To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Trust in the validity of published work is of fundamental importance to scientists. Confirmation of validity is more readily attained than addressing the question of whether fraud was involved. Suggestions are made for key stakeholders - institutions and companies, journals, and funders as to how they might enhance trust in science, both by accelerating the assessment of data validity and by segregating that effort from investigation of allegations of fraud.
This article discusses the prospects and pitfalls of a legally binding pandemic agreement under the auspices of the World Health Organization, currently under negotiation in Geneva. Such an agreement could foster a rules-based pandemic prevention, preparedness and response as a reaction to the failures by states during the COVID-19 pandemic, including a lack of effective coordination for sharing all kinds of data and the global inequity in the distribution of medical goods fueled by vaccine nationalism. Achieving these goals, however, will depend upon a meaningful engagement by delegations negotiating the agreement, a legally sound formulation of its provisions, and overcoming the currently pervasive emergency-bias in this field of global health law. Thus, as advocated by Lawrence Gostin in his seminal treatise on Global Health Law ten years ago, the pandemic agreement could help realize the transformative potential of law for facing one of the greatest health threats to humanity.
Over the past ten years, global health lawyers have actively engaged with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). A pivotal instrument in this regard is the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2003. Despite its open-ended wording, it has significantly influenced domestic tobacco regulation. For instance, thanks to this treaty, the Dutch government no longer engages with the tobacco industry and has (independent from the tobacco industry) implemented various tobacco control measures, resulting in a significant reduction in smoking. The treaty also serves as an exemplary model for the adoption of similar treaties to regulate other behavioral risk factors such as unhealthy diets and alcohol use, as well as broader environmental determinants.
Chaenothecopsis inconspicua is a new anamorphic lichenicolous fungus forming black sporodochia on the thallus of Lecanora expallens. Molecular analysis demonstrates that the new species is positioned in the Mycocaliciales. Although a remarkable diversity of anamorphs was already recognized in Mycocaliciales, it is the first species within this order known to produce sporodochioid conidiomata. Chaenothecopsis inconspicua is currently known from several localities in the northern half of the Netherlands, most often on old Quercus robur trees in villages. A key to the lichenicolous fungi inhabiting Lecanora expallens is provided.
This article analyzes whether the development of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle can serve to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing, given the abuse of veto power by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Although several proposals have been made to restrain the use of the veto, the absence of an intent to eliminate it in its entirety has obstructed UN institutions in their efforts to build an inclusive and peaceful society.
In this context, the authors discuss the debate on the utility of R2P as a norm; its historical background; the relevance of the Responsibility Not to Veto (RN2V) through the example of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict; and the role of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) and other UN organs in aiding the UNSC to implement R2P and maintain international peace and security.
The article focuses on preventing mass atrocities through R2P to safeguard vulnerable populations’ access to basic rights and economic opportunities. Further, RN2V, by limiting UNSC paralysis during a crisis, would help avert protracted conflicts that exacerbate poverty, displacement, and environmental degradation. The R2P and RN2V principles collectively have the potential to strengthen UN institutions and reinforce the emphasis on equity, resilience, and peace by ensuring that violence, conflicts, and political inaction do not undo developmental gains.
The United Kingdom was the first country to legalize the refusal to provide health care in the name of “conscientious objection”, allowing doctors to refuse to provide abortions based on personal or religious beliefs.
A historical review into the origins and motivation behind the “conscientious objection” clause in the 1967 Abortion Act found that Parliamentarians and the medical profession wanted to preserve doctors’ authority over patients, protect objecting doctors from liability, and appease religious anti-abortion beliefs.
These factors point to an unprincipled basis for the introduction of “conscientious objection” into healthcare, which ultimately came at the expense of patients’ rights and health. The “conscience clause” also represented a negation of basic ethical directives in medical practice including patient autonomy and physicians’ fiduciary duty to patients. The term “conscientious objection”— borrowed from the military but misapplied to healthcare — helped mask the practice as a moral “right” of doctors, even while it disregarded patients’ health and dignity.
Refusing to provide treatment on the basis of “conscience” is harmful and discriminatory, and should be phased out gradually using disincentives and other measures to encourage objectors to choose other fields.
In the digital age, “commercial sharenting” refers to parents excessively sharing their children’s images and data on social media for profit. Initially motivated by parental pride, this practice is now driven by child-to-child marketing, where young influencers shape their peers’ consumption habits. While regulations protect child influencers’ privacy, a significant gap remains regarding the rights of child viewers. We argue that commercial sharenting threatens children’s right to health under Article 24(1) of the UNCRC, potentially leading to harmful consumer behaviors and identity confusion. In response, China has adopted a fragmented regulatory approach to platform liability. This article advocates for a comprehensive legal framework incorporating content filtering, moderation, and reviewal to regulate commercial sharenting and safeguard children’s rights and interests in China.
This article first describes shifts in human rights law that have led to improvements in the realization of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) over the last decade. The article does so, however, with careful attention to the structural factors beyond formal legal mechanisms that may undermine the ability of governments, even with the best of intentions, to fully develop the necessary robust health and justice systems. Second, this article considers two additional factors: the political economy factors that enable or limit the ability of States to realize SRHR, as well as the growing evidence base that supports positive legal transformation.