The use of ILE appears to be a safe therapy for the poisoned animal patient, but is warranted only with certain toxicoses. Adverse events associated with ILE in veterinary medicine are rare and anecdotal. Standard resuscitation protocols should be exhausted before considering this therapy and the potential side effects should be evaluated before administration of ILE as a potential antidote in cases of lipophilic drug toxicoses. Further research is waranted.

Although it is well recognized that alcohol abuse impairs alveolar macrophage immune function and renders patients susceptible to pneumonia, the mechanisms are incompletely understood. Alveolar macrophage maturation and function requires priming by GM-CSF, which is produced and secreted into the alveolar space by the alveolar epithelium. In this study, we determined that although chronic ethanol ingestion (6 wk) in rats had no effect on GM-CSF expression within the alveolar space, it significantly decreased membrane expression of the GM-CSF receptor in alveolar macrophages. In parallel, ethanol ingestion decreased cellular expression and nuclear binding of PU.1, the master transcription factor that activates GM-CSF-dependent macrophage functions. Furthermore, treatment of ethanol-fed rats in vivo with rGM-CSF via the upper airway restored GM-CSF receptor membrane expression as well as PU.1 protein expression and nuclear binding in alveolar macrophages. Importantly, GM-CSF treatment also restored alveolar macrophage function in ethanol-fed rats, as reflected by endotoxin-stimulated release of TNF-α and bacterial phagocytosis. We conclude that ethanol ingestion dampens alveolar macrophage immune function by decreasing GM-CSF receptor expression and downstream PU.1 nuclear binding and that these chronic defects can be reversed relatively quickly with rGM-CSF treatment in vivo.

No abstract

The Trail Making Test may not be equivalent across cultures, i.e., differences in the scores across different cultures may not reveal real differences in the ability of the subjects on the construct being measured. In order to assess this hypothesis, normative samples from ten different countries were compared. Age decade subgroups across samples were ranked based on mean time taken to complete each part of the task. Large Z scores differences were found between these samples when comparing the first with the second, and the last in the rank. These differences were significant even when age and education were comparable across samples. Following Van de Vijver & Tanzer (1997), several possible sources of bias were identified. Incomparability of samples and administration differences were the most likely factors accounting for differences. Because of the lack of validity studies in the countries considered, no firm conclusions could be obtained regarding construct bias. Although the TMT may be measuring visual scanning, psychomotor speed and mental flexibility, normative data from different countries and cultures are not equivalent which might lead to serious diagnostic errors.