Politics,democratic action,and solidarity

I agree with the critique of rationalism proposed by Spinosa, Flores, and Dreyfus in ‘Disclosing New Worlds’. Today the defence of democracy requires us to understand that allegiance to democratic institutions can only rest on identification with the practices, the language‐games, and the discourses which are constitutive of the democratic ‘form of life’, and that it is not a question of providing them with a rational justification. My comments are developed in two directions. First, as a development of their thesis concerning the centrality of practices, I suggest that in order to grasp the present crisis of democratic forms of individuality we can learn a lot from Nietzsche's analysis of ‘nihilism’. Second, I point to a dimension which I consider to be missing in the perspective put forward in the article. It fails to take account of the fact that the constitution of a ‘we’ always requires the determination of a ‘them’. This, in my view, has important consequences for the relation between solidarity and politics. I conclude by arguing for the need to introduce an agonistic element in the view of solidarity, and for the crucial role of the category of the adversary in a pluralist democracy whose aim is to transform antagonism into agonism.     

Resolving Power of the Perceptual-and Sensorimotor Systems in 6- to 10-Year-Old Children

Children aged 6 to 10 were tested on their ability to move accurately and to perceptually evaluate their motor response. Subjects performed a directional and an amplitude visuo-manual aiming task without vision of their moving limb. They were asked to correct their error, after completion of their movements, only if they felt they were not accurate. Terminal aiming errors and correction responses (adjustments) were analyzed, and threshold detection was determined relative to terminal aiming error. Action accuracy and evaluation of action accuracy are two abilities that do not develop synchronously. Moreover, the relationship between these abilities depends on whether accuracy and direction or amplitude are required. Amplitude undergoes more corrections than direction, suggesting that the spatial system of reference involved depends more upon the coding of the final position than on direction. Two spatial comparators, operating on the basis of two types of evaluation, seem to have a variably distinct contribution to movement and perception accuracy, according to age.     

SNRIs: their pharmacology, clinical efficacy, and tolerability in comparison with other classes of antidepressants

The class of serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) now comprises three medications: venlafaxine, milnacipran, and duloxetine. These drugs block the reuptake of both serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine with differing selectivity. Whereas milnacipran blocks 5-HT and norepinephrine reuptake with equal affinity, duloxetine has a 10-fold selectivity for 5-HT and venlafaxine a 30-fold selectivity for 5-HT. All three SNRIs are efficacious in treating a variety of anxiety disorders. There is no evidence for major differences between SNRIs and SSRIs in their efficacy in treating anxiety disorders. In contrast to SSRIs, which are generally ineffective in treating chronic pain, all three SNRIs seem to be helpful in relieving chronic pain associated with and independent of depression. Tolerability of an SNRI at therapeutic doses varies within the class. Although no direct comparative data are available, venlafaxine seems to be the least well-tolerated, combining serotonergic adverse effects (nausea, sexual dysfunction, withdrawal problems) with a dose-dependent cardiovascular phenomenon, principally hypertension. Duloxetine and milnacipran appear better tolerated and essentially devoid of cardiovascular toxicity.     

How patients’ representations of cystic fibrosis-related diabetes inform their health behaviours

Background: Although diabetes is a frequent complication of cystic fibrosis (CF), patients’ behaviours tend not to comply with best practice recommendations. Using Leventhal’s Common-Sense Model, we address this issue by exploring patients’ representations of CF-related diabetes (CFRD) to better understand the discrepancy between patients’ expected and observed health behaviours.

Methods: Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with patients (n = 39) in six CF clinics in Quebec, Canada. These interviews were part of a larger research project on screening and management practices for CFRD.

Results: Illness representations differed between two groups of interviewed patients: (1) one group had either CF without dysglycemia or CF with impaired glucose tolerance; and (2) the other group had CFRD. Both representations were internally consistent and encompassed Leventhal’s five dimensions of illness representation: illness identity, cause, timeline, consequences and control.

Conclusions: Patients require specific information on CFRD. The screening phase could be a crucial time to help patients adjust their representations to fit the reality of CFRD.