Skip to main content Accessibility help

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.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

5 results

  • The Use of Analogous Reasoning for Assessing Discomfort in Laboratory Animals

  • F R Stafleu, E Rivas, T Rivas, J Vorstenbosch, F R Heeger, A C Beynen
  • Journal:
    Animal Welfare / Volume 1 / Issue 2 / May 1992
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 January 2023, pp. 77-84
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • When assessing discomfort in animals analogous reasoning is often used, namely, that the causes or symptoms of discomfort in people will also apply to animals. This practical rule of thumb can be based on an ‘analogy-postulate’. This postulate takes into account the anatomical and physiological similarities of vertebrate nervous systems and the comparability and homology in the behavioural and physiological responses to discomfort of humans and other vertebrates in similar situations. There are theoretical and practical problems with this analogous reasoning. Theoretical objections include claims that feelings do not exist, are irrelevant or that scientific knowledge is not necessary to recognize feelings. Practical problems will occur when assessing the discomfort of animals without proper knowledge of the relevant species-specific information. Nevertheless, we think that there are two equivalent sound reasons for accepting the analogy-postulate. First, there is more evidence in favour of acceptance of the postulate than of its rejection. Secondly, the negative moral consequences of erroneously rejecting the postulate are far greater than those of mistakenly accepting it.

  • 6 - Discussion

  • Taylor N. Carlson, Washington University, St Louis, Jaime E. Settle, College of William and Mary, Virginia
  • Book:
    What Goes Without Saying
    Published online:
    26 May 2022
    Print publication:
    09 June 2022, pp 130-153

  • Summary

    Chapter 6 offers the first look into the Discussion stage (Stage 3) of the 4D Framework. We focus on what people feel during a political discussion, captured using psychophysiological measurement during two different lab experiments. In the Psychophysiological Anticipation Study, we measure changes in participants' heart rates and skin conductance as they anticipate a political discussion. We find that individuals had a larger psychophysiological response to even the thought of engaging in a political discussion, compared to observing contentious discussions on video. In the Psychophysiological Experience Study, we measure variation in heart rate and skin conductance during real conversations. We find that individuals exhibit physiological signs of discomfort while in these conversations, especially when the conversation is disagreeable.

  • 4 - A Constitution Marked by a “Discomfort with Democracy”

  • Roberto Gargarella, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Book:
    The Law As a Conversation among Equals
    Published online:
    25 April 2022
    Print publication:
    21 April 2022, pp 51-65

  • Summary

    In this chapter, I begin to study in more detail the “construction” of “counter-majoritarian” constitutions or, to use the terms employed by the Brazilian jurist Roberto Mangabeira Unger, constitutions constructed around a “discomfort with democracy.” I use, as a starting point in this exploration, the concept of “factions” that played a central role in the Federalist Papers, and which James Madison took as a basis to explain and justify his influential approach to constitutionalism. I examine the institutional implications of this “counter-majoritarian” view through numerous examples, including the preponderance of “indirect elections”; the special requirements to run for the Senate; and the peculiar organization and competencies of courts.

  • Effect of Spinal Immobilization on Heart Rate, Blood Pressure and Respiratory Rate

  • Stevan R. Bruijns, Henry R. Guly, Lee A. Wallis
  • Journal:
    Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 28 / Issue 3 / June 2013
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    25 March 2013, pp. 210-214
    Print publication:
    June 2013
  • Introduction

    Vital signs remain important clinical indicators in the management of trauma. Tissue injury and ischemia cause tachycardia and hypertension, which are mediated via the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). Spinal immobilization is known to cause discomfort, and it is not known how this might influence the SNS and contribute to abnormal vital signs.

    Hypothesis

    This study aimed to establish whether the pain and discomfort associated with spinal immobilization and the maneuvers commonly used in injured patients (eg, log roll) affect the Heart rate (HR), Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Respiratory rate (RR). The null hypothesis was that there are no effects.

    Methods

    A prospective, unblinded, repeated-measure study of 53 healthy subjects was used to test the null hypothesis. Heart rate, BP and RR were measured at rest (five minutes), after spinal immobilization (10 minutes), following log roll, with partial immobilization (10 minutes) and again at rest (five minutes). A visual analog scale (VAS) for both pain and discomfort were also collected at each stage. Results were statistically compared.

    Results

    Pain VAS increased significantly during spinal immobilization (3.8 mm, P < .01). Discomfort VAS increased significantly during spinal immobilization, after log roll and during partial immobilization (17.7 mm, 5.8 mm and 8.9 mm, respectively; P < .001). Vital signs however, showed no clinically relevant changes.

    Discussion

    Spinal immobilization does not cause a change in vital signs despite a significant increase in pain and discomfort. Since no relationship appears to exist between immobilization and abnormal vital signs, abnormal vital signs in a clinical situation should not be considered to be the result of immobilization. Likewise, pain and discomfort in immobilized patients should not be disregarded due to lack of changes in vital signs.

    BruijnsS, GulyH, WallisL. Effect of Spinal Immobilization on Heart Rate, Blood Pressure and Respiratory Rate. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(2):1-5.