Catamnestic surveys on somato-psychosocial development in childhood and adolescence of patients with unipolar depressive and bipolar manic-depressive psychoses

The somatic and psychosocial development of 80 subjects with manifest affective-phasic psychoses is studied retrospectively and compared with that of an identically sized control group consisting of neuropsychiatrically healthy subjects. Statistically significant differences were found particularly in the answers to questions dealing with social situation and social adaptability. Achievement at school and vocational qualifications were lower among the parents of the patients than among those of the healthy subjects. Characteristic features of the patients' childhood and adolescence were transient depression, often for no apparent cause, and maladaption, and vocational wishes were fulfilled less often than among the controls. The patients experienced greater difficulty in settling in to a new group due to their contact difficulties.     

The right to a decent minimum of health care

Buchanan examines, and finds inadequate, several philosophical approaches to justifying and specifying the content of a universal right to a decent minimum of health care: utilitarian arguments, Rawlsian ideal contract arguments, and Norman Daniels' equality of opportunity argument. Also rejecting the libertarian hypothesis that there is no right to a decent minimum of care, he contends that the claim that society should guarantee certain health care services can be supported by a pluralistic approach encompassing special right-claims, harm prevention, prudential arguments emphasizing public health benefits, and beneficence.     

Why 2 + 2 = 5 looks so wrong: On the odd-even rule in sum verification

The odd-even status of a sum depends on the odd-even status of its addends. A sum must be odd if an odd number of its addends are odd; else it must be even. A proposed sum that violates the required odd-even status of the sum—that is, deviates from the correct sum, whether odd or even, by an odd value (e.g., splits of ±1, ±3, ±5)—can be rejected immediately as false. Subjects in the present study did indeed use the odd-even rule in sum verification, because they were as fast and accurate in rejecting a split of ±1 as one of ±2, and a split of ±3 as one of ±4, even though a larger split generally is easier to reject (symbolic distance effect), and splits of ±3 and ±4 were rejected faster and more accurately than those of ±1 and ±2. Performance on separate odd-even tasks indicated that the odd-even properties of numbers and sums are readily available for use by adults, and that persons who do well on such tasks are especially likely to use the odd-even rule in sum verification.