This paper provides a review of sexualities scholarship within the social sciences between 1970 and 2015. It takes an innovative approach by focussing on the way in which bisexuality is addressed in this body of literature. The paper reveals the marginalisation, underrepresentation, and invisibility of bisexuality within and across the social sciences in relation to both bisexual experience and identity. Reasons for this varied across the different eras, including the heterosexist nature of the literature, the impact of gay and lesbian-focused identity politics, and queer deconstructionism. In addition, patterns of bisexual erasure and invisibility were uneven, with some scholarship taking inclusive approaches or criticising prejudice against bisexuality. The initial findings of the review were enriched by critical commentary from key relevant sociologists and political scientists. The paper concludes that future sexualities scholarship could be enhanced by greater consideration of bisexuality.

This article discusses the experience in one University when implementing a web based e-portfolio into their non-medical prescribing (NMP) modules. Pertinent screen shots will illustrate the e-portfolio and its use. The e-portfolio adopted has all the elements of the former paper-based document. However, a key advantage of implementing an e-portfolio is the contribution it makes to the National Information Board's (2015) digital priorities for health and social care. In this case, in equipping NMP students as part of the wider healthcare workforce with such digital knowledge skills as are deemed appropriate to their role and impending prescribing role too.Adopting an e-portfolio within the NMP modules has brought many benefits. These include strengthened assessment methods in terms of authenticity, reliability, validity and mentor preparation. The main challenges that were experienced concur with those reported by Moule et al (2011) and were related to the IT literacy skills of participants as well as computer/internet access issues within their own workplace environment. The module team overcame these through continual review of the assessment strategies being deployed as well as the functionality of the e-portfolio.

No abstract

The attention of the writer was drawn to this subject in the fall of 1904. The material for the paper was gathered the following winter. A request for facts bearing on the subject was inserted in the Journal of the American Medical Association early in August, 1905. This request has received so few answers that it seems advisable to gather and correlate the material available with present bacteriological views, and discuss briefly the possibility of the cat being a disseminator of disease. The paper is written solely from the standpoint of medical biology. The problems involved in the prevention of disease are predominantly biological in nature. Many diseases are already known to be due to specific organisms, and their distribution, course, and termination as well as methods of prevention depend fundamentally on biological laws. Everywhere science demonstrates that all forms of animal life, living with man, may become infeded with human disease organisms, and may transmit these organisms to each other and to man. In the process they mayor may not contract the disease themselves; and mayor may not increase or decrease the virulence of the disease organisms in their passage through the animal host. The problem as formulated by Dr. Theobald Smith (20), is thus stated, "How far does nature utilize animals as a workshop for preparing bacteria to act in a pathogenic rl)le upon the human race?" He concludes: "There is evidently some physiological relation between man and the rat, as disclosed by the bubonic plague; between man and the horse, as disclosed by the bacillus of glanders.. "Some writers believe in a relationship between man and certain domestic animals, as in case of scarlatina. More general relationships are established between larger groups of animals by anthrax and rabies. "If we go a step farther into a less cultivated domain, we can readily tkink of other possible relationships between human disease and animals in which the causes of human disease may live without producing any recognizable disease. We can neither dispute nor affirm such relationship because we know comparatively little, if anything, ofthe pathogenic organisms which thrive, say, upon the mucous membranes ofhorses, cats, dogs, rats, mice, and

No abstract