\n\nConclusions: At our pediatric healthcare facility in New York City, fewer children were hospitalized with 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) during the second wave, but both waves had a similar spectrum of illness severity and low mortality rate.

(Pediatr Crit Care Med 2012; 13:375-380)”
“Objective Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is part of routine medical practice for clinical assessment of kidney function in health and disease conditions, and is determined by measuring the clearance of creatinine (Cl-Crn) or estimated (eGFR) from equations using serum creatinine (Crn) or cystatin C (Cyst C). Crn and Cyst C methods obviate the need for urine collection but their reliability Selleckchem SRT2104 under non-resting conditions is uncertain. This study compared GFR determined by Cl-Crn, Crn and Cyst C methods under the conditions of rest and after exercise.\n\nMethods Twelve young male subjects performed a 30 min treadmill exercise at 80% of the maximal oxygen capacity. Venous blood samples and urine collections were collected before and after exercise and after recovery period. GFR rates were calculated from serum Crn and Cyst C equations, and Cl-Crn measured from serum and urine Crn output. Albumin was also determined for all samples.\n\nResults Under resting conditions, eGFR from Crn and Cyst C did not differ from

Cl-Crn (p=0.39). Immediately after exercise, GFR decreased significantly, selleck inhibitor Anti-infection inhibitor regardless of the method, but more so for Cl-Crn (-30.0%; p<0.05) compared with Crn (-18.2%) and Cyst C (-19.8%). After the recovery period, GFR determined by Cl-Crn was returned to initial values whereas Crn and Cyst C remained reduced. Although eGFR methods accurately estimate GFR at rest, those methods underestimated the change in GFR after acute exercise.\n\nConclusions These results indicate that exercise-induced changes in GFR should be determined by Cl-Crn method.”
“Previous efforts to evaluate the climate change impact of researchers have focused mainly on transport related impact

of conference attendance, and infrastructure. Because these represent only a part of the activities involved in the science making process this short note presents the carbon footprint of a complete science making process of one specific case. Apart from presenting the total footprint, we evaluate the relative contribution of the different scientific activities, and quantify mitigating possibilities. The case PhD project had a carbon footprint of 21.5 t CO2-eq (2.69 t CO2-eq per peer-reviewed paper, 0.3 t CO2-eq per citation and 5.4 t CO2-eq per h-index unit at graduation) of which general mobility represents 75%. Conference attendance was responsible for 35% of the carbon footprint, whereas infrastructure related emissions showed to contribute 20% of the total impact. Videoconferencing could have reduced the climate change impact on this case PhD with up to 44%.