TuftScope: Continuing a Legacy
By
David Gennert, Eriene-Heidi Sidhom
Catching the Zebra
By
Michael Essman
Is Pharmacotherapy the Best Treatment for ADHD?
By
Eriene-Heidi Sidhom, Brian Wolf
Brian Wolf argues that pharmacotherapy is the best treatment for ADHD but Eriene-Heidi Sidhom believes behavior therapies and other individualized treatments are necessary to move treatment forward.
A Discussion with Anthony Monaco, President of Tufts University
By
Brian Wolf
Dr. Anthony Monaco, M.D./Ph.D. is the President of Tufts University and is a distinguished neuroscientist that focused his research on the genetic basis of neurological and psychiatric disorders such as autism, specific language impairment and dyslexia. His research group at Oxford’s Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics first identified a gene specifically involved in human speech and language. As the thirteenth President of Tufts University, Dr. Monaco brings his experience as a biomedical researcher to contribute to Tufts’ excellence in education, research and greater engagement with society.
The best Career of 2011?
By
TuftScope Staff
One in a Million
By
Ariel Lefland
A Protection of Choice on Both Spectrums: Federal Birth Control Funding
By
Joseph St. Pierre
In Curbing Obesity, Fat Taxes Not the Way to Go
By
Shayna Schor
The Impact of the Private Care Sector on Female Feticide
By
TuftScope Staff
MRSA in Boston Area Hospitals
By
Kristen Davenport
MRSA (methicillin-resistant _staphylococcus aureus_) is an antibiotic-resistant bacterium that is a leading cause of hospital-acquired
infection. _Staphylococcus aureus_ usually lives symbiotically on the skin and does not cause infection until it manages to pass the
body’s protective barriers. Its presence in hospitals is due in part to the widespread use of antibiotics and the common surgical
methods that permit the introduction of the skin flora into the body.
Though many hospitals have developed protocol to prevent MRSA infection, the specific practices vary widely. This paper addresses
four spheres of influence on Boston-area hospitals by presenting case studies of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, St. Elizabeth’s
Medical Center, Children’s Hospital Boston, New England Baptist Medical Center and Tufts Medical Center. The four spheres of
influence are state legislation, national organizations, media attention and societal pressure and the demographics of the specific
hospital. Though the five hospitals have employed varied protocols, their decision-making process clearly reflects the aforementioned
spheres of influence. The authors were able to hypothesize why each hospital was influenced the way it was, leading to the
implementation of their MRSA prevention program.
AGENT ORANGE: A Dilemma in Standards of Proof and the Objectivity of Science
By
Lindor Qunaj
From 1962 to 1971, the United States government sprayed over 19 million gallons of herbicides in Vietnam, a defoliation program termed Operation Ranch Hand. Among these chemicals was Agent Orange, a lethal combination of chlorophenoxyacetic acids that is often classified as one of the most toxic substance created by man. ^1^ Since then, studies have shown that dioxin, a contaminant commonly found in these mixtures, has caused a staggering number of cancers, birth defects, and other ailments in both Ranch Hands (the Air Force pilots who were responsible for the spraying missions) and their children. In the face of uncertainty among scientists, the government’s initial response to concerns over the chemical’s safety was marked by indecision. Without a conclusive explanation from the supposedly objective field of science and conflicting views from other arenas, policymakers were hesitant to make a causal connection between Agent Orange and negative health outcomes. The debates and controversy that ensued—and still continue to this day—serve as an interesting case study in the different standards of proof used in science, politics, and the courts, as well as the use of scientific objectivity to motivate public policy.
Transgender Health: Current Social Movements, the Ethics of Fighting on their Behalf and Analysis for Further Change
By
Ryan Rifkin
Transgender people face health disparities far exceeding those of most other demographics and minority populations in the United States of America. Hate crimes have only been recorded since October 2009 when the Matthew Shepard Act to expand the definition of hate crimes was ratified, rendering highly underestimated statistics. Grassroots organizations seek to help the community directly while others aim to create institutional change. By examining these “bottom-up” and “top-down” approaches, respectively, a course of action will be recommended for the social movements fighting for equitable transgender care. Many questions must be considered throughout this process in order to understand how to achieve a cohesive and successful movement for this particular minority population. First, the barriers preventing transgender people from accessing care in social, legal and physical contexts and the differences between necessary health care for transgender people versus their cisgender– when one person’s sex and gender match one another and are acceptable in the context of that society- counterparts must be understood. Many health care workers are indeed sympathetic to gender issues, so why these workers are unsuccessful in their attempts and the consequences of not providing equitable care must be considered before reaching concluding suggestions. Finally, this article will look at current transgender health social movements and compare them to principles of social movements, concluding with my thoughts on what the community should do to remove the barriers I establish. The goal of this article is to reveal the barriers transgender people face, many of which relate to issues their cisgender counterparts take for granted. By unearthing and demystifying transgender people and their health issues, I aim to increase passion about providing equitable care.
Does social capital help or hinder the integration of Asian immigrants into the U.S. and Canada?
By
Linda Le
This paper investigates the effects of immigration upon the mental health of Asian immigrants and the role that social capital plays in mitigating or exacerbating these effects. The number of immigrants from Asia to both United States and Canada has grown exponentially within the last few decades, but little research to date has been done to understand the prevalence of depression among this population and the efficacy and cultural appropriateness of health services available to them. A literature review finds a high rate of depression among the Asian immigrant population, with differential rates based upon age of immigration and gender. Most individuals relied upon sources of social capital to cope with their conditions rather than seeking out clinical treatment. Social capital was found to both mitigate and worsen the effects of immigration upon mental health. Bridging and weak bonding ties were beneficial while strong bonding ties were generally more detrimental. Implications for useful and effective mental health services for this community are discussed.
Contagion; Dir. by Steven Soderbergh
By
David Gennert
Haiti After the Earthquake; by Paul Farmer
By
Eriene-Heidi Sidhom
