text:
Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET): open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial
Lorinda Chung, Cathie Spino, Richard McLain, Sindhu R. Johnson, Christopher P. Denton, Jerry A. Molitor, Virginia D. Steen, Robert Lafyatis, Robert W. Simms, Suzanne Kafaja, Tracy M. Frech, Vivien Hsu, Robyn T. Domsic, Janet E. Pope, Jessica K. Gordon, Maureen D. Mayes, Nora Sandorfi, Faye N. Hant, Elana J. Bernstein, Soumya Chatterjee
Show 12 others
Flavia V. Castelino, Ali Ajam, Yannick Allanore, Marco Matucci-Cerinic, Michael L. Whitfield, Oliver Distler, Ora Singer, Amber Young, Vivek Nagaraja, David A. Fox, Daniel E. Furst, Dinesh Khanna
Medicine - Rheumatic and Autoimmune
Background: Abatacept was well tolerated by patients with early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis in a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial, with potential efficacy at 12 months. We report here the results of an open-label extension for 6 months. Methods: Patients (aged ≥18 years) with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis of less than 3 years' duration from their first non-Raynaud's symptom were enrolled into the ASSET trial (A Study of Subcutaneous Abatacept to Treat Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis), which is a double-blind trial at 22 sites in Canada, the UK, and the USA. After completion of 12 months of treatment with either abatacept or placebo, patients received a further 6 months of abatacept (125 mg subcutaneous every week) in an open-label extension. The primary endpoint of the double-blind trial was modified Rodnan Skin Score (mRSS) at 12 months, which was reassessed at 18 months in the open-label extension. The primary analysis included all participants who completed the double-blind trial and received at least one dose of open-label treatment (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02161406. Findings: Between Sept 22, 2014, and March 15, 2017, 88 participants were randomly allocated in the double-blind trial either abatacept (n=44) or placebo (44); 32 patients from each treatment group completed the 6-month open-label extension. Among patients assigned abatacept, a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS was noted at 12 months (−6·6 [SD 6·4]), with further improvement seen during the open-label extension period (−9·8 [8·1] at month 18). Participants assigned placebo had a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS at 12 months (−3·7 [SD 7·6]), with a further improvement at month 18 (−6·3 [9·3]). Infections during the open-label extension phase occurred in nine patients in the placebo–abatacept group (12 adverse events, one serious adverse event) and in 11 patients in the abatacept–abatacept group (14 adverse events, one serious adverse event). Two deaths occurred during the 12-month double-blind period in the abatacept group, which were related to scleroderma renal crisis; no deaths were recorded during the open-label extension. Interpretation: During the 6-month open-label extension, no new safety signals for abatacept were identified in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Clinically meaningful improvements in mRSS and other outcome measures were observed in both the abatacept and placebo groups when patients transitioned to open-label treatment. These data support further studies of abatacept in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and National Institutes of Health.
The Lancet Rheumatology
LC is on the advisory board and steering committee for Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; the advisory board for Eicos and Mitsubishi Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; the data safety monitoring board for Reata, outside of the submitted work; and reports grants from and is on the advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work. CS reports statistical consultant fees from Eicos, outside of the submitted work. SRJ reports clinical trial support from Bayer, Corbus, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Ikaria, outside of the submitted work; and clinical trial support from and is on the advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work. CPD reports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Inventiva, and CSL Behring, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Roche, Horizon, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Galapagos, during the conduct of the study. JAM reports clinical trial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Eicos, outside of the submitted work; personal fees, consulting fees, and clinical trial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; and clinical trial support from Corbus and Kadmon, outside of the submitted work. VDS reports grants, is a site principal investigator for a trial in scleroderma, and is on the advisory board for Corbus and Bayer, during the conduct of the study; grants and is on a steering committee for a trial in scleroderma for CSL Behring, during the conduct of the study; is on the advisory board for Forbius, during the conduct of the study; reports grants and consultancy, advisory board, and site principal investigator for a trial in scleroderma and lung disease for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; is site principal investigator for a scleroderma and Raynaud's trial and is on a steering committee for Eisocs, outside of the submitted work; and reports grants from Reata, outside of the submitted work. RL reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Formation, Sanofi, Biocon, Boehringer-Mannheim, Merck, and Genentech/Roche, outside of the submitted work; and grants from Corbus, Formation, Elpidera, Regeneron, Pfizer, and Kiniksa, outside of the submitted work. RWS reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Corbus, Boehringer Ingelheim, EMD Serono, Actelion, Roche, and Sanofi, during the conduct of the study. SK reports clinical trial support from the University of California at Los Angeles Division of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study. RTD reports personal fees from Formation, Eicos, and Corbus, outside of the submitted work. JEP reports grants and honoraria for consulting from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim, during the conduct of the study; and grants from Merck, during the conduct of the study. JKG reports grants from the University of Michigan, during the conduct of the study; and grants from Eicos and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, outside of the submitted work. MDM reports personal fees from Medtelligence, Actelion Pharma, Astellas, and Mitsubishi-Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; grants from Bayer, Reata, Sanofi, Corbus, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside of the submitted work; and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eicos, and Galapagos Pharma, outside of the submitted work. EJB reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), outside of the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Eicos, outside of the submitted work; and grants from Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. YA reports grants and personal fees from Inventiva and Sanofi, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chemomab, Curzion, and Roche, during the conduct of the study. MM-C has received consulting fees or honorarium from Inventiva, Bayer, Boehringer, CSL Behring, Corbus, Galapagos, Mitsubishi, Samsung, Regeneron, Acceleron, MSD, Chemomab, Lilly, Pfizer, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. MLW reports grants from NIH, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Celdara Medical, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Acceleron, AbbVie, and Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; and grants and personal fees from Corbus, outside of the submitted work. OD reports personal fees from AbbVie, Actelion, Acceleron Pharma, Amgen, AnaMar, Baecon Discovery, and Blade Therapeutics, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Catenion, Competitive Drug Development, CSL Behring, ChemomAb, Curzion Pharmaceuticals, Ergonex, Galapagos, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Inventiva, Italfarmaco, iQone, iQvia, Lilly, Medac, Medscape, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Target BioScience, and UCB, outside of the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Mitsubishi Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; and has a patent (mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis) issued to US8247389, EP2331143. VN reports clinical trial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study. DAF reports grants from NIH (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Clinical and Autoimmunity Center of Excellence), Immune Tolerance Network, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; and personal fees from CSL Behring, outside of the submitted work. DEF reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Acetlion, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corbus, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, NIH, Novartis, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; grants from Sanofi and Genentech/Roche, outside of the submitted work; and fees for Continuing Medical Education (CME) presentations, outside of the submitted work. DK reports grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants from NIH, Immune Tolerance Network, and Bayer, outside of the submitted work; grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Horizon, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Acceleron, Acetlion, Amgen, Blade Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Corbus, Cytori, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Horizon, Merck, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, United Therapeutics, and Eicos, outside of the submitted work; CME support from Impact PH, outside of the submitted work; holds stock in Eicos; and declares personal fees from and is Chief Medical Officer for CiviBioPharma/Eicos, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests.
This investigator-initiated clinical trial was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and the National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Clinical and Autoimmunity Center of Excellence, grant 5-UM1-AI-110557 to the University of Michigan; and National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, grants K24-AR-063120 and R01-AR-07047 to DK). We thank the patients who participated in this trial and the research coordinators for their hard work and contributions.
Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET): open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
Abatacept Medicine & Life Sciences
Diffuse Scleroderma Medicine & Life Sciences
Intention Medicine & Life Sciences
Canada Medicine & Life Sciences
Chung, L., Spino, C., McLain, R., Johnson, S. R., Denton, C. P., Molitor, J. A., Steen, V. D., Lafyatis, R., Simms, R. W., Kafaja, S., Frech, T. M., Hsu, V., Domsic, R. T., Pope, J. E., Gordon, J. K., Mayes, M. D., Sandorfi, N., Hant, F. N., Bernstein, E. J., ... Khanna, D. (2020). Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET): open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial. The Lancet Rheumatology, 2(12), e743-e753. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30237-X
Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET) : open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial. / Chung, Lorinda; Spino, Cathie; McLain, Richard; Johnson, Sindhu R.; Denton, Christopher P.; Molitor, Jerry A.; Steen, Virginia D.; Lafyatis, Robert; Simms, Robert W.; Kafaja, Suzanne; Frech, Tracy M.; Hsu, Vivien; Domsic, Robyn T.; Pope, Janet E.; Gordon, Jessica K.; Mayes, Maureen D.; Sandorfi, Nora; Hant, Faye N.; Bernstein, Elana J.; Chatterjee, Soumya; Castelino, Flavia V.; Ajam, Ali; Allanore, Yannick; Matucci-Cerinic, Marco; Whitfield, Michael L.; Distler, Oliver; Singer, Ora; Young, Amber; Nagaraja, Vivek; Fox, David A.; Furst, Daniel E.; Khanna, Dinesh.
In: The Lancet Rheumatology, Vol. 2, No. 12, 12.2020, p. e743-e753.
Chung, L, Spino, C, McLain, R, Johnson, SR, Denton, CP, Molitor, JA, Steen, VD, Lafyatis, R, Simms, RW, Kafaja, S, Frech, TM, Hsu, V, Domsic, RT, Pope, JE, Gordon, JK, Mayes, MD, Sandorfi, N, Hant, FN, Bernstein, EJ, Chatterjee, S, Castelino, FV, Ajam, A, Allanore, Y, Matucci-Cerinic, M, Whitfield, ML, Distler, O, Singer, O, Young, A, Nagaraja, V, Fox, DA, Furst, DE & Khanna, D 2020, 'Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET): open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial', The Lancet Rheumatology, vol. 2, no. 12, pp. e743-e753. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30237-X
Chung L, Spino C, McLain R, Johnson SR, Denton CP, Molitor JA et al. Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET): open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial. The Lancet Rheumatology. 2020 Dec;2(12):e743-e753. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30237-X
Chung, Lorinda ; Spino, Cathie ; McLain, Richard ; Johnson, Sindhu R. ; Denton, Christopher P. ; Molitor, Jerry A. ; Steen, Virginia D. ; Lafyatis, Robert ; Simms, Robert W. ; Kafaja, Suzanne ; Frech, Tracy M. ; Hsu, Vivien ; Domsic, Robyn T. ; Pope, Janet E. ; Gordon, Jessica K. ; Mayes, Maureen D. ; Sandorfi, Nora ; Hant, Faye N. ; Bernstein, Elana J. ; Chatterjee, Soumya ; Castelino, Flavia V. ; Ajam, Ali ; Allanore, Yannick ; Matucci-Cerinic, Marco ; Whitfield, Michael L. ; Distler, Oliver ; Singer, Ora ; Young, Amber ; Nagaraja, Vivek ; Fox, David A. ; Furst, Daniel E. ; Khanna, Dinesh. / Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET) : open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial. In: The Lancet Rheumatology. 2020 ; Vol. 2, No. 12. pp. e743-e753.
@article{49035b17c55b47918adbab9c6b1ad6db,
title = "Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET): open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial",
abstract = "Background: Abatacept was well tolerated by patients with early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis in a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial, with potential efficacy at 12 months. We report here the results of an open-label extension for 6 months. Methods: Patients (aged ≥18 years) with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis of less than 3 years' duration from their first non-Raynaud's symptom were enrolled into the ASSET trial (A Study of Subcutaneous Abatacept to Treat Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis), which is a double-blind trial at 22 sites in Canada, the UK, and the USA. After completion of 12 months of treatment with either abatacept or placebo, patients received a further 6 months of abatacept (125 mg subcutaneous every week) in an open-label extension. The primary endpoint of the double-blind trial was modified Rodnan Skin Score (mRSS) at 12 months, which was reassessed at 18 months in the open-label extension. The primary analysis included all participants who completed the double-blind trial and received at least one dose of open-label treatment (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02161406. Findings: Between Sept 22, 2014, and March 15, 2017, 88 participants were randomly allocated in the double-blind trial either abatacept (n=44) or placebo (44); 32 patients from each treatment group completed the 6-month open-label extension. Among patients assigned abatacept, a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS was noted at 12 months (−6·6 [SD 6·4]), with further improvement seen during the open-label extension period (−9·8 [8·1] at month 18). Participants assigned placebo had a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS at 12 months (−3·7 [SD 7·6]), with a further improvement at month 18 (−6·3 [9·3]). Infections during the open-label extension phase occurred in nine patients in the placebo–abatacept group (12 adverse events, one serious adverse event) and in 11 patients in the abatacept–abatacept group (14 adverse events, one serious adverse event). Two deaths occurred during the 12-month double-blind period in the abatacept group, which were related to scleroderma renal crisis; no deaths were recorded during the open-label extension. Interpretation: During the 6-month open-label extension, no new safety signals for abatacept were identified in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Clinically meaningful improvements in mRSS and other outcome measures were observed in both the abatacept and placebo groups when patients transitioned to open-label treatment. These data support further studies of abatacept in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and National Institutes of Health.",
author = "Lorinda Chung and Cathie Spino and Richard McLain and Johnson, {Sindhu R.} and Denton, {Christopher P.} and Molitor, {Jerry A.} and Steen, {Virginia D.} and Robert Lafyatis and Simms, {Robert W.} and Suzanne Kafaja and Frech, {Tracy M.} and Vivien Hsu and Domsic, {Robyn T.} and Pope, {Janet E.} and Gordon, {Jessica K.} and Mayes, {Maureen D.} and Nora Sandorfi and Hant, {Faye N.} and Bernstein, {Elana J.} and Soumya Chatterjee and Castelino, {Flavia V.} and Ali Ajam and Yannick Allanore and Marco Matucci-Cerinic and Whitfield, {Michael L.} and Oliver Distler and Ora Singer and Amber Young and Vivek Nagaraja and Fox, {David A.} and Furst, {Daniel E.} and Dinesh Khanna",
note = "Funding Information: LC is on the advisory board and steering committee for Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; the advisory board for Eicos and Mitsubishi Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; the data safety monitoring board for Reata, outside of the submitted work; and reports grants from and is on the advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work. CS reports statistical consultant fees from Eicos, outside of the submitted work. SRJ reports clinical trial support from Bayer, Corbus, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Ikaria, outside of the submitted work; and clinical trial support from and is on the advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work. CPD reports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Inventiva, and CSL Behring, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Roche, Horizon, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Galapagos, during the conduct of the study. JAM reports clinical trial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Eicos, outside of the submitted work; personal fees, consulting fees, and clinical trial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; and clinical trial support from Corbus and Kadmon, outside of the submitted work. VDS reports grants, is a site principal investigator for a trial in scleroderma, and is on the advisory board for Corbus and Bayer, during the conduct of the study; grants and is on a steering committee for a trial in scleroderma for CSL Behring, during the conduct of the study; is on the advisory board for Forbius, during the conduct of the study; reports grants and consultancy, advisory board, and site principal investigator for a trial in scleroderma and lung disease for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; is site principal investigator for a scleroderma and Raynaud's trial and is on a steering committee for Eisocs, outside of the submitted work; and reports grants from Reata, outside of the submitted work. RL reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Formation, Sanofi, Biocon, Boehringer-Mannheim, Merck, and Genentech/Roche, outside of the submitted work; and grants from Corbus, Formation, Elpidera, Regeneron, Pfizer, and Kiniksa, outside of the submitted work. RWS reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Corbus, Boehringer Ingelheim, EMD Serono, Actelion, Roche, and Sanofi, during the conduct of the study. SK reports clinical trial support from the University of California at Los Angeles Division of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study. RTD reports personal fees from Formation, Eicos, and Corbus, outside of the submitted work. JEP reports grants and honoraria for consulting from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim, during the conduct of the study; and grants from Merck, during the conduct of the study. JKG reports grants from the University of Michigan, during the conduct of the study; and grants from Eicos and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, outside of the submitted work. MDM reports personal fees from Medtelligence, Actelion Pharma, Astellas, and Mitsubishi-Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; grants from Bayer, Reata, Sanofi, Corbus, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside of the submitted work; and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eicos, and Galapagos Pharma, outside of the submitted work. EJB reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), outside of the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Eicos, outside of the submitted work; and grants from Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. YA reports grants and personal fees from Inventiva and Sanofi, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chemomab, Curzion, and Roche, during the conduct of the study. MM-C has received consulting fees or honorarium from Inventiva, Bayer, Boehringer, CSL Behring, Corbus, Galapagos, Mitsubishi, Samsung, Regeneron, Acceleron, MSD, Chemomab, Lilly, Pfizer, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. MLW reports grants from NIH, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Celdara Medical, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Acceleron, AbbVie, and Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; and grants and personal fees from Corbus, outside of the submitted work. OD reports personal fees from AbbVie, Actelion, Acceleron Pharma, Amgen, AnaMar, Baecon Discovery, and Blade Therapeutics, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Catenion, Competitive Drug Development, CSL Behring, ChemomAb, Curzion Pharmaceuticals, Ergonex, Galapagos, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Inventiva, Italfarmaco, iQone, iQvia, Lilly, Medac, Medscape, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Target BioScience, and UCB, outside of the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Mitsubishi Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; and has a patent (mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis) issued to US8247389, EP2331143. VN reports clinical trial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study. DAF reports grants from NIH (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Clinical and Autoimmunity Center of Excellence), Immune Tolerance Network, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; and personal fees from CSL Behring, outside of the submitted work. DEF reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Acetlion, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corbus, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, NIH, Novartis, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; grants from Sanofi and Genentech/Roche, outside of the submitted work; and fees for Continuing Medical Education (CME) presentations, outside of the submitted work. DK reports grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants from NIH, Immune Tolerance Network, and Bayer, outside of the submitted work; grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Horizon, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Acceleron, Acetlion, Amgen, Blade Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Corbus, Cytori, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Horizon, Merck, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, United Therapeutics, and Eicos, outside of the submitted work; CME support from Impact PH, outside of the submitted work; holds stock in Eicos; and declares personal fees from and is Chief Medical Officer for CiviBioPharma/Eicos, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests. Funding Information: This investigator-initiated clinical trial was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and the National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Clinical and Autoimmunity Center of Excellence, grant 5-UM1-AI-110557 to the University of Michigan; and National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, grants K24-AR-063120 and R01-AR-07047 to DK). We thank the patients who participated in this trial and the research coordinators for their hard work and contributions. ",
journal = "The Lancet Rheumatology",
publisher = "Lancet Publishing Group",
T1 - Safety and efficacy of abatacept in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (ASSET)
T2 - open-label extension of a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial
AU - Chung, Lorinda
AU - Spino, Cathie
AU - McLain, Richard
AU - Johnson, Sindhu R.
AU - Denton, Christopher P.
AU - Molitor, Jerry A.
AU - Steen, Virginia D.
AU - Lafyatis, Robert
AU - Simms, Robert W.
AU - Kafaja, Suzanne
AU - Frech, Tracy M.
AU - Hsu, Vivien
AU - Domsic, Robyn T.
AU - Pope, Janet E.
AU - Gordon, Jessica K.
AU - Mayes, Maureen D.
AU - Sandorfi, Nora
AU - Hant, Faye N.
AU - Bernstein, Elana J.
AU - Chatterjee, Soumya
AU - Castelino, Flavia V.
AU - Ajam, Ali
AU - Allanore, Yannick
AU - Matucci-Cerinic, Marco
AU - Whitfield, Michael L.
AU - Distler, Oliver
AU - Singer, Ora
AU - Young, Amber
AU - Nagaraja, Vivek
AU - Fox, David A.
AU - Furst, Daniel E.
AU - Khanna, Dinesh
N1 - Funding Information: LC is on the advisory board and steering committee for Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; the advisory board for Eicos and Mitsubishi Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; the data safety monitoring board for Reata, outside of the submitted work; and reports grants from and is on the advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work. CS reports statistical consultant fees from Eicos, outside of the submitted work. SRJ reports clinical trial support from Bayer, Corbus, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Ikaria, outside of the submitted work; and clinical trial support from and is on the advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work. CPD reports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Inventiva, and CSL Behring, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Roche, Horizon, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Galapagos, during the conduct of the study. JAM reports clinical trial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Eicos, outside of the submitted work; personal fees, consulting fees, and clinical trial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; and clinical trial support from Corbus and Kadmon, outside of the submitted work. VDS reports grants, is a site principal investigator for a trial in scleroderma, and is on the advisory board for Corbus and Bayer, during the conduct of the study; grants and is on a steering committee for a trial in scleroderma for CSL Behring, during the conduct of the study; is on the advisory board for Forbius, during the conduct of the study; reports grants and consultancy, advisory board, and site principal investigator for a trial in scleroderma and lung disease for Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; is site principal investigator for a scleroderma and Raynaud's trial and is on a steering committee for Eisocs, outside of the submitted work; and reports grants from Reata, outside of the submitted work. RL reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Formation, Sanofi, Biocon, Boehringer-Mannheim, Merck, and Genentech/Roche, outside of the submitted work; and grants from Corbus, Formation, Elpidera, Regeneron, Pfizer, and Kiniksa, outside of the submitted work. RWS reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Corbus, Boehringer Ingelheim, EMD Serono, Actelion, Roche, and Sanofi, during the conduct of the study. SK reports clinical trial support from the University of California at Los Angeles Division of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study. RTD reports personal fees from Formation, Eicos, and Corbus, outside of the submitted work. JEP reports grants and honoraria for consulting from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim, during the conduct of the study; and grants from Merck, during the conduct of the study. JKG reports grants from the University of Michigan, during the conduct of the study; and grants from Eicos and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, outside of the submitted work. MDM reports personal fees from Medtelligence, Actelion Pharma, Astellas, and Mitsubishi-Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; grants from Bayer, Reata, Sanofi, Corbus, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside of the submitted work; and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eicos, and Galapagos Pharma, outside of the submitted work. EJB reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), outside of the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Eicos, outside of the submitted work; and grants from Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. YA reports grants and personal fees from Inventiva and Sanofi, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chemomab, Curzion, and Roche, during the conduct of the study. MM-C has received consulting fees or honorarium from Inventiva, Bayer, Boehringer, CSL Behring, Corbus, Galapagos, Mitsubishi, Samsung, Regeneron, Acceleron, MSD, Chemomab, Lilly, Pfizer, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. MLW reports grants from NIH, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Celdara Medical, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Acceleron, AbbVie, and Boehringer Ingelheim, outside of the submitted work; and grants and personal fees from Corbus, outside of the submitted work. OD reports personal fees from AbbVie, Actelion, Acceleron Pharma, Amgen, AnaMar, Baecon Discovery, and Blade Therapeutics, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Catenion, Competitive Drug Development, CSL Behring, ChemomAb, Curzion Pharmaceuticals, Ergonex, Galapagos, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Inventiva, Italfarmaco, iQone, iQvia, Lilly, Medac, Medscape, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Target BioScience, and UCB, outside of the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Mitsubishi Tanabe, outside of the submitted work; and has a patent (mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis) issued to US8247389, EP2331143. VN reports clinical trial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study. DAF reports grants from NIH (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Clinical and Autoimmunity Center of Excellence), Immune Tolerance Network, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; and personal fees from CSL Behring, outside of the submitted work. DEF reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Acetlion, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corbus, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, NIH, Novartis, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; grants from Sanofi and Genentech/Roche, outside of the submitted work; and fees for Continuing Medical Education (CME) presentations, outside of the submitted work. DK reports grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study; grants from NIH, Immune Tolerance Network, and Bayer, outside of the submitted work; grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Horizon, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work; personal fees from Acceleron, Acetlion, Amgen, Blade Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Corbus, Cytori, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Horizon, Merck, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, United Therapeutics, and Eicos, outside of the submitted work; CME support from Impact PH, outside of the submitted work; holds stock in Eicos; and declares personal fees from and is Chief Medical Officer for CiviBioPharma/Eicos, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests. Funding Information: This investigator-initiated clinical trial was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and the National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Clinical and Autoimmunity Center of Excellence, grant 5-UM1-AI-110557 to the University of Michigan; and National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, grants K24-AR-063120 and R01-AR-07047 to DK). We thank the patients who participated in this trial and the research coordinators for their hard work and contributions.
N2 - Background: Abatacept was well tolerated by patients with early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis in a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial, with potential efficacy at 12 months. We report here the results of an open-label extension for 6 months. Methods: Patients (aged ≥18 years) with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis of less than 3 years' duration from their first non-Raynaud's symptom were enrolled into the ASSET trial (A Study of Subcutaneous Abatacept to Treat Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis), which is a double-blind trial at 22 sites in Canada, the UK, and the USA. After completion of 12 months of treatment with either abatacept or placebo, patients received a further 6 months of abatacept (125 mg subcutaneous every week) in an open-label extension. The primary endpoint of the double-blind trial was modified Rodnan Skin Score (mRSS) at 12 months, which was reassessed at 18 months in the open-label extension. The primary analysis included all participants who completed the double-blind trial and received at least one dose of open-label treatment (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02161406. Findings: Between Sept 22, 2014, and March 15, 2017, 88 participants were randomly allocated in the double-blind trial either abatacept (n=44) or placebo (44); 32 patients from each treatment group completed the 6-month open-label extension. Among patients assigned abatacept, a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS was noted at 12 months (−6·6 [SD 6·4]), with further improvement seen during the open-label extension period (−9·8 [8·1] at month 18). Participants assigned placebo had a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS at 12 months (−3·7 [SD 7·6]), with a further improvement at month 18 (−6·3 [9·3]). Infections during the open-label extension phase occurred in nine patients in the placebo–abatacept group (12 adverse events, one serious adverse event) and in 11 patients in the abatacept–abatacept group (14 adverse events, one serious adverse event). Two deaths occurred during the 12-month double-blind period in the abatacept group, which were related to scleroderma renal crisis; no deaths were recorded during the open-label extension. Interpretation: During the 6-month open-label extension, no new safety signals for abatacept were identified in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Clinically meaningful improvements in mRSS and other outcome measures were observed in both the abatacept and placebo groups when patients transitioned to open-label treatment. These data support further studies of abatacept in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and National Institutes of Health.
AB - Background: Abatacept was well tolerated by patients with early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis in a phase 2, double-blind randomised trial, with potential efficacy at 12 months. We report here the results of an open-label extension for 6 months. Methods: Patients (aged ≥18 years) with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis of less than 3 years' duration from their first non-Raynaud's symptom were enrolled into the ASSET trial (A Study of Subcutaneous Abatacept to Treat Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis), which is a double-blind trial at 22 sites in Canada, the UK, and the USA. After completion of 12 months of treatment with either abatacept or placebo, patients received a further 6 months of abatacept (125 mg subcutaneous every week) in an open-label extension. The primary endpoint of the double-blind trial was modified Rodnan Skin Score (mRSS) at 12 months, which was reassessed at 18 months in the open-label extension. The primary analysis included all participants who completed the double-blind trial and received at least one dose of open-label treatment (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02161406. Findings: Between Sept 22, 2014, and March 15, 2017, 88 participants were randomly allocated in the double-blind trial either abatacept (n=44) or placebo (44); 32 patients from each treatment group completed the 6-month open-label extension. Among patients assigned abatacept, a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS was noted at 12 months (−6·6 [SD 6·4]), with further improvement seen during the open-label extension period (−9·8 [8·1] at month 18). Participants assigned placebo had a mean improvement from baseline in mRSS at 12 months (−3·7 [SD 7·6]), with a further improvement at month 18 (−6·3 [9·3]). Infections during the open-label extension phase occurred in nine patients in the placebo–abatacept group (12 adverse events, one serious adverse event) and in 11 patients in the abatacept–abatacept group (14 adverse events, one serious adverse event). Two deaths occurred during the 12-month double-blind period in the abatacept group, which were related to scleroderma renal crisis; no deaths were recorded during the open-label extension. Interpretation: During the 6-month open-label extension, no new safety signals for abatacept were identified in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Clinically meaningful improvements in mRSS and other outcome measures were observed in both the abatacept and placebo groups when patients transitioned to open-label treatment. These data support further studies of abatacept in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and National Institutes of Health.
JO - The Lancet Rheumatology
JF - The Lancet Rheumatology


- 3:20 Why responses from the right and left are inadequate.
- 13:49 How racism is created by state and elite actors, rather than from a generalised public attitude.
- 24:57 The Tory party and allied elite institutions now have an instrumental relationship with Islamophobia that must be tackled.


text:
Nova Scotia > Sports
Golf-Woods says he could play some tour events again after accident-Golf Digest
Reuters | Posted: Nov. 29, 2021, 6:22 p.m. | Updated: Nov. 29, 2021, 8:21 p.m. | 2 Min Read
(Reuters) - Tiger Woods said he could see himself playing some events on the PGA Tour again one day, despite the severe leg injuries he suffered in a brutal car accident in February.
The 15-times major winner said that at one point after the crash he thought he might lose his leg, and that he was frustrated by the slow process of rehabilitation that included three months in a hospital bed.
"Something that is realistic is playing the tour one day — never full-time, ever again — but pick and choose," he told Golf Digest https://www.golfdigest.com/story/tiger-woods-exclusive-interview, adding that he was not "even at the halfway point" of a full recovery.
Written off as too old and too beaten up from repeated back surgery - including a back fusion procedure - and knee operations, the 45-year-old American pulled off one of the greatest comebacks in all sports in 2019 when he won the Masters by one stroke, his first major title in 11 years.
His car accident this year prompted an outpouring of support from across the golf world and speculation among fans about whether he could stage yet another rebound to the top of the sport.
"After my back fusion, I had to climb Mount Everest one more time. I had to do it, and I did. This time around, I don't think I'll have the body to climb Mount Everest, and that's okay," he told the Digest.
(Reporting by Amy Tennery in New York; editing by Clare Fallon)
More Sports Stories
Taylor Gillis brings much more than scoring to the UPEI Panthers
Tennis-TikTok helps Keys as resurgence continues at Australian Open
Tennis-France's Tan exits Australian Open on wheelchair after injury
Australian court sets Jan 20 to issue reasons for dismissal of Djokovic case
Despite banged-up blue line, Lightning top Kings

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Select from a table if conditions met in joined table I have two tables
members

+-----------+
|id   | name|
+-----------+-
| 1   | john |
| 2   | adam |
| 3   | sara |
+-----------+-

keys

+-----------+
|id   | color|
+-----------+-
| 1   | blue |
| 2   | green|
| 3   | red  |
+-----------+-

and a third joined table
members_keys

+-----------+---------
| member_id | key_id |
+-----------+---------
| 1         | 1      |
| 1         | 3      |
| 2         | 1      |
+-----------+--------

both rows are assigned as primary key and foreign key

What I need is to get john's keys (keys 1 and 3 in this example)
This is what I am doing
select * from keys join members_keys on keys.id = members_keys.key_id where members_keys.member_id = 1;

from my limited testing I got the required rows, but I feel there is a better way to do it and this solution looks like wasting a lot of resources (comparing each row in keys with all rows in members_keys)

A: Comparing each row in keys with all rows in members_keys is not how the join is actually implemented.
This is the query plan without any indexes:
create table members(id int, name text);
create table keys(id int, color text);
create table members_keys(member_id int, key_id int);
explain select * from keys join members_keys on keys.id = members_keys.key_id where members_keys.member_id = 1;
                                QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=38.39..66.55 rows=70 width=44)
   Hash Cond: (keys.id = members_keys.key_id)
   ->  Seq Scan on keys  (cost=0.00..22.70 rows=1270 width=36)
   ->  Hash  (cost=38.25..38.25 rows=11 width=8)
         ->  Seq Scan on members_keys  (cost=0.00..38.25 rows=11 width=8)
               Filter: (member_id = 1)

The database first goes through all rows of the members_keys table, and only those with the matching member_id are inserted into a hash table. It then goes through all rows in the keys table (once), and searches for matching entries in the hash table. (Hash lookups are very fast; their speed is ideally independent of the size of the hash table.)
If we add primary keys with their implicit indexes, then the join works pretty much the same, except that the member_key = 1 check can be sped up with index lookups:
alter table members add primary key(id);
alter table keys add primary key(id);
alter table members_keys add primary key(member_id, key_id);
explain select * from keys join members_keys on keys.id = members_keys.key_id where members_keys.member_id = 1;
                                         QUERY PLAN
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Hash Join  (cost=15.05..41.09 rows=11 width=44)
   Hash Cond: (keys.id = members_keys.key_id)
   ->  Seq Scan on keys  (cost=0.00..22.70 rows=1270 width=4)
   ->  Hash  (cost=14.91..14.91 rows=11 width=4)
         ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on members_keys  (cost=4.24..14.91 rows=11 width=4)
               Recheck Cond: (member_id = 1)
               ->  Bitmap Index Scan on members_keys_pkey  (cost=0.00..4.24 rows=11 width=0)
                     Index Cond: (member_id = 1)

The database did rewrite your query into something like the following (except that select * returns columns from both tables):
select * from keys where id in (select key_id from members_keys where member_id = 1);

And depending on database version, options, and statistics, the database might do something entirely different. But it will not do an actual cross join if it can avoid it.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Copyright at UBC
Copyright Requirements
Copyright Requirements for UBC Faculty and Staff
Copyright Guidelines for UBC Faculty, Staff and Students
Fair Dealing Requirements for UBC Faculty and Staff
Fair Dealing in Practice
Best Practices for Faculty
Lecture Slides & Recordings
Distributing Course Readings
Music & Film in the Classroom
Open Course & Educational Resource Guidelines
Copyright Flowcharts
DVD Restrictions
Staff FAQ
Why Should I Care?
Information about SOCAN and Re:Sound Fees at UBC
Copying Posters
Broadcast Emails
» Home » Copyright Requirements for UBC Faculty and Staff
Background and Purpose
3. Digital Locks
4. Statutory Exceptions
5. Fair Dealing Requirements
6. Coursepacks
7. Obtaining Consent
8. Infringement
UBC is committed to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge. As such, UBC wishes to provide University Persons with broad access and exposure to copyrighted works, in a manner that facilitates evolving educational and instructional methodologies, while simultaneously respecting the proprietary intellectual property rights of knowledge creators.
UBC and its faculty, staff and students are creators of various forms of intellectual property, as well as consumers of intellectual property. As creators, we rely on the protections offered by intellectual property laws to ensure that our work product is protected from improper use. As consumers of intellectual property, we are legally (and morally) obligated to respect the intellectual property rights of others, just as we expect others to respect our intellectual property rights.
One intellectual property right that transcends all academic disciplines, and therefore is relevant to all University Persons, is copyright. Copyright is the sole and exclusive right of a copyright holder to produce, reproduce, perform, publish, adapt, translate and telecommunicate an original work, and to control the circumstances in which others may do any of these things. Copyright holders have the ability to allow others to use their copyrighted works through what are legally referred to as licences.
Copyright law in Canada protects a wide range of works. If you wish to reproduce a substantial part of a copyrighted work, you may only copy the work if the Copyright Act specifically allows you to do so, or if you have express permission from the copyright owner or another person with the authority to grant permission. The Copyright Act provides a number of exceptions (or user rights) that enable certain classes of users, such as universities and persons acting under the authority of a university, to copy and utilize copyrighted works in specific situations without first securing express permission. These exceptions provide a balance between providing copyright holders with legal rights to control the use of their works, and allowing users access in specific circumstances that are in the public interest.
As a preeminent research institution, UBC is constantly developing and adapting the learning and teaching experience it offers by, among other things, adopting and expanding the use of digital technologies in its classrooms, including electronic learning management systems. In so doing, UBC needs to ensure that University Persons recognise and deal with copyright issues that arise within this constantly evolving environment. While recognizing the challenge that this may pose to University Persons, UBC is committed to ensuring that these world class learning and instruction opportunities are conducted in a copyright compliant fashion.
This document sets out UBC's requirements regarding copyright, which University Persons must adhere to in order to comply with copyright laws. For further information, please refer to the Copyright Guidelines and Fair Dealing Requirements (as defined below). Additionally, please see Fair Dealing in Practice for detailed information about copying in a variety of different contexts.
1.1 As used in these UBC Copyright Requirements, the following defined terms shall have the meanings provided below:
"Circumvent" means, in respect of a Digital Lock, to descramble a scrambled work, decrypt an encrypted work or otherwise avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate or impair the Digital Lock.
"Copyright Act" means the Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, as amended from time to time.
"Copyright Guidelines" means the Copyright Guidelines for UBC Faculty, Staff and Students posted at http://copyright.ubc.ca, as may be amended from time to time by UBC.
"Copyrighted Work" means any original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work including without limitation computer programs, translations, annotations, and compilations of works, in which copyright subsists, unless copyright in such work has expired in accordance with the Copyright Act.
"Digital Lock" means any effective technology, device or component that, in the ordinary course of its operation, controls access to a work, a performer's performance fixed in a sound recording or a sound recording, and whose use is authorized by the copyright owner.
"Fair Dealing Exception" means the exceptions to copyright infringement provided under Sections 29, 29.1 and 29.2 of the Copyright Act, which allows any person to make a copy of a copyrighted work for the allowable purposes of research, private study, education, satire, parody, criticism, review, or news reporting.
"Fair Dealing Requirements" means the Fair Dealing Requirements for UBC Faculty and Staff, posted at http://copyright.ubc.ca, as may be amended from time to time by UBC.
"Other Staff" means full-time and part-time staff members of UBC and any other person who works at or under the auspices of UBC who is not Teaching Staff.
"Statutory Exception(s)" means various exceptions under the Copyright Act that permit certain things to be done by educational institutions, or persons acting under the authority of an educational institution, that would otherwise infringe copyright. These include, without limitation, the Fair Dealing Exception. A current list of the Statutory Exceptions available to UBC is set out under Section 3 of the Copyright Guidelines.
"Student" means a person registered or engaged in a course, unit or program of academic, continuing, professional, or vocational study administered or hosted by UBC, including a person who is granted deferred standing in a course.
"Teaching Staff" means any person who teaches at or under the auspices of UBC, including without limitation faculty members, adjunct and clinical faculty, lecturers, instructors, and teaching assistants.
"UBC Licence" means a licence agreement between UBC and the author or copyright holder, a publisher, or a publisher's representative, which is listed under the UBC Licence information database at http://licenses.library.ubc.ca/.
"University Person(s)" or "you" means collectively and individually, Teaching Staff and Other Staff.
2.1 In accordance with UBC's desire to promote the educational, research and private study activities of Students, Teaching Staff are encouraged to provide their Students with requisite materials, whether in print or electronic form, provided that this is balanced with UBC's need to respect the intellectual property rights of copyright holders and comply with copyright laws. As UBC considers copyright infringement to be a serious matter, every University Person must comply with applicable copyright laws when dealing with Copyrighted Works, and not infringe on the intellectual property rights of the copyright holders of such Copyrighted Works.
3.1 University Persons must not Circumvent any Digital Locks to access Copyrighted Works unless they are authorised by the copyright owner to do so (see the discussion of Access Controls and Use Restrictions in the Copyright Guidelines). The user rights described in sections 4 and 5 below are unavailable if a University Person has Circumvented a Digital Lock without the copyright owner's authorization.
4.1 If a University Person wishes to reproduce a substantial part of a Copyrighted Work, he or she may only copy the Copyrighted Work if the Copyright Act specifically allows this under a Statutory Exception, or he or she has express permission from the copyright holder.
4.2 If a University Person wishes to rely on a Statutory Exception to copy, reproduce, perform, communicate, display or otherwise deal with a Copyrighted Work, he or she must comply with any specific conditions required by such Statutory Exception and ensure that he or she does not Circumvent any Digital Lock protecting the Copyrighted Work. A current list of the Statutory Exceptions available to UBC is set out under Section 3 of the Copyright Guidelines.
5.1 If a University Person wishes to rely on the Fair Dealing Exception to copy, reproduce, perform, communicate, display or otherwise deal with a Copyrighted Work, he or she must comply with the terms of the Fair Dealing Requirements, and ensure that he or she does not Circumvent any Digital Lock protecting the Copyrighted Work.
5.2 In order to ensure that any copying and distribution of Copyrighted Works takes place in a manner that directs Students not to further distribute or disseminate the Copyrighted Works and has appropriate safeguards in compliance with applicable laws, Teaching Staff and Other Staff must comply with the Fair Dealing Requirements when making paper copies of Copyrighted Works to distribute to Students as part of classroom instruction, or posting Copyrighted Materials onto secure, password-protected learning management systems and course websites.
5.3 University Persons should be aware that some UBC Licences that provide access to Copyrighted Works in electronic format restrict the making or dissemination of copies and limit the Fair Dealing Exception, and that if there is a conflict between the terms of a UBC Licence and the terms of the Fair Dealing Requirements, the terms of the UBC Licence shall prevail. Thus, if a Copyrighted Work is subject to the terms of a UBC Licence, University Persons shall comply with the terms of such UBC Licence. If you have any questions or concerns about the terms of a UBC Licence, please contact the Scholarly Communications and Copyright Office at copyright.services@ubc.ca.
6.1 In producing and distributing course packs to Students, Teaching Staff members are responsible for ensuring that such production and distribution complies with the Copyright Act. If a Teaching Staff member needs to include a Copyrighted Work in a coursepack, the Teaching Staff member should submit their request for a coursepack to the UBC Bookstore, which will ensure that the requirements of the Copyright Act are met.
6.2 Where a Teaching Staff member wishes to utilize another coursepack production facility, it is the responsibility of the Teaching Staff member to ensure that such coursepack is produced:
in accordance with the Fair Dealing Requirements, if the Fair Dealing Exception applies;
in accordance with the terms of a UBC Licence or other licence, if such terms allow the production of coursepacks; or
by obtaining consent from the copyright holder in accordance with Section 7 below.
7. Obtaining Consent from Copyright Holder
7.1 If you wish to make a copy that is not permitted by Sections 3 through 6 above, then you must seek the express permission of the copyright holder.
7.2 These permissions need to be sought on a case by case basis, and there is no obligation for the copyright holder to grant your request. You may also wish to consider whether a different Copyrighted Work (which may be subject to a UBC Licence) would be an acceptable alternative. If you have any questions or concerns about obtaining a copyright permission for a particular Copyrighted Work, contact copyright.services@ubc.ca.
8.1 Should you be aware of copyright compliance deficiencies, you should bring them to the attention of the Scholarly Communications and Copyright Office so that appropriate action can be taken to address the situation.
8.2 Copyright infringement is a serious matter and can result in legal liability for you personally, as well as for UBC.
8.3 In addition, failure to comply with the terms of these UBC Copyright Requirements may result in disciplinary action being taken by UBC against you.
Syllabus Service
Copyright Basics FAQ
Theses and Dissertations Guide
Image Sources Guide
Image Citation Guide
Creative Commons Guide
Public Domain Guide
Changes to the Theses and Dissertations Guide
The Theses and Dissertations Guide has been updated to reflect changes to UBC's policy on the inclusion of materials provided under fair dealing. [Read More]
New DVD digitization service to support online learning
In order to better support online learning, UBC Library is now offering a service to convert content on DVD to streaming video. This service is limited to course-required content for students to be viewed outside the classroom. Instructors can make requests via Library Online Course Reserves (LOCR). [Read More]
York University v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright) Update
In 2013, Access Copyright commenced a legal case against York University in Federal Court seeking enforcement of an interim tariff approved by the Copyright Board. York, which had refused an Access licence in 2011, claimed that the tariff was not mandatory and further stated that the application of its Fair Dealing Guidelines and practices protected it from any claim of infringement. [Read more]
Except where otherwise noted, this website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Credits
Scholarly Communications and Copyright Office
Walter C. Koerner Library
Website copyright.ubc.ca
Email copyright.services@ubc.ca


text:
SCMA's speaking notes at LegCo Finance Committee special meeting
Following are the speaking notes of the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Raymond Tam, at the special meeting of the Legislative Council Finance Committee today (April 3):
Chairman,
I wish to brief Members on the main points of the estimates of expenditure of the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau (CMAB) in 2017-18.
Estimates of Expenditure of CMAB
In 2017-18, the CMAB is allocated $698.1 million, which is $90.2 million (about 14.8 per cent) higher than the revised estimates for 2016-17. The financial provision is mainly used in the following areas:
(I) Electoral Arrangements
The Government will continue to work closely with the Electoral Affairs Commission (EAC) to ensure that the public elections will be conducted in a fair, open and honest manner in accordance with the relevant legislation.
2019 District Council election
To prepare for the 2019 District Council (DC) election, we are conducting a review on the number of elected seats for the sixth-term DCs. We expect that we will consult the Legislative Council Panel on Constitutional Affairs (CA Panel) on the outcome of the review around the middle of this year, followed by amendments to the subsidiary legislation to reflect such outcome, with a view to enabling the EAC to, in accordance with the Electoral Affairs Commission Ordinance, conduct timely review of the boundaries of DC constituencies and recommend the delineation of DC constituencies before the 2019 DC election.
2017 Voter Registration
The 2017 Voter Registration (VR) campaign has already commenced on March 10. The statutory deadline for both voter registration and change of registration particulars is May 2 this year. We will, through various channels, encourage eligible persons to register as electors, remind electors to update their registration particulars, and encourage electors to use the Online Voter Information Enquiry System to verify their registration status and particulars. The Registration and Electoral Office (REO) will continue to implement checking measures and the inquiry process in the 2017 VR cycle, and remind the public of the importance of providing true and accurate information for registration and updating their address in the 2017 VR campaign. If any person is suspected of providing false information for voter registration, the REO will refer the case to the law enforcement agencies for follow-up action and investigation in accordance with the established procedures.
Enhancement of Voter Registration System
The Consultation Report on Enhancement of Voter Registration System was released in January 2016. Some of the recommendations in the Report have already been implemented in the 2016 VR cycle. As regards the other proposed measures that involve amendments to the electoral legislation, including review of the VR objection mechanism, raising the penalties on offences relating to VR and introducing the requirement of submitting address proof by electors, we would take into account Members' views when formulating the detailed arrangements and the legislative proposals. When the legislative proposals concerned are ready, the Government will submit them to the Legislative Council for scrutiny with a view to implementing these measures before the next election cycle.
(II) Promoting the Basic Law
In 2017-18, the CMAB will continue to set aside about $16 million for enabling the public to have a more comprehensive and thorough understanding of the "one country, two systems" principle and the Basic Law via various means of organising or sponsoring various types of promotional activities.
The year 2017 marks the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). Riding on this opportunity, relevant policy bureaux/departments responsible for promoting the Basic Law will organise various types of activities this year to help people from different walks of life grasp the complete concept of "one country, two systems" in a correct and comprehensive manner and to deepen their understanding of the Basic Law.
(III) Rights of the Individual
In 2017-18, subventions to the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data (PCPD) will remain the major parts of the estimated total provision in human rights under the bureau. The CMAB will continue to carry out promotional and educational work in certain areas.
Anti-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity
We are actively taking forward the strategies and measures recommended by the Advisory Group on Eliminating Discrimination against Sexual Minorities in December 2015. First of all, we have enhanced public education and publicity efforts, which include appealing to employers for their adoption of the Code of Practice against Discrimination in Employment on the Ground of Sexual Orientation. In addition, for drawing up a charter on non-discrimination of sexual minorities, we are now studying the relevant legislation, codes of practice and guidelines in different jurisdictions. We shall consult the stakeholders on the content of a draft charter within this year.
To provide training and resources for personnel in specific fields, we have gathered the views of training providers on the content and delivery mode of the sensitivity training and a psychologist with experience in designing and teaching related training programmes is developing the training resources. For the review of support services for sexual minorities, we are now gathering views from users and providers of support services to inform the examination of the effectiveness and room for improvement of existing services.
We are also conducting a further study on the experience of other jurisdictions in tackling discrimination through legislative and non-legislative measures. The findings of the study would form the basis for future public consultation. Our progress on the related work will be reported to the CA Panel in due course.
EOC and PCPD
The statutory function of the EOC is to be responsible for the implementation of the four anti-discrimination ordinances (Note 1). The total subvention for the EOC in 2017-18 is $115.5 million. The statutory function of the PCPD is confined to enforcing the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance. In 2017-18, we will allocate $76.1 million to the PCPD.
On March 20, we consulted the CA Panel on the nine prioritised recommendations proposed by the EOC in its Discrimination Law Review. The CA Panel generally agreed that the nine prioritised recommendations including the one on introducing express provisions prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of breastfeeding, and protection from direct discrimination by perception or imputation that a person is of a particular racial group, etc, should be taken forward. Among other things, the CA Panel also expressed views that the recommendation concerning the amendment to the Disability Discrimination Ordinance for introducing provision on being accompanied by an assistance animal (i.e. a guide dog) as a category of protection from discrimination should be covered as well. After the meeting, we have conveyed this suggestion to the Labour and Welfare Bureau for their consideration. We will follow up as soon as possible and take forward the related legislative preparatory work for the various recommendations.
Promotion of children's rights
For promotion of children's rights, we have earmarked about $1.08 million (excluding manpower cost) for implementing programmes for enhancing children's rights promotion in 2017-18. We will continue to promote children's rights through the Children's Rights Education Funding Scheme and the Children's Rights Forum.
(IV) Mainland Affairs and Co-operation with Taiwan
In 2017-18, the financial provision for the Mainland and Taiwan Offices is $354.6 million, representing an increase of $75.2 million (26.9 per cent) when compared with the revised estimates for 2016-17, mainly due to the setting up of more liaison units in the Mainland and organisation of activities in the Mainland to celebrate the establishment of the HKSAR.
Enhancing network of Mainland Offices
The HKSAR Government has established in the eastern, southern, western, northern and central regions of the Mainland five offices and eight liaison units. To further enhance the network of our offices in the Mainland and to provide better support for Hong Kong residents and enterprises in seizing the development opportunities in the Mainland, we will set up three additional liaison units before the middle of this year. They will be located in Hangzhou City of Zhejiang Province, Nanning City of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and Xi'an City of Shaanxi Province. We will also make use of existing resources to equip each Mainland Office with its own Immigration Division to provide more timely support to Hong Kong residents in distress in the Mainland. In addition, we created the post of Head (Cultural Exchange) under the Beijing Office in July last year to enhance promotion of cultural exchange and co-operation between Hong Kong and the Mainland.
Organisation of activities in the Mainland to celebrate 20th anniversary of establishment of HKSAR
In 2017-18, the five Mainland Offices and the total of 11 liaison units under their purview will organise a series of events in their respective service areas to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the HKSAR, under the theme of "Together•Progress•Opportunity", to showcase the successful implementation of "one country, two systems", bring about social cohesion and unity, build up confidence and seize opportunities.
National 13th Five-Year Plan
Promulgated in March last year, the Outline of the National 13th Five-Year Plan (13-5 Plan) (Note 2) reaffirms the strong support of the Central Authorities in maintaining the long-term prosperity and stability of Hong Kong and provides more opportunities for the future development of Hong Kong. Our bureau will continue to provide support to the Steering Committee on Co-operation with the Mainland, chaired by the Chief Secretary for Administration, to co-ordinate various policy bureaux and departments to actively implement the initiatives related to Hong Kong's development set out in the 13-5 Plan under the "one country, two systems" principle.
Regional co-operation
Development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Big Bay Area
The Dedicated Chapter on Hong Kong and Macao in the 13-5 Plan emphasises deepening co-operation between the Mainland and Hong Kong/Macao, and for the first time expresses "support for Hong Kong and Macao to play an important role in the Pan-Pearl River Delta Region co-operation, and the development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Big Bay Area and major inter-provincial/regional co-operation platforms". The HKSAR Government is now following the strategic direction of the Dedicated Chapter and the principle of "one country, two systems" to jointly participate in the planning of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Big Bay Area with the National Development and Reform Commission, as well as the Guangdong Provincial Government and the Macao Government. Through active consultation and consensus-building, this can assist Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao to leverage their own unique yet complementary advantages.
Co-operation with Guangdong Province
Guangdong Province has all along been the most important partner of Hong Kong in terms of regional co-operation. At the 22nd Working Meeting of Hong Kong/Guangdong Co-operation Joint Conference held on February 23 this year, both sides formulated the 2017 Work Plan of Hong Kong/Guangdong Co-operation to foster collaboration in a number of areas, including the Belt and Road Initiative, innovation and technology, youth, environmental protection, financial services, professional services, key co-operation regions, education, tourism, etc.
Qianhai, Nansha and Hengqin
The Dedicated Chapter expresses support in "expediting development of co-operation platforms among Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao, such as Qianhai, Nansha and Hengqin". The HKSAR Government strongly supports the future development of the three areas, which is also one of the co-operation items under the Work Plan of the Hong Kong/Guangdong Co-operation. Under the principle of "one country, two systems", the HKSAR Government will continue to enhance exchanges and co-operation with the Guangdong Provincial Government, as well as the Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Zhuhai Municipal Governments, with a view to enhancing the partnership with Guangdong Province and the three areas. We will also work together to expedite the development of the three areas as co-operation platforms among Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao, thereby opening up more room and opportunities for the development of Hong Kong people and enterprises.
Co-operation with Macao
At the Hong Kong Macao Co-operation High Level Meeting held in July last year, Hong Kong and Macao agreed to strive for the formal signing of the HK-Macao CEPA within this year. Both sides also agreed to focus on promoting economic co-operation; financial, exhibition and tourism co-operation; cross-boundary infrastructure; and youth co-operation.
Co-operation with Shenzhen
On Hong Kong/Shenzhen Co-operation, at the Hong Kong/Shenzhen Co-operation Meeting held on January 3 this year, both sides agreed on the key co-operation areas: development of the Hong Kong-Shenzhen Innovation and Technology Park at the Lok Ma Chau Loop, innovation and technology, Qianhai development, financial co-operation, professional services and youth co-operation.
Co-operation with Pan-Pearl River Delta region and regional co-operation
We will make use of the existing cooperation platforms to strengthen exchanges and co-operation with the nine provinces of the Pan-Pearl River Delta region, Shanghai Municipality, Beijing Municipality and Fujian to give full play to Hong Kong's unique advantages of "one country" and "two systems", as well as the extensive and strong international connections to promote the development of the relevant regions/provinces/municipalities and open up business opportunities for Hong Kong industries.
Development of Hong Kong-Taiwan relations
Hong Kong and Taiwan continue to promote exchanges and co-operation on various fronts such as economic affairs and trade, culture, tourism, social livelihood and city management through the two non-official platforms of the Hong Kong-Taiwan Economic and Cultural Cooperation and Promotion Council and the Taiwan-Hong Kong Economic and Cultural Co-operation Council. In addition, our Hong Kong Economic, Trade and Cultural Office in Taiwan will continue to promote Hong Kong through organising and participating in various activities.
Note 1: The four anti-discrimination ordinances are the Sex Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 480), the Disability Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 487), the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 527) and the Race Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 602).
Note 2: The full name is the "Outline of the 13th Five-Year Plan for the National Economic and Social Development of the People's Republic of China".
Ends/Monday, April 3, 2017
Issued at HKT 14:52


At Pond House you will find the best training facilities in the country available to your horse.
Over the years the swimming pool has proved to be invaluable - especially with problem horses. It has been the ideal facility with which to tackle injuries: cuts, lameness, muscular or foot problems etc. which may have otherwise stopped the horse from exercising. The idea behind the equine pool is simple - it gives the horses a "weightless gallop", meaning they are fully exercised, yet their legs are not put under any undue pressure.
The horses are always supervised by at least three experienced and fully trained members of our excellent staff when swimming, and as you can see from the picture of "Night In A Million" – most of them enjoy it enormously!


text:
Home > Community archives > Willington > A Commentary on the Bedford Estate Cottages
Willington is a village with three surviving blocks of Bedford Estate cottages - all in Church Road. One sees these in a number of parishes in the county, always built to a standard plan. Bedfordshire and Luton Archives and Records Service is lucky in having the original master plans as well as the respective bills of quantities for constructing the seven different types of "Cottages for Agricultural Labourers" designed for the estate. These are in a document in the Russell (Dukes of Bedford) Archive called "Duke of Bedford's Cottages for Agricultural Labourers published in 1850.
In 1849 a clergyman of Cogenhoe [Northamptonshire] published a pamphlet entitled: The System of Building Labourers' Cottages Pursued on the Estates of His Grace the Duke of Bedford, Practically Examined by the Rev. C. H. Hartshorne. An edited version of this pamphlet appears below.
"The subject of building Labourers' Cottages having latterly excited much of public attention, and been ably introduced to notice by a Paper read at our Northamptonshire Architectural Society, I shall make a few remarks upon it, under the conviction that one of such general importance to the welfare of the working classes cannot be too much discussed".
"Society is always in its most healthy state, when we find individuals amicably striving together to ameliorate the condition of those below them, and labouring to promote work of social regeneration, and a collision of opinion, therefore, on such important topics, may elicit something for the common advantage. Much earnestness has been felt by landed proprietors in this and the neighbouring county of Bedford, and if any difference of opinion has existed as to the best methods of effecting their benevolent intentions of providing better dwellings for the poor, those who are the objects of the movement derive all the benefit, whilst the promoters of these laudable undertakings are, on their part, content to learn by experience what can be done for the best. Some points of detail still remain open for discussion, such, for instance, as to the mode by which convenience and economy may be best united. But the general principle of giving to the working man a comfortable dwelling, is now universally recognised as one of the first duties of a landlord".
"Northamptonshire is particularly fortunate in the abundant supply of oolitic limestone with which its cottages are chiefly built, and this material imparts a mellow tone to whole ranges of its villages in succession. Ear; Spencer, in his very beautiful cottages, has profited by his contiguity to the quarries of Duston and Harlestone, and in the same way most of the builders in the northern parts of the county have freely used the Colley Weston slate for covering. In passing into Bedfordshire, we at once perceive by the poverty of its ecclesiastical structures, that the geological features of this part of England are widely different, and whilst the use of bricks in Northamptonshire is unfrequent, and may be censured as a violation of architectural unity, here they are the only material that can be used with economy or propriety. The medieval architects felt this difficulty when they employed them in the church of Houghton Conquest, and in the venerable abbey of Saint Albans, in the next county [Hertfordshire], and the Duke of Bedford in the various cottages he has recently built on his Woburn estate, has been compelled to follow the precedent thus established in earlier ages. His Grace's cottages in Devonshire, however, are constructed with different materials, as well as on a different plan, and so are those erected in the Fens of Cambridgeshire".
"Impressed with a sense of his high responsibilities as a landlord, a feeling exhibited with as much active philosophy, as it has been felicitously expressed in his own words, in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society, he has endeavoured to carry out for the last three years an improved system of replacing the decayed tenements on his property by such dwellings as would induce higher notions of decency and order, thus justly giving the labouring classes on his estate an opportunity of proving upon whom the blame of bad habits for the most part rests, and it is not stating too much to say, that already a visible preference has been shown for neatness, cleanliness, and decent habits among all those who have been thus placed in habitations where the existence of such an amendment in their moral and domestic economy can be displayed".
"I shall not dwell upon this agreeable commencement of a better order of things, but rather endeavour to lay before the reader my own impression from frequent opportunities of observation as to how far these buildings on the Bedfordshire estate themselves actually combine internal comfort with reasonableness of cost and architectural pretensions. The experiment of cottage building has here been fairly, nay most extensively tried, for in the years 1846, 1847 and 1848 no fewer than fifty-two cottages were erected which have been increased during the present year by fifty-three additional ones, most of which are completed and occupied. As regards future operations, a gradual rebuilding of the decayed tenements will continue to go on till three hundred more are erected, and no doubt the same prudence and good judgement that has hitherto prevailed will not fail to take advantage of fresh improvements as they become known, or are thought desirable for adoption".
"To describe these cottages generally, they are all built of various designs, in a most substantial manner; the walls of brick, the floors, roofs and joiner's work of foreign timber; the roofs covered with plain tiles and Staffordshire rolled ridges; the window lights of cast-iron, and painted to imitate lead lights, which is very effectively accomplished, as they are light and clean castings. These buildings are all provided with iron spouting and iron conducting pipes, which are again connected with underground drains made water-tight with cement, leading to large tanks, and these also in turn are cemented, and capable of holding an ample supply of rain water for washing throughout the driest season of the year; capacious enough, in fact, to contain upwards of 5,000 gallons. The foundations are built on concrete, the lower floors are paved with Staffordshire squares, and laid on the same material. They have washhouses sometimes under the same cartilage, but in no instance more than 20 feet distant, not too far off to be in the least inconvenient, fitted up with copper, sink, dresser, and hat and cloak rail &c. Either the living room or the back kitchen is provided with oven and boiler range. The pantry lighted, ventilated and fitted up with shelves, meat hooks &c. There is also a closet under the stairs for stores &c. the bed-rooms are provided with closets, one room having a fire-place in case of sickness, the other rooms thoroughly light and airy. The yards are all divided by low fences and posts for drying clothes, each house having the convenience of a separate wood and coal barn and privy. They have an ample supply of spring and rain water, and a receptacle for ashes. The drains from the sinks, constructed water-tight, convey all refuse matter to a manure tank in a garden lying contiguous, which tank is provided with a man-hole and stone to take off, so that each cottager may have the advantage of the sewerage collected for his own ground, the tank being cleaned out twice a year. By a clause in the letting, the cottages are all cleaned and lime-whited once a year. There are good roads formed between each group of cottages, as well as all round the back premises, for the purpose of conveying the fuel to the wood barns without going through the dwelling parts, which, as is well known, is done in most instances, to the detriment of the houses. The cottages are built of various sizes, to suit the requirements of the tenants. Some have one bedroom, some two, others have three, and in cases where the families are very numerous, extra large three bed-roomed houses are provided, so that two descriptions of three bed-roomed houses are provided to suit the size of families. The cottages themselves are erected in groups of fours, sixes, sevens, and all of different elevations. No doubt it may sometimes be desirable to see single cottages in preference to two together, or several in a row, but a proprietor will naturally be impelled to try where he can to lighten the general cost, and if the same pump will do for six as serves one, that is a proportionate diminution of outlay to take into his calculations".
"This will furnish a sufficiently general idea of the plan, and the mode of combination that has been pursued, in constructing these hundred and five cottages, that have replaced some of the dilapidated tenements at Woburn, Houghton Regis, Millbrook, Ampthill, Maulden, Cople, Willington, Oakley, Knotting &c. But as many an enquirer may reasonably wish for more particular information upon a subject of such importance, I will say a few words about some of these architectural groups specifically. Some of those erected first, as may naturally be expected, have not the entire perfection larger experience has contributed to such as have been more recently built, and the ground floor rooms in some of these might have been improved by having six inches of additional height and increasing their length or breadth an extra foot".
"As to architectural appearance, that must always be regulated by a strict and prudential economy. Expense will inevitably follow every deviation from what is not actually necessary, and it is too much to expect that the individual who erects houses at a pecuniary loss should incur a still greater, merely to please the taste of those who might lose sight of utility, airiness and convenience in their admiration of what is unmeaning, useless and merely picturesque. Yet it cannot be said that this attractive point has been disregarded in the cottages under review, for the proportions are, without exception, satisfactory and just; the outlines are undulating and broken; they show that much care has been bestowed to produce constant variety of elevation, a task requiring the most consummate skill, where everything must come in its proper place, every room receive its due share of light and ventilation, and where only three rooms can be admitted into the formula for regulating the laws of permutation. Still they are diversified, especially at Millbrook, by hooded porches with single and cross loops, gables projecting fifteen inches, eaves twelve, pendants, hip knobs, barges floated in cement, rafters with moulded feet, water tabling resting on herring bone bricks, rounded coigns, chimneys rising seven feet above the ridge, panels, and chequers of different coloured bricks; bricks formed both of the mild porous clay of amt, and the stiff gault from Marston Moretaine".
"An objection has been made against the use of cast-iron window lights, but a glazier well knows hat panes once broken in leaded lights can never be replaced with their original truth and precision. When joining is once disturbed or destroyed, the size of the quarries must necessarily become irregular, and they will grow more loose and shaky every time the same pane is mended, so that when once repaired they must be greatly inferior to what they were at first. This objection cannot possibly apply to cast-iron lights; besides being air and water tight, they are considerably stronger, preferable in point of cheapness, and not liable to be bulged out by internal thrusts. Lead light in a few years require renewal, and in most cases where more than one pane is torn away the cottager stuffs up the interstice with a wisp of straw or an old tattered garment, the most fitting emblem of the slatternly daudle who is too frequently his house-wife".
"In the cottages erected in the town of Woburn, where the value of frontage is an essential consideration, the gardens next the public street are limited in size, though they are sufficiently large however to allow of flowers, pot-herbs, or even beds of cabbages to grow. It would not be desirable to shut out a current of air behind or before a cottage, and therefore high, intervening walls – more suitable for the separation of refractory paupers, or the inmates of a prison, than as barriers between honest neighbours and men of self-sustaining industry – have been very judiciously dispensed with. A closer separation in the rear would equally defeat the intention of using the back premises as a drying ground, which ought invariably to be close upon the pump and the washhouse (as the wood barn should be upon the oven), and have plenty of air and sun".
"The walls of all the two bed-roomed cottages I visited in and out of Woburn are of brick, which is a great advantage over the thin wooden partition generally adopted where this salutary division is attempted to be carried out. In the three bed-roomed cottages it would be difficult, from the want of separation walls beneath the upper floors, to find sufficient support for the weight of brick walls throughout, and therefore the children's rooms are divided by a boarded partition "tongued". The principal room, however, which it is presumed man and wife would occupy, is in all cases surrounded by solid walls".
"An objection has been raised against the walls not being plastered, and where work is badly done, this certainly tends to give a rough aspect to the inside of a house, but such an objection – quite a matter of opinion – can hardly be said to be of much importance, when, as in the instance of the Duke of Bedford's cottages, the brickwork is made fair and even on both sides, and all the joints clean stuck – to say nothing of the recurring expense of injuries to the plaster, under rough usage, and its untidy appearance when it is broken".
"The question may be fairly asked, whether the inmates themselves are satisfied with the arrangements of the houses they live in, and I have accordingly enquired of them what they wished to see altered, and how far they found them suitable to their personal wants. Amongst the answers returned were such as these: - "I am very fond of my home". "It is warm, no cold comes through the walls". "I find it very comfortable, it is a great change for the better". "It is a comfortable home". "We like it very well, indeed we can't help but like it".
"The expense of erecting cottages exhibiting so many advantages over those hitherto built by wealthy proprietors, is a question that will be eagerly asked by those who are intending to follow the Duke of Bedford's example. It is one not very easy of solution since the price of labour and the value of materials will vary in different districts. Some may have timber and stone within their immediate reach, and therefore cost them next to nothing, beyond the sawing and dressing. Others may have every separate item to purchase. The specifications published on this point in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society, have shown what quantity of the various materials are required for building a proper house for a labourer; the cost of them will greatly depend upon the contingencies of carriage, or upon the owner already having what is necessary on his property. Some approximation to the truth may, however, be gained by the rent paid by the tenants, which, for cottages of the description already given (exclusive of site), may be laid at a return of three per cent on the outlay. Where they are constructed of hollow brick, with the addition of tubes worked close to the chimney, so as to diffuse the air in a rarefied state through the whole of the house – and such a triple group is now being tried at Millbrook – it is presumed a saving of 25 per cent may be effected on the brick-work. This, however, does not affect the carpenter's work beyond a small sum in the roofing – where four or five are built together, an item scarcely worth mentioning".
"There is one feature about these cottages eminently worthy of notice, and not to be passed over, namely, that they look like what they profess to be, simply labourer's cottages, and nothing more.; whilst the work is so well executed, that when once finished, it involves no yearly recurring expense to keep it in good repair. Possessing far more than the usual conveniences appended to this class of buildings, such as separate offices for domestic and private use, distinct paths, in some instances furnished with water apparatus, and in all a plentiful supply of hard and soft water, thoroughly dry, with little plots in front, and large allotments either at the back or close by, they are, as one of the inmates at Ampthill declared to me, "every thing I require. I wish for nothing else. I have found the comfort of it".
"The terms under which the tenants are bound are dictated by good sense and a spirit of equity, which brings me to the rent, which is the last thing, and certainly it is one of the most difficult to adjust, since it should neither be too high to be oppressive, or too low to compromise the independence of a workman, who will thus be degraded to the state of an idle pensioner or a worthless mendicant. The rents vary from a shilling to sixteen pence a-week, according as the houses possess one, two, or three bed-rooms. Some of the latter are of an extra size to accommodate a large family, and reach eighteen pence a-week. Being let under reasonable agreements, the occupiers are content and happy, and the noble proprietor, aiming at no ideal perfection, nor exacting an exorbitant repayment, as is too commonly the case where houses are run up by contract, must certainly thus far, and the work is still proceeding, have the satisfaction of feeling that his anxious efforts to ameliorate the condition of the peasantry on his estates have been rewarded by success, and acknowledged by their gratitude".


In May 2008, Mounds holds the Guinness World Record for the "World's Largest Augmented Breasts"
And her breasts contain 10 liters of saline solution and weigh about 20 lbs each! World Largest Natural Breasts World's largest Breast World's largest Breast World's Largest Breasts Design by Free WordPress Themes Annie Hawkins Turner, who goes by the name Norma Stitz professionally, has the largest breasts in the world at size 102ZZZ!
Lolo Ferrari, born Eve Valois (() 9 February 1963 – 5 March 2000), was a French dancer, pornographic actress, actress and singer billed as "the woman with the largest breasts in the world"


Edward H. Saer III, MD, has specialized in orthopaedic surgery of the spine in Little Rock for 30 years. Dr. Saer is familiar with the latest techniques and technologies and has extensive experience in standard surgical instrumentation, plus a strong dose of the compassion and care essential for those suffering with various conditions of the back and neck.
Dr. Saer's practice now focuses on the non-surgical treatment of the spine, including deformities, work-related injuries, trauma and cervical and lumbar disorders. He completed his residency at the University of Michigan and received his fellowship training in Minneapolis, Minnesota, at the Minnesota Spine Center. He has presented scientific papers and exhibits at national and international spine surgery meetings. Dr. Saer is past president of the Pulaski County Medical Society.