In de afgelopen twee jaar is veel veranderd op juridisch vlak als het gaat om de rechtspositie van de consument en diens aansluiting op het aardgassysteem. In deze bijdrage verkennen we de juridische mogelijkheden én onmogelijkheden van twee uitgangsposities: a. die van de burger die graag zelf actie wil ondernemen om van het gas af te gaan en b. die van de gasklever, oftewel de burger die wil vasthouden aan het gas omdat hij geen heil ziet in de energietransitie, de alternatieve voorziening geen verbetering of te duur is, diens huis niet geschikt is voor een warmtepomp of omdat hij de woning volledig op elektriciteit wil. In dit laatste geval wordt vervolgens uiteengezet in hoeverre de gastrouwe burger gedwongen kan worden onder huidig en toekomstig recht toch de overstap te maken naar een energievoorziening zonder aardgas. Voor de uiteenzetting van deze uitgangsposities wordt kort de achtergrond van de warmtetransitie geschetst en de manier waarop deze via de transitievisie warmte, met de gemeente aan kop, tot stand moet gaan komen. Het Wetsvoorstel gemeentelijke instrumenten warmtetransitie wordt hier tevens besproken.
LINK
BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to assess the outcome of elderly intensive care unit (ICU) patients treated during the spring and autumn COVID-19 surges in Europe.METHODS: This was a prospective European observational study (the COVIP study) in ICU patients aged 70 years and older admitted with COVID-19 disease from March to December 2020 to 159 ICUs in 14 European countries. An electronic database was used to register a number of parameters including: SOFA score, Clinical Frailty Scale, co-morbidities, usual ICU procedures and survival at 90 days. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04321265).RESULTS: In total, 2625 patients were included, 1327 from the first and 1298 from the second surge. Median age was 74 and 75 years in surge 1 and 2, respectively. SOFA score was higher in the first surge (median 6 versus 5, p < 0.0001). The PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission was higher during surge 1, and more patients received invasive mechanical ventilation (78% versus 68%, p < 0.0001). During the first 15 days of treatment, survival was similar during the first and the second surge. Survival was lower in the second surge after day 15 and differed after 30 days (57% vs 50%) as well as after 90 days (51% vs 40%).CONCLUSION: An unexpected, but significant, decrease in 30-day and 90-day survival was observed during the second surge in our cohort of elderly ICU patients. The reason for this is unclear. Our main concern is whether the widespread changes in practice and treatment of COVID-19 between the two surges have contributed to this increased mortality in elderly patients. Further studies are urgently warranted to provide more evidence for current practice in elderly patients.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04321265 , registered March 19th, 2020.
MULTIFILE
Social media is a transformative digital technology, collapsing the “six degrees ofseparation” which have previously characterized many social networks, and breaking down many of the barriers to individuals communicating with each other. Some commentators suggest that this is having profound effects across society, that social media have opened up new channels for public debates and have revolutionized the communication of prominent public issues such as climate change. In this article we provide the first systematic and critical review of the literature on social media and climate change. We highlight three key findings from the literature: a substantial bias toward Twitter studies, the prevalent approaches to researching climate change on social media (publics, themes, and professional communication), and important empirical findings (the use of mainstream information sources, discussions of “settled science,” polarization, and responses to temperature anomalies).Following this, we identify gaps in the existing literature that should beaddressed by future research: namely, researchers should consider qualitativestudies, visual communication and alternative social media platforms to Twitter.We conclude by arguing for further research that goes beyond a focus on sciencecommunication to a deeper examination of how publics imagine climate changeand its future role in social life.
DOCUMENT