Contraband and violence: lessons from the Southeast Asian case

This article looks at the intersection between contraband and violence in Southeast Asia. I argue that the two activities are often linked and play off one another in specific, contextualized ways. To make this case, I examine instances of smuggling in the history of the region; through the trade in human beings, both historically and today; through the transit of narcotics, again historically and today; and via the conduit of a range of other contraband cargoes. Race, religion, memory and geography all factor into the outcome of when smuggling may take on violent forms. I chronicle these occasions throughout the width and breadth of the region, stretching from the Thai/Burmese border in the north to the island world of Insular Southeast Asia in the south. Throughout the essay, I pay particular attention to the larger milieus of commerce, politics, and society that condition moments when acts of smuggling may in fact turn violent. **NB: Most of the field-research for this piece (including local newspaper article accumulation) was done in the late 1990s under a Fulbright grant. A subsequent Faculty Fulbright in 2004 supplemented much of this earlier research, and also allowed me to travel to a number of other locales to make observations on this topic.

---

The case for pain neuroimaging in the courtroom: lessons from deception detection

From an observer''s perspective, pain is a fairly nebulous concept—it is not externally visible, its cause is not obvious, and perceptions of its intensity are mainly subjective. If difficulties in understanding the source and degree of pain are troublesome in contexts requiring social empathy, they are especially problematic in the legal setting. Tort law applies to both acute and chronic pain cases, but the lack of objective measures demands high thresholds of proof. However, recent developments in pain neuroimaging may clarify some of these inherent uncertainties, as studies purport detection of pain on an individual level. In analyzing the scientific and legal barriers of utilizing pain neuroimaging in court, it is prudent to discuss neuroimaging for deception, a topic that has garnered significant controversy due to premature attempts at introduction in the courtroom. Through comparing and contrasting the two applications of neuroimaging to the legal setting, this paper argues that the nature of tort law, the distinct features of pain, and the reduced vulnerability to countermeasures distinguish pain neuroimaging in a promising way. This paper further contends that the mistakes and lessons involving deception detection are essential to consider for pain neuroimaging to have a meaningful future in court.     

A case of death from prothiophos poisoning

A 62-year-old male, a farmer, who had ingested prothiophos (Tokuthion), died after 21 h of intensive care. Prothiophos in the tissues of the victim was extracted and purified by Extrelut column extraction. A gas chromatograph equipped with a flame photometric detector, and a gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer were used to detect prothiophos. The concentration of prothiophos was 10.9 micrograms/g in the brain, 8.6 micrograms/g in the kidney, 418 micrograms/g in the liver, 2.96 mg/g in the gastric contents and 4.69 mg/g in the intestinal contents. The case history and the distribution of prothiophos indicated that the cause of death was acute prothiophos poisoning.     

University startups as a commercialization alternative: lessons from three contrasting case studies

A recent National Research Council (NRC) report (2011) recommends that universities must craft policies and allocate resources to enable more university startups because some university technologies will never be commercialized unless licensed to a startup. However, the creation of university startups requires personnel skills and programs not typically associated with an university Office of Technology Transfer (OTT). Estimates show that 75 % of university inventions are not licensed at all. The conclusions of this study include university policies to turn some them to fuel university startups. Carefully selected case studies of three contrasting universities reveal patterns of successful startup policies and performance. MIT’s case is an example of long-term success, the University of Colorado’s case is an example of medium-term success, and Auburn University’s case is an example of a new-comer to the scene. Lessons from the case studies include: the need for very early evaluation of all inventions for their startup potential, the need for pre-license seed funds through proof-of-concept programs to advance early-stage inventions to the next stage, and the need for OTT personnel skilled in enabling startups. NSF’s recent I-Corps program invests heavily in the training of potential enablers and entrepreneurs for commercializing university inventions. Based on the findings of this study, I-Corps must also invest in pre-license proof-of-concept programs to advance early-stage university inventions closer to the market. Implementing the conclusions of this study would also accomplish the recommendations of the 2011 NRC report cited above.     

The fallacy of the simultaneous sudden infant death syndrome in twins

The likelihood of twin infants dying suddenly and simultaneously of SIDS, a natural disorder, defies credibility. However, injuries associated with environmental hazards provide possible mechanisms of sudden death. A search for hazards in the homes of 13 pairs of healthy twins who died together of no apparent cause formed the basis of this study. Ten of the 13 sets were certified by medical examiners as simultaneous twin SIDS. The findings in this study suggest that all 13 sets died from injuries, either unintentional or otherwise, and that these deaths could have been prevented.     

迟发性机械性窒息死亡1例

机械性窒息后,多迅速死亡,或迅速好转,不遗留任何后遗症,迟发性窒息死亡少见。现报道1例皮带勒颈后持续昏迷,后合并肺部感染于14天后死亡     

迟发性机械性窒息死亡1例

机械性窒息后，多迅速死亡，或迅速好转，不遗留任何后遗症，迟发性窒息死亡少见。现报道1例皮带勒颈后持续昏迷，后合并肺部感染于14天后死亡的案例。     

Speech, privacy, and the power of the purse: lessons from the abortion "gag rule" case.

In Rust v. Sullivan, 59 U.S.L.W. 4451 (1991), the US Supreme Court ruled that neither the privacy interests of family planning clients nor the 1st Amendment interests of their counselors prevented the government from banning all discussion of abortions in federally funded family planning clinics. In doing so, the Court also reaffirmed its view that the state and federal legislatures have virtually unlimited discretion in limiting or conditioning social welfare programs, a view having even greater long-term implications for American health policy than the implications of Rust for the constitutional protection of abortion. Rust upheld the Department of Health and Human Services' 1988 directive prohibiting the use of any funds from Title X of the Public Health Service Act (authorizing family planning programs) in programs where abortion is a method of family planning. This means that a clinician may lawfully respond to a client's inquiry about abortion only with a denial that abortion is an option. Thus, while allowing women the constitutional protection to chose an abortion, the Court has allowed the legislature to freely use the power of the purse to discourage or prevent the choice of abortion. Rust's greatest impact may well be in its acceptance of the enormous power wielded by the government over funded activities, especially in health policy. Justice Rehnquist believes there is not constitutional right to health, welfare, or any other government benefit; the legislative branches of the government cannot be required by judicial interpretation of the Constitution to provide any particular benefit or service to anyone. Even when the government chooses to fund a particular benefit, it is free to condition that benefit with virtually no judicially enforceable limits on that discretion.