Still lying abroad? On the institution of the resident ambassador

What explains the persistence and proliferation of the resident ambassador? Why is the role apparently important both to the conduct of international affairs and to the work of governments? I do not try to propose a new theory of ambassadors, but I do offer conclusions about the nature of living in a globalized society of states where the economic logic of markets and the political logic of communities are at cross-purposes. It is a world in which we depend on institutions to help us maintain order and stability. Ambassadors are one of those institutions. At one level they are the concrete day by day reproduction of the society of states. At another level they act on behalf of the members of their community, helping that community to maintain its strength and cohesion by doing what needs to be done, abroad. An increase in the intensity of interactions among states, therefore, seems to lead to an increase in diplomatic representation facilitated rather than impeded by the new technologies of transportation and communications. Ambassadors are still lying abroad, it seems, because changes in technology have brought 'abroad' much closer to home while the myriad effects of globalization have made much more of abroad relevant to people and their governments. Far from being in decline, the resident ambassador seems likely to continue flourishing.     

Criteria for differentiating self- or other-inflicted injuries of alleged or real victims

A synoptic study of six cases of self-inflicted sharp force injuries is presented, where young, mostly female people had simulated assaults to gain sympathy or other personal advantage. The morphological distinctives of simulated assault wounds from such of real assault are worked out and the common situative and motivative background is cleared up.     

Hair analysis for drug abuse: I. Determination of methamphetamine and amphetamine in hair by stable isotope dilution gas chromatography/mass spectrometry method

Determination of methamphetamine and amphetamine in hair was performed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry using stable isotope-labeled internal standards, 2-methylamino-1-phenylpropane-2,3,3,3-d4 and 2-amino-1-phenylpropane-2,3,3,3-d4. Extraction of hair with methanol/5M hydrochloric acid (20:1) using ultrasonication was chosen as the standard method. The calibration curves for amphetamines in the hair were linear from 1 to 100 ng/mg (r greater than 0.99). The detection limit was 0.5 ng/mg at the 95% confidence level. The coefficients of variation (CV) (n = 8) of analysis using the spiked hair with methamphetamine were from 0.7 to 6%. The CV (n = 8) of analysis of the methamphetamine abuser's hair was 17.5%. Sectional analysis of monkey and human hair after methamphetamine ingestion suggested a good correlation between the duration of drug use and drug distribution in the hair.     

Correlations on radioimmunoassay, fluorescence polarization immunoassay, and enzyme immunoassay of cannabis metabolites with gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis of 11-nor-delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid in urine specimens.

Results obtained from three commercial immunoassay kits, Abuscreen, TDx, and EMIT, commonly used for the initial test of urine cannabinoids (and metabolites) were correlated with the 11-nor-delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (9-THC-COOH) concentration as determined by GC/MS. Correlation coefficients obtained based on 26 (out of 1359 total sample population) highly relevant samples, are 0.601 and 0.438 for Abuscreen and TDx. Correlation coefficients obtained from a parallel study on a different set of 47 (out of 5070 total sample population) highly relevant specimens are 0.658 and 0.575 for Abuscreen and Emit. The immunoassay concentration levels, that correspond to the commonly used 15 ng/ml GC/MS cutoff value for 9-THC-COOH, as calculated from the regression equations are 82 ng/ml and 75 ng/ml for TDx and EMIT and 120 ng/ml and 72 ng/ml for Abuscreen manufactured at two different time periods. The difference of these calculated corresponding concentrations provides quantitative evidence of the reagent specificity differences.