Developmental validation of a novel lateral flow strip test for rapid identification of human blood (Rapid Stain Identification™-Blood)

Human blood is the body fluid most commonly encountered at crime scenes, and blood detection may aid investigators in reconstructing what occurred during a crime. In addition, blood detection can help determine which items of evidence should be processed for DNA-STR testing. Unfortunately, many common substances can cause red-brown stains that resemble blood. Furthermore, many current human blood detection methods are presumptive and prone to false positive results. Here, the developmental validation of a new blood identification test, Rapid Stain Identification™-Blood (RSID™-Blood), is described. RSID™-Blood utilizes two anti-glycophorin A (red blood cell membrane specific protein) monoclonal antibodies in a lateral flow strip test format to detect human blood. We present evidence demonstrating that this test is accurate, reproducible, easy to use, and highly specific for human blood. Importantly, RSID™-Blood does not cross-react with ferret, skunk, or primate blood and exhibits no high-dose hook effect. Also, we describe studies on the sensitivity, body fluid specificity, and species specificity of RSID™-Blood. In addition, we show that the test can detect blood from a variety of forensic exhibits prior to processing for DNA-STR analysis. In conclusion, we suggest that RSID™-Blood is effective and useful for the detection of human blood on forensic exhibits, and offers improved blood detection when compared to other currently used methods.     

The allusive market: insurance of flood risk in neoliberal Britain

Launched in 2016, Flood Re is a government-supported scheme for flood-risk insurance in Britain that is intended to pave the way towards an eventual ‘free’ market featuring risk-reflective pricing. This paper introduces the concept of ‘the allusive market’ to denote the figurative work that the market vision performs in this context. Alluding to the merits of what is in reality a highly implausible market-based future for flood insurance releases the government from having to substantively address intractable problems associated with the financial risk of flooding in the present: the market will come to the rescue. A risk-management crutch, the allusive market engenders contemporary policy paralysis, occasioning in turn the worsening of the very problems that the market is being relied upon, eventually, to resolve.     

The energy model muddle

It is well-known that modelers and policy analysts gain access to policymaking arenas based on what they know. Therefore, critics of models are quick to employ various types of technical standards when evaluating policy models in order to assess validity and reliability of claims to knowledge. This article argues that, in the effort to make models better, overreliance on technical standards misses the important political and policy reasons to model: models call attention to the modelers and to their advice about important policy problems of the day. In this sense, models are used as symbols, as claims to authority, whether or not the underlying knowledge is technically up to snuff. Drawing on the experience of energy policy models, this article explores the problem of models as knowledge versus models as symbols and it examines the muddle that conflicts between them produce.     

EDA for HLM: Visualization when Probabilistic Inference Fails

e-mail: jwbowers{at}umich.edu (corresponding author) e-mail: kwdrake{at}umich.edu Nearly all hierarchical linear models presented to politicalscience audiences are estimated using maximum likelihood undera repeated sampling interpretation of the results of hypothesistests. Maximum likelihood estimators have excellent asymptoticproperties but less than ideal small sample properties. Multilevelmodels common in political science have relatively large samplesof units like individuals nested within relatively small samplesof units like countries. Often these level-2 samples will beso small as to make inference about level-2 effects uninterpretablein the likelihood framework from which they were estimated.When analysts do not have enough data to make a compelling argumentfor repeated sampling based probabilistic inference, we showhow visualization can be a useful way of allowing scientificprogress to continue despite lack of fit between research designand asymptotic properties of maximum likelihood estimators.     

What Difference Does a Robe Make? Comparing Mediators with and without Prior Judicial Experience

This article reports the results of two studies. The first study, based on the responses of attorneys to questions about the reasons for the success of mediators with and without prior judicial experience, shows that the capacity of the mediator to gain the confidence of the disputants was most important for mediators with and without prior judicial experience. Although certain process skills were viewed as important to the success of both former judges and nonjudges, in general, process skills were significantly more important for nonjudges than for former judges. The capacity to provide useful case evaluations, on the other hand, was significantly more important for former judges than for nonjudges. The second study, based upon attorney responses to questions about unsatisfactory mediators, reinforced the conclusions of the first study regarding the importance of confidence-building attributes. For both judges and nonjudges, the mediator's inability to gain the confidence of the parties was a major reason for his or her lack of success.     

UK Abortion Law: Reform Proposals,Private Members’ Bills,Devolution and the Role of the Courts

UK abortion law remains unsettled, and subject to on‐going controversy and reform. This article offers a comprehensive critique of all reforms implemented or proposed since 2016. It examines reforms proposed in both Houses of Parliament and contextualises them within a public law analysis, showing both that the complex parliamentary processes relating to Private Members’ Bills have frustrated reform attempts, and that these attempts have been contradictory in their aims between the two Houses. Secondly, it examines the unique positions of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales to show the extent to which devolutionary settlements have influenced both reforms and executive involvement. Finally, it examines the potential impact of the courts on abortion law following Re Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission's Application for Judicial Review, showing that the Supreme Court's reframing of the debate in human rights terms is likely to affect abortion law, not only in Northern Ireland, but in the whole of the UK.