We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure 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.
Leptospira are bacteria that cause leptospirosis in both humans and animals. Human Leptospira infections in Uganda are suspected to arise from animal–human interactions. From a nationwide survey to determine Leptospira prevalence and circulating sequence types in Uganda, we tested 2030 livestock kidney samples, and 117 small mammals (rodents and shrews) using real-time PCR targeting the lipL32 gene. Pathogenic Leptospira species were detected in 45 livestock samples but not in the small mammals. The prevalence was 6.12% in sheep, 4.25% in cattle, 2.08% in goats, and 0.46% in pigs. Sequence typing revealed that Leptospira borgpetersenii, Leptospira kirschneri, and Leptospira interrogans are widespread across Uganda, with 13 novel sequence types identified. These findings enhance the East African MLST database and support the hypothesis that domesticated animals may be a source of human leptospirosis in Uganda, highlighting the need for increased awareness among those in close contact with livestock.
Human rights issues loom large in the contemporary history of Iran. Under the reign of the late shah, Iranians were deprived of basic rights and freedoms and suffered from pervasive violations of human rights, many at the hands of the regime's notorious security forces. Ironically, in official representations to the international community, the shah's government posed as a champion of human rights. In the 1960s and 1970s Iranians took a leadership role at the United Nations in promoting international human rights law, and Tehran was selected as the venue for the important 1968 UN International Conference on Human Rights. Under the shah Iran ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which the United States failed to ratify until 1992 (and then only conditionally). Individual Iranians also contributed to the development of human rights principles.
Since the appearance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, various human rights declarations have been proposed that purport to set forth alternative Islamic principles on human rights. How Islam pertains to human rights remains contested, and none of the proposed Islamic human rights declarations can be taken as a definitive statement of Islamic human rights. The Islamic heritage is diffuse and complex, and trends in contemporary Islamic thought vary widely. Moreover, the rationale for producing Islamic alternatives is challenged by Muslims who embrace the UDHR as consonant with their faith along with the concept of dignity that is linked to the human rights that it sets forth.
The idea that Islam possesses its own distinctive version of human rights has been promoted by conservative forces in Muslim societies that seek to uphold rules of Islamic law, or Shariʿa, that are in conflict with the UDHR. In league with some of these conservative forces, governments of Muslim countries have sponsored alternative declarations and resolutions that rely on Islamic elements to rationalize non-compliance with the UDHR, eliminating some UDHR rights and circumscribing others. Where the concept of dignity figures in such declarations, because it accommodates inequality and restrictions on rights, it takes on colourations unlike those of dignity in the UDHR.