Although still prevalent in many human societies, the practice of cousin marriage has precipitously declined in populations undergoing rapid demographic and socioeconomic change. However, it is still unclear whether changes in the structure of the marriage pool or changes in the fitness-relevant consequences of cousin marriage more strongly influence the frequency of cousin marriage. Here, we use genealogical data collected by the Tsimane Health and Life History Project to show that there is a small but measurable decline in the frequency of first cross-cousin marriage since the mid-twentieth century. Such changes are linked to concomitant changes in the pool of potential spouses in recent decades. We find only very modest differences in fitness-relevant demographic measures between first cousin and non-cousin marriages. These differences have been diminishing as the Tsimane have become more market integrated. The factors that influence preferences for cousin marriage appear to be less prevalent now than in the past, but cultural inertia might slow the pace of change in marriage norms. Overall, our findings suggest that cultural changes in marriage practices reflect underlying societal changes that shape the pool of potential spouses.

Maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index is positively associated with offspring obesity, even at adulthood, whereas breastfeeding decreases the risk of obesity. The present study was aimed at assessing whether breastfeeding moderates the association of maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index with offspring body composition at adulthood, using data from 3439 subjects enrolled in a southern Brazilian birth cohort. At 30 years of age, maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index was positively associated with offspring prevalence of obesity, abdominal obesity, as well as body mass index and fat and lean mass index. Breastfeeding moderated the association of maternal pre-pregnancy obesity with offspring adiposity at 30 years of age. For those breastfed<6 months, body mass index was 4.13 kg/m2 (95% confidence interval: 2.98; 5.28) higher among offspring of obese mothers, in relation to offspring of normal weight mothers, whereas among those breastfed≥6 months the magnitude of the difference was small [2.95 kg/m2 (95% confidence interval: 1.17; 4.73)], p-value for interaction = 0.03. Concerning obesity, among those who had been breastfed < 6 months, the prevalence of obesity was 2.56 (95% confidence interval: 1.98; 3.31) times higher among offspring of obese mothers. On the other hand, among those who were breastfed ≥ 6 months, the prevalence of obesity was 1.82 (95% confidence interval: 1.09; 3.04) times higher among offspring of obese mothers. Therefore, among overweight mothers breastfeeding for more than 6 months should be supported, as it may mitigate the consequences of maternal overweight on offspring body composition.

I Introduction

At Metaphysics Γ 3, Aristotle argues that it belongs to a single discipline, which he calls first philosophy, to investigate both substance (οὐσία) and a special class of claims which includes among its members the principle of non-contradiction (PNC). At Γ 4, after insisting that the PNC is, strictly speaking, indemonstrable, he sets forth a series of sketches of refutative arguments intended to show how it can, nonetheless, be substantiated. Traditionally, his main refutative argument has been taken to be embedded in the passage which runs from 1006a31 to b34. In that passage, he tries to show that anyone who denies the PNC and who can then be led, by means of an artfully arranged series of questions, to agree (whether willingly or grudgingly) to a few seemingly modest theses about the signification of expressions of a certain type — which Aristotle illustrates with the general term ‘man’ (ἄνθρωπος) — is thereby logically committed to the following modal claim: ‘It is necessary, then, if it is true to say that something is a man, that it be a bipedal animal' (1006b28-30).

Fifty-nine patients were treated in a prospective, randomized comparison of pentobarbital and mannitol for the control of intracranial hypertension resulting from head injury. Patients with elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) after evacuation of intracranial hematomas were randomized to one of two treatment groups; mannitol initially or pentobarbital initially, followed by the second drug as required by further elevation of ICP. Similarly, patients with raised ICP but without hematomas requiring evacuation were randomly assigned to two treatment groups in an identical paradigm.

Those with ICP elevation and no hematoma treated with pentobarbital as initial therapy had a 77% mortality compared to a 41% mortality for those with mannitol as initial treatment. Patients with evacuated hematomas had mortalities of 40% and 43% (no significant difference) for pentobarbital and mannitol respectively. In both no-hematoma and hematoma streams pentobarbital was less effective than mannitol for control of raised ICP.

Multivariate statistical analysis indicates that pentobarbital coma is not better than mannitol for the treatment of intracranial hypertension and may be harmful in no-hematoma patients with intracranial hypertension after head injury.

Acute agitation is a common psychiatric emergency often treated with intramuscular (IM) medication when rapid control is necessary or the patient refuses to take an oral agent. Conventional IM antipsychotics are associated with side effects, particularly movement disorders, that may alarm patients and render them unreceptive to taking these medications again. Ziprasidone (Geodon®) is the first second-generation, or atypical, antipsychotic to become available in an IM formulation. Ziprasidone IM was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2002 for the treatment of agitation in patients with schizophrenia. In October 2004, a roundtable panel of physicians with extensive experience in the management of acutely agitated patients met to review the first 2 years of experience with this agent. This monograph, a product of that meeting, discusses clinical experience to date with ziprasidone IM and offers recommendations on its use in various settings.

In clinical trials, patients treated with ziprasidone IM demonstrated significant and rapid (within 15-30 minutes) reduction in agitation and improvement in psychotic symptoms, agitation, and hostility to an extent greater than or equal to that attained with haloperidol IM. Tolerability of ziprasidone IM was superior to that of haloperidol IM, with a lower burden of movement disorders. Clinical trials have also shown that ziprasidone IM can be administered with benzodiazepines without adverse consequences. Transition from IM to oral ziprasidone has been well tolerated, with maintenance of symptom control. The most common adverse events associated with ziprasidone IM were insomnia, headache, and dizziness in fixed-dose trials and insomnia and hypertension in flexible-dose trials. No consistent pattern of escalating incidence of adverse events with escalating ziprasidone doses has been observed. Changes in QTc interval associated with ziprasidone at peak serum concentrations are modest and comparable to those seen with haloperidol IM. Results of randomized clinical trials of ziprasidone IM have been corroborated in studies in real-world treatment settings involving patients with extreme agitation or a recent history of alcohol or substance abuse. In these circumstances, clinically significant improvement was seen within 30 minutes of ziprasidone IM administration, without regard to the suspected underlying etiology of agitation. Agents with a good safety/tolerability profile, such as ziprasidone IM, may be more cost effective long term than older agents, due to reduced incidence of acute adverse effects (eg, acute dystonia) that often require extended periods of observation. Additional trials of ziprasidone IM in agitated patients in a variety of clinical settings are warranted to generate comparative risk/benefit data with conventional agents and other second-generation antipsychotics.

A consensus conference on the reasons for the undertreatment of depression was organized by the National Depressive and Manic Depressive Association (NDMDA) on January 17–18,1996. The target audience included health policymakers, clinicians, patients and their families, and the public at large. Six key questions were addressed: (1) Is depression undertreated in the community and in the clinic? (2) What is the economic cost to society of depression? (3) What have been the efforts in the past to redress undertreatment and how successful have they been? (4) What are the reasons for the gap between our knowledge of the diagnosis and treatment of depression and actual treatment received in this country? (5) What can we do to narrow this gap? (6) What can we do immediately to narrow this gap?