2 Variant Classifications and Definitions,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, July 13, 2021, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/variant-info.html. [6] Nature, “Gene-therapy trials must proceed with caution,” Nature 534, 590 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/534590a. [7] Fathema Uddin, Charles M. Rudin, and Triparna Sen, “CRISPR Gene Therapy: Applications, Limitations, and Implications for the Future,” Frontiers in Oncology 10 (August 7, 2020): 1387, doi:10.3389/fonc.2020.01387. [8] Ibid. [9] Savulescu, J, “Ethics and Enhancement,” Annals New York Academy of Sciences (2006), 321-338. [10] Martin Müller et al., “Assessing Public Opinion on CRISPR-Cas9: Combining Crowdsourcing and Deep Learning,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 22, no. 8 (August 31, 2020): e17830, doi:10.2196/17830. [11] Stephan Guttinger, “Trust in Science: CRISPR–Cas9 and the Ban on Human Germline Editing,” Science and Engineering Ethics 24, no. 4 (August 2018): 1077–96, doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9931-1. [12] Katherine Mobley, “How Public Perception Can Make Or Break A Brand, And What It Means For Employees,” Forbes, January 5, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescommunicationscouncil/2019/05/01/how-public-perception-can-make-or-break-a-brand-and-what-it-means-for-employees/?sh=7b81058ad118. [13] James P. Broughton et al., “CRISPR–Cas12-Based Detection of SARS-CoV-2,” Nature Biotechnology 38, no. 7 (July 2020): 870–74, doi:10.1038/s41587-020-0513-4. [14] “A COVID-19 Test to Detect Virus Variants.”; Kean Hean Ooi et al., “An Engineered CRISPR-Cas12a Variant and DNA-RNA Hybrid Guides Enable Robust and Rapid COVID-19 Testing,” Nature Communications 12, no. 1 (December 2021): 1739, doi:10.1038/s41467-021-21996-6. [15] Dietram A. Scheufele et al., “What We Know about Effective Public Engagement on CRISPR and Beyond,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, no. 22 (June 1, 2021): e2004835117, doi:10.1073/pnas.2004835117. [16] WHO Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing, “Humane Genome Editing Position Paper” (WHO, 2021). [17] International Commission on the Clinical Use of Human Germline Genome Editing et al., Heritable Human Genome Editing (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2020), doi:10.17226/25665. [18] Josiah Zayner, “2018 Genetic Engineering For All: The Last Great Frontier of Human Freedom,” www.leapsmag.com, January 20, 2018, https://leapsmag.com/genetic-engineering-last-great-frontier-human-freedom/particle-1.

Cute pictures of animals feature as an inoffensive and adorable background to the contemporary online experience with cute content regularly shared on social media platforms. Indeed the demand for cuteness is so strong in the current cultural milieu that some animals become recognisable animal celebrities in the process (Hepola). However, despite the existence of this professionalisation in some sections of the cute economy, amateurs produce the majority of cute content that circulates online. This is largely because one of the central contributors to this steady stream of cute animal pictures is the subforum Aww, hosted on the online community Reddit. Aww is wholly dedicated to pictures of cute things and allows users to directly submit cute content directly to the site. Aww is one of the default subforums that new Reddit users are automatically subscribed to and is immensely popular, featuring over 4.2 million dedicated subscribers as well as untold casual visits. The section is self-described as: “Things that make you go AWW! -- like puppies, and bunnies, and so on...Feel free to post pictures, videos and stories of cute things” ("The cutest things on the internet!"). Users upload cute animal photos that they have taken and wait for the Reddit community to vote on their favourite pictures. The voting mechanism helps users to acknowledge their favourite posts, with the most popular featured on the front page of Aww (for a detailed critique of this process see van der Nagel 2013). The user-generated model of the site means that instead of visitors being confronted with a formally curated selection of cute animal photos, Aww offers a constantly changing mixture of amateur, semi-pro and professional content. Aww - and Reddit more generally - stand as an emblematic example of participatory culture (Jenkins 2006), with users playing an active role in the production and curation of online content. However, given the commercial nature of many user-generated content sites, this amateur media activity is becoming increasingly subject to intellectual property claims and conflicts (see Burgess; Kennedy). Across the internet there are growing tensions between website operators and amateur producers. As Jenny Kennedy (132) notes, while these platforms promote a public rhetoric of “sharing”, these corporate narratives “downplay their economic power” and imply “that they do not control the practices contained within their sites”. Subsequently, the expectations of users regarding how content is managed and organised can differ substantially from the corporate goals of social media companies. This paper contributes to the growing body of literature interested in the politics of amateur media production (see Hunter and Lastowka; Benkler; Burgess; Kennedy) by exploring the emergence of attribution norms and informal enforcement measures in and around the Aww online community. In contrast to professional content creators, amateurs often have fewer resources on hand to protect their copyrighted work and are also challenged by a pervasive online rhetoric that suggests that popular content essentially “belongs to the Internet” (Douglas). A number of communities on Reddit have questioned the company’s handling of amateur content with users suggesting that Reddit actively seeks to de-contextualise original content and not attribute original creators. By examining how amateur creators and online communities regulate content online, I interrogate the power relations that exist between social media platforms and users and explore how the corporate rhetoric of participatory culture interacts with the legal framework of copyright law. This article also contributes to existing legal scholarship on communities of practice and norms-based intellectual property systems. This literature has explored how social norms effectively regulate the protection of, among other things, recipes (Fauchart and Von Hippel), fashion design (Raustiala and Sprigman) and stand-up comedy routines (Oliar and Sprigman), in situations where copyright law does not function as an effective regulatory mechanism. Often these norms are in line with copyright law protections, but in other cases they diverge from these legal principles. In this paper I suggest that particular sections of Reddit function in a similar way, with their own set of self-governing norms, and that these norms largely align with the philosophical aims of copyright law. The paper begins by outlining a series of recent debates that have occurred between amateur media creators and Reddit, before exploring how norms are regulated on Reddit subforums Aww and Karma Court. I then offer some brief conclusions on the value of paying attention to how social norms structure forms of “sharing” (see Kennedy) and provide a useful way for amateur media producers to protect their content without going through formal legal processes. Introducing Reddit and the Confused Politics of Amateur Content Reddit is a social news site, a vibrant community and one of the most popular websites online. It stands as the most visible iteration of a long-standing tradition of user-generated and managed news, one that goes back to websites like Slashdot, which operated in the mid to late-90s. Founded in 2005 Reddit was launched after only one funding round of venture capital, receiving $100k in seed funding from Y Combinatory (Miller). Despite some early rivalry between Reddit and competitor site Digg, Reddit had enough potential to be purchased by Condé Nast for an estimated $20 million (Carr). Reddit’s audience numbers have grown exponentially in the last few years, with the site currently receiving over 5 billion page views and 114 million unique visitors per month (“About Reddit”). It has also changed focus significantly in the last few years with the site now “as much about posting interesting or funny pictures as it is about news” (Sepponen). Reddit hosts a number of individual subforums (called subreddits), which focus on a particular topic and function essentially like online bulletin boards. The front-page of Reddit showcases the most popular content from across the whole website, and user-generated content features heavily here. Amateur media cannot spread without the structural support of social media platforms, but this support is qualified in particular ways. Reddit stands as a paradigmatic case. Users on Reddit are “incentivized to submit direct links to images, because viewers can get to them more easily” (Douglas) and the website encourages amateur creators to use a preferred content server – Imgur – to host images. The Imgur service provides a direct public link to an image – even bypassing the Reddit discussion page – and with its free hosting and limited ads it has become a popular service and is used by most Reddit users (Slater-Robins). For the majority of Reddit users this is an unproblematic partnership. Imgur is free, effective and fast. However, a vocal minority of Reddit users and amateur creators claim that the partnership between Reddit and Imgur has created the equivalent of an online ghetto (Douglas).As Nick Douglas explains, when using services like Imgur there is no requirement to either provide an external link to a creators website or to attribute the creator, limiting the ability for an amateur creator to gain exposure. It also bypasses existing revenue streams that may have been set up by creators, including ad-supported websites or online stores offering merchandise. As a result creators have little opportunity to benefit either economically or reputationally from this system. This occurs to such an extent that “there are actually warnings against submitting your own [original] work” to particular subforums on Reddit (Douglas). For example, some forum moderators require submissions to either “link directly to a specific image file or to a website with minimal ads” (“Reddit Pics”). It is in this context, that the posting of original content without attribution is not actively policed. There are a number of complaints circulating within the Reddit community about these practices (see “Ok, look people. I know you heart Imgur, but webcomics? Just link to the freaking site”; “The problem with reddit”). Many creators have directly protested against this aspect of Reddit’s structural organisation. Blogger Benjamin Grelle (a.k.a The Frogman) and writer Chris Menning are two notable examples. Grelle’s protest was witty and dramatic. He wrote a blog post featuring a picture of an email he sent to Imgur offering the company a choice: send him a huge novelty check for $10,000 or alternatively, add a proper attribution system that allows artists, photographers and content creators to properly credit their work. Grelle estimates that his work generated around $20,000 in ad revenue for Imgur; however the structure of Reddit and Imgur meant he earned little income from the “viral” success of his content. Grelle claimed he was happy for his work to be shared, but attribution meant that it was more likely a fan would follow the link to his website and provide him with some financial recompense for his work. Unsurprisingly, Grelle didn’t receive a paycheck and so in response has developed a unique way to gain exposure. He has started to insert himself into his work, “[s]o when you see a stolen Frogman piece, you still see Ben Grelle’s face” (Douglas). Chris Menning posted a blog about being banned from Reddit, hoping to bring to light some of the inequalities that persist around Reddit’s current structure. He began by noting that he had received a significant amount of traffic from them in the past. He had responded in kind by looking to create original content for particular subforums, knowing what a particular community would enjoy. However, his habit of providing the link to his own website along with the content he posted saw him get labelled as a spammer and banned by administrators. Menning chose not to fight the ban:It seems that the only way I could avoid [getting banned] is if I were to relinquish any rights to my original content and post it exclusively to Imgur. In effect, reddit punishes the creation of original content, and rewards content theft (Menning). Instead he decided to quit Reddit, claiming that Reddit’s approach would carry long-term consequences as the platform provided little incentive for creators to produce wholly original content. It is worth noting that neither Menning nor Grelle turned to legal avenues in order to gain financial restitution. Considering the nature of the practices they were complaining about, compensation in the form of an injunction or damages would have certainly been possible. In Benjamin’s case, a user had combined a number of his copyrighted works into one image and posted the image to Imgur without attribution --this infringed Grelle’s copyright in his work as well as his moral right to be attributed as the creator of the work. However, the public comments of both creators suggest that despite the possibility of legal success, their issue was not so much to do with their individual cases but rather the broader structural issues at play within Reddit. While they might gain individually from a successful legal challenge, over the long term Reddit would continue to be a fraught place for amateur and semi-professional content creators. Certain parts of the Reddit community appear to be sympathetic to these issues, and the complaints of dissenting users like Menning and Grelle have received active support from some users and moderators on the site. This has led to changes in the way content is being posted and managed on Aww, and has also driven the emergence of a satirical user-run court entitled Karma Court. In these spaces moderators and members establish community norms, regularly police the correct attribution of works and challenge the de-contextualisation of content overtly encouraged by Reddit, Imgur and other subforums. In the following section I will examine both Aww and Karma Court in order to explore how these norms are established and negotiated by both moderators and users alike. reddit.com/r/aww: The Online Hub of Cute Animal Pictures As we have seen, the design of Reddit and Imgur creates a number of problems for amateur creators who wish to protect their intellectual property. To address these shortcomings, the Aww community has created its own informal regulatory systems. Volunteer moderators play a crucial role: they establish informal codes of conduct for the Aww community and enforce various rules about how the site should be used. One of these rules relates to attribution. Users are asked to to “post original content whenever possible or attribute original content creators” ("The cutest things on the internet!"). Due to the volunteer nature of the work and the size of the Aww sub-reddit, moderator enforcement is haphazard. Consequently, responsibility falls on the wider user community to self-police. Despite its informal nature, this process manages to facilitate a fairly consistent standard of attribution. In this way it functions as an informal method of intellectual property protection. It is worth noting however that this commitment to original content is not solely due to the moral character of Aww users. A significant motivation is the distribution of karma points amongst Reddit users. Karma, which represents your good standing within the Reddit community, can be earned through user likes and votes – these push the most popular content to the front page of each subforum. Thus karma stands as a numerical representation of a user’s value to Reddit. This ostensibly democratic system has the paradoxical effect of fuelling intellectual property violations on the site. Users often repost other users’ jpegs, animated gifs, and other content, in order to reap the social and cultural capital that comes with posting a popular picture. In some cases they claim authorship of the content; in other cases they simply re-post content that they feel “belongs to the internet” (Douglas). Some content is so popular or pervasive online (this content that is often described as “viral”) that users feel there is little reason or need to attribute content. This helps to explain the persistence of ownership and attribution conflicts on Reddit. In the eyes of some users and moderators the management of these rights and the correct distribution of karma are seen to be vital to the long-term functioning of site. The karma system offers a numerical representation of each contributor’s value. Re-posting already successful content and claiming it as your own challenges the proper functioning of the karma system and potentially ‘inhibits the innovative potential of contributions (Richterich). On Aww the re-posting of original content is viewed as a taboo act that breaches these norms. The poster is seen to have engaged in deceptive conduct in order to gain karma for their user profile. In addition there is a strong ethic that runs through these comment threads that the original creator deserves attribution. There is a presumption that this attribution is vital in order to increasing the possible marketability of the posted content and to recognise and courage creators within the community. This sort of community-driven regulation contrasts with the aforementioned site design of Reddit and Imgur, which frustrates effective authorship attribution practices. Aww users, in contrast, have shown a willingness to defend what they see as the intellectual property rights of content creators.A series of recent examples outline how this process works in practice. User “moonlikeme123” posted a picture of a cat with its hands on the steering wheel of a car. The picture was entitled “we don’t need to ask for directions, Helen”. During the same day, three separate users had identified the picture as a repost, with one noting that the same picture was already on the front page of Aww. “moonlikeme123” received no karma points for the picture. In a second example, the user “nibblur” posted a photo of a kitten “hunting” a toy mouse. Within a day, one enterprising user had identified the original photographer – “torode”, an amateur photographer – and linked to his Reddit profile (see fig. 2) ("ferocious cat hunting its prey: aww."). One further example: on 15 July 2013 “Cuzacelmare” posted a picture of two dogs comforting each other – an image which had originally been posted by “lauface”. Again, users were quick to point out the lack of attribution and the attempt to claim someone else’s content as their own (“Comforting her sister during a storm: aww). It is worth noting that some Reddit users consider attributing content to be entirely without benefit. Some deride karma as “meaningless” and suggest that as a significant amount of content online is regularly reposted elsewhere, there is little harm done in re-posting what is essentially amateur content destined to be lost in the bowels of the internet. For example, the comments that follow Cuzacelmare’s reflect an ambivalence about reposting, suggesting that users weigh up the benefits of exposure gained by the re-posting against the lack of attribution granted and the increasingly decontextualized nature of the photo itself:Why does everyone get so bitchy about reposts. Not everyone is on ALL the time or has been on Rreddit since it was created. I mean if you've seen it already ignore it. It's just picture you aren't forced to click the link. [sic] (“Comforting her sister during a storm: aww”)We're arguing semantics, but any content that gets attention can benefit the creator, whether it's reddit or Youtube (“Comforting her sister during a storm: aww”) Such discussions are common on comment threads following re-posts by other users. They underline the conflicted status of this ephemeral media and the underlying frictions that are part of these processes. These discussions underline the fact that on Reddit the “sharing” (Kennedy) and “spreading” (Jenkins et al.) of content is not seen as an unquestioned positive but rather as a contestable structural feature that needs to be constantly negotiated and discussed. These informal methods of identification, post-hoc attribution and criticism in comment threads have been the long-standing method used to redress questions of attribution and ownership of content on Reddit. However in recent times, Reddit users have turned to satirical methods of formal adjudication for particularly egregious cases. A sub-reddit, Karma Court, now functions as an informal tribunal in which punishment is meted out for “the abuse of karma and general contemptible actions heretofore identified as wrongdoing” (“Constitution and F.A.Q of the Karma Court”). Due to its double function as both an adjudicator and satire of users overly-invested in online debates, there is no limit to the possible “crimes” a user may be charged with. The following charges are only presented as guidelines and speak to common negative experiences on online: (1). Douchebaggery - When one is being a douche.(2). Defamation - Tarnishing another redditor's [user’s] username.(3). Public Indecency - When a user flexes his or her 'e-peen' with the intent to shame other users.(4). OhShit.exe - Intentional reposting that results in reddit Gold.(5). GrandTheft.jpg - Reposting while claiming credit for the post.(6). Obstruction of Justice - Impeding or interfering with an investigation, such as submitting false screenshots, deleting evidence, or providing false evidence to the court.(7). Other - Literally anything else you want. We like creative names for charges.(“Constitution and F.A.Q of the Karma Court”) In Karma Court, legal representation can be sourced from a list of attorneys and judges, populated by users who volunteer to help adjudicate the case. They are required to have been a Reddit member for over six months. The only punishment is a public shaming. Interestingly Karma Court has developed a fair reposting clause that attempts to manage the complex debates around reposting and attribution. Under the non-binding satirical clause, users are able to repost content if it has not featured on the front page of a sub-reddit for seven or more days, if the re-poster acknowledges in the title or description that they are re-posting or if the original poster has less than 30,000 link karma (which means that the original poster has not substantially contributed to the Reddit community). If a re-poster does not adhere by these rules and claims a re-post as their own original content (or “OC”), they can be charged with “grandtheft.jpg” and brought to trial by another Reddit user. As one of the most popular subforums, a number of cases have emerged from Aww. The aforementioned re-poster “Cuzacelmare” (“I am bringing /U/ Cuzacelmare to trial …”) was “charged” through this process and served with a summons after denying “cute and innocent animals of that subreddit of their much deserved karma”. Similar cases to do with re-posting without attribution on Aww involve “FreshCorio” (“Reddit vs. U/FreshCorio …”) and “ninjacollin” (“People of Reddit vs. /U/ ninjacollin”) who were also brought to karma court. In each case prosecutors were adamant that false authorship claims needed to be punished. With these mock trials run by volunteers it takes time for arguments to be heard and judgment to occur; however “ninjacollin” expedited the legal process by offering a full confession. As a new user, “ninjacollin” was reprimanded severely for his actions and the users on Karma Court underlined the consequences of not identifying original content creators when re-posting content. Ownership and Attribution: Amateur Media, Distribution and Law The practices outlined above offer a number of alternate ways to think about amateur media and how it is distributed. An increasingly complex picture of content attribution and circulation emerges once we take into account the structural operation of Reddit, the intellectual property norms of users, and the various formal and informal systems of regulation that are appearing on the site. Such practices require users to negotiate complex questions of ownership between each other and in relation to corporate bodies. These negotiations often lead to informal agreements around a set of norms to regulate the spread of content within a particular community, suggesting that the lack of a formal legal process in these debates does not mean that there is an absence of regulation. As noted throughout this paper, the spread of online content often involves progressive de-contextualisation. Website design features often support this process in the hopes of encouraging content to spread in a fashion amenable to their corporate goals. Considering this tendency for content to be decontextualized online, the presence of attribution norms on subforums like Aww is significant. Instead of remixing, spreading and re-purposing content indiscriminately, users retain a concept of ownership and attribution that tracks closely to the basic principles of copyright law. Rather than users radically redefining concepts of attribution and ownership, as prefigured in some of the more utopian accounts of participatory media, the dominant norms of the Reddit community extend a discourse of copyright and ownership. As well as providing a greater level of detail to contemporary debates around amateur media and its viral or spreadable nature (Burgess; Jenkins; Jenkins et al), this analysis offers some lessons for copyright law. The emergence of norms in particular Reddit subforums which govern the use of copyrighted content and the use of a mock court structure suggests that online communities have the capacity to engage in forms of redress for amateur creators. These organic forms of copyright management operate adjacent to formal legal structures of copyright law. However, they are more accessible and practical for amateur creators, who do not always have the money to hire lawyers, especially when the market value of their content might be negligible. The informal regulatory systems outlined above may not operate perfectly but they reveal communities who are willing to engage foundational conversations around the importance of attribution and ownership. Following the existing literature (Fauchart and Von Hippel; Raustiala and Sprigman; Schultz; Oliar and Sprigman), I suggest that these online social norms provide a useful form of alternative protection for amateur creators. Acknowledgements Thanks to Ramon Lobato and Emily van der Nagel for comments and productive discussions around these issues. I am also grateful to the two anonymous peer reviewers for their assistance in developing this argument. References “About Reddit.” Reddit, 2014. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.reddit.com/about/›. Benkler, Yochai. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006. Burgess, Jean. “YouTube and the Formalisation of Amateur Media.” Amateur Media: Social, Cultural and Legal Perspectives. In Dan Hunter, Ramon Lobato, Megan Richardson, and Julian Thomas, eds. Oxford: Routledge, 2012. Carr, Nicholas. “Left Alone by Its Owner, Reddit Soars.” The New York Times: Business, 2 Sep. 2012. “Comforting Her Sister during a Storm: aww.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 15 July 2013. “Constitution and F.A.Q of the Karma Court.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 2014. Douglas, Nick. “Everything on the Internet Gets Stolen: Here’s How You Should Feel about That.” Slacktory, 8 Sep. 2009. Fauchart, Emmanual, and Eric von Hippel. “Norms-Based Intellectual Property Systems: The Case of French Chefs.” Organization Science 19.2 (2008): 187 - 201 "Ferocious Cat Hunting Its Prey: aww." reddit: the front page of the internet, 4 April 2013. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.rreddit.com/r/aww/comments/1bobcp/ferocious_cat_hunting_its_prey/›. Hepola, Sarah. “The Internet is Made of Kittens.” Salon.com, 11 Feb. 2009. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.salon.com/2009/02/10/cat_internet/›. Hunter, Dan, and Greg Lastowka. “Amateur-to-Amateur.” William & Mary Law Review 46 (2004): 951 - 1030. “I Am Bringing /U/ Cuzacelmare to Trial on the Basis of Being One of the Biggest _______ I’ve Ever Seen, by Reposting Cute Animal Pictures to /R/Awww. Feels.Jpg.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 21 March 2013. Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Jenkins, Henry, Sam Ford, and Joshua Green. Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. New York: New York University Press, 2013. Menning, Chris. "So I Got Banned from Reddit" Modern Primate, 23 Aug. 2012. Miller, Keery. “How Y Combinator Helped Shape Reddit.” Bloomberg Businessweek, 26 Sep. 2007. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2007-09-26/how-y-combinator-helped-shape-redditbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice›. “Ok, Look People. I Know You Heart Imgur, But Webcomics? Just Link to the Freaking Site.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 22 Aug. 2011. Oliar, Dotan, and Christopher Sprigman. “There’s No Free Laugh (Anymore): The Emergence of Intellectual Property Norms and the Transformation of Stand-Up Comedy.” Virginia Law Review 94.8 (2009): 1787 – 1867. “People of reddit vs. /U/Ninjacollin for Grandtheft.jpg.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 30 Jan. 2013. Raustiala, Kal, and Christopher Sprigman. “The Piracy Paradox: Innovation and Intellectual Property in Fashion Design”. Virginia Law Review 92.8 (2006): 1687-1777. “Reddit v. U/FreshCorio. User Uploads Popular Repost Picture of R/AWW and Claims It Is His Sister’s Cat. Falsely Claims It Is His Cakeday for Good Measure.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 12 Apr. 2013. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.reddit.com/r/KarmaCourt/comments/1c7vxz/reddit_vs_ufreshcorio_user_uploads_popular_repost/›. “Reddit Pics.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 2014. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/›. Richterich, Annika. “’Karma, Precious Karma!’ Karmawhoring on Reddit and the Front Page’s Econometrisation.” Journal of Peer Production 4 (2014). 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-4-value-and-currency/peer-reviewed-articles/karma-precious-karma/›. Schultz, Mark. “Fear and Norms and Rock & Roll: What Jambands Can Teach Us about Persuading People to Obey Copyright Law.” Berkley Technology Law Journal 21.2 (2006): 651 – 728. Sepponen, Bemmu. “Why Redditors Gave Imgur a Chance.” Social Media Today, 20 July 2011. Slater-Robins, Max. “From Rags to Riches: The Story of Imgur.” Neowin, 21 Apr. 2013. "The Cutest Things on the Internet!" reddit: the front page of the internet, n.d. “The Problem with reddit.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 23 Aug. 2012. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.rreddit.com/r/technology/comments/ypbe2/the_problem_with_rreddit/›. Van der Nagel, Emily. “Faceless Bodies: Negotiating Technological and Cultural Codes on reddit gonewild.” Scan: Journal of Media Arts Culture 10.2 (2013). "We Don’t Need to Ask for Directions, Helen: aww." reddit: the front page of the internet, 30 June 2013. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.rreddit.com/r/aww/comments/1heut6/we_dont_need_to_ask_for_directions_helen/›.