Osteoarthritic cartilage destruction is caused by an imbalance between anabolic and catabolic factors. Here, we show that hypoxia-inducible factor-2alpha (HIF-2alpha, encoded by EPAS1) is a catabolic transcription factor in the osteoarthritic process. HIF-2alpha directly induces the expression in chondrocytes of genes encoding catabolic factors, including matrix metalloproteinases (MMP1, MMP3, MMP9, MMP12 and MMP13), aggrecanase-1 (ADAMTS4), nitric oxide synthase-2 (NOS2) and prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase-2 (PTGS2). HIF-2alpha expression was markedly increased in human and mouse osteoarthritic cartilage, and its ectopic expression triggered articular cartilage destruction in mice and rabbits. Moreover, mice transgenic for Epas1 only in chondrocytes showed spontaneous cartilage destruction, whereas heterozygous genetic deletion of Epas1 in mice suppressed cartilage destruction caused by destabilization of the medial meniscus (DMM) or collagenase injection, with concomitant modulation of catabolic factors. Our results collectively demonstrate that HIF-2alpha causes cartilage destruction by regulating crucial catabolic genes.
Section 1361 protects "any property" of the United States or an agency or department thereof, or any property being manufactured or constructed for the United States or an agency or department thereof, from willful depredation or attempted depredation. "Depredation" has been characterized as the act of plundering, robbing, pillaging or laying waste. United States v. Jenkins, 554 F.2d 783, 786 (6th Cir. 1977); cf. Deal v. United States, 274 U.S. 277, 283 (1927) ("depredation" defined in context of postal statute). This section prohibits actual physical damage or destruction of both real and personal property, but mere adverse possession of that property without physical harm is insufficient to violate the law. United States v. Jenkins, supra, 554 F.2d at 785. Section 1361 is a specific intent crime, see United States v. Jones, 607 F.2d 269, 273-74 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1085 (1980), and the government must prove that the defendant acted willfully; that is intentionally, with knowledge that he/she is violating a law. United States v. Simpson, 460 F.2d 515, 518 (9th Cir. 1972); United States v. Moylan, 417 F.2d 1002, 1004 (4th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 910 (1970). The government is not required to prove that defendant knew the property belonged to the government, because government ownership is "merely a 'jurisdictional fact'." United States v. LaPorta, 46 F.3d 152, 158 (2d Cir. 1994), quoting United States v. Feola, 420 U.S. 671 (1975). In fact, title or possession by the United States is not a necessary element of this offense, if the property in question was being made for the United States. The government must present evidence establishing value of damage. United States v. Seaman, 18 F.3d 649, 651 (9th Cir. 1994). The penalties for violations of this section are tied to the extent of the property damage. As amended on September 13, 1994, if the damage exceeds $100, the defendant is subject to a fine of up to $250,000, ten years imprisonment, or both. See Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-322, 330016, 108 Stat. 1796, 2146-47 (1994). When property damage does not exceed $100, the offense is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $100,000, one year imprisonment, or both. See 18 U.S.C. 3559(a), 3571.
The Data Destruction Document is a best practices guide on properly destroying sensitive student data after it is no longer needed. It details the life cycle of data and discusses various legal requirements relating to the destruction of data under FERPA, and examines a variety of methods for properly destroying data. The guide also discusses best practices for data destruction and provides some real-world examples of how to implement it within your organization.
The DHS Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office (CWMD) works to prevent attacks against the United States using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) through timely, responsive support to operational partners.
Rhabdomyolysis is a clinical syndrome that comprises destruction of skeletal muscle with outflow of intracellular muscle content into the bloodstream. There is a great heterogeneity in the literature regarding definition, epidemiology, and treatment. The aim of this systematic literature review was to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the epidemiologic data, definition, and management of rhabdomyolysis.
Regardless of the cause of rhabdomyolysis, the pathophysiology of muscle destruction follows a common pathway. The muscle cell is affected either by direct cell membrane destruction or by energy depletion . Free ionized calcium enters the intracellular space and activates proteases and apoptosis pathways . Production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) leads to mitochondrial dysfunction and ultimately to cell death [2, 37].
Acute kidney injury in rhabdomyolysis. Enzymes*: creatine kinase, aldolase, lactate dehydrogenase. After muscle destruction, myoglobin and enzymes released into the circulation damage capillaries, leading to leakage and edema. Hypovolemia and the decrease in renal bood flow is associated with acute kidney injury. Myoglobin cytotoxicity affects the kidney by lipid peroxidation and production of reactive oxygen species. Tubular obstruction by myoglobin is also associated with AKI
The presence of AKI may be accompanied by excessive potassium levels, correlating with the degree of muscle destruction. These levels should be followed closely due to the risk of cardiac dysrhythmias . Serial electrocardiography studies should also be performed to detect abnormalities secondary to electrolyte disturbances .
We welcome drop-offs at our Palatine facility as well as a monthly container rental that we can pick-up and change-out. Our clients are involved in the pick-up, preparation, sorting, and destruction of the documents.
While some certification schemes have strong standards, weak implementation combined with a lack of transparency and product traceability means even these schemes have major failings. Too many certified companies continue to be linked to forest and ecosystem destruction, land disputes and human rights abuses. Currently, certification enables destructive businesses to continue operating as usual. By improving the image of forest and ecosystem risk commodities and so stimulating demand, certification risks actually increasing the harm caused by the expansion of commodity production. Certification schemes thus end up greenwashing products linked to deforestation, ecosystem destruction and rights abuses.
AllStars can also eject from their vehicles, whether it be voluntarily or upon destruction. This causes AllStars to be on foot in the arena, during which they are vulnerable to opponents' vehicles, though they can dodge them by jumping or rolling. To make up for it, each AllStar has unique skills that can turn the battle to their favor, in addition to the ability to jump onto an opponent's vehicle and either take over or instantly destroy it. For instance, Shyft has the ability to go invisible and render himself invisible to opponents' radar, while Lupita has the ability to leave a trail of fire on her path. While on foot, AllStars can also freely navigate the arena to collect shards on their way, set up retractable traps to defend themselves, or simply find another vehicle.
The intent is the most difficult element to determine. To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group. It is this special intent, or dolus specialis, that makes the crime of genocide so unique. In addition, case law has associated intent with the existence of a State or organizational plan or policy, even if the definition of genocide in international law does not include that element.
The final shred size requirements must be met prior to release of the shred to an unprotected environment, such as landfill. An agency or, legally authorized agency contractor, including a NAID contractor, may shred to a larger size if the paper is protected as it moves through the process until final Safeguards compliant destruction is attained.
Verification of the sanitization and disposal process is an essential step in assuring media was properly sanitized. A representative sampling of media should be tested after sanitization has been completed. As required by Publication 1075, Section 2.F.3, every third piece of physical electronic media should be checked to ensure appropriate destruction of FTI.
The Department of Justice, State tax agencies and the Social Security Administration may be exempted from the requirement of having agency personnel present during destruction by a contractor, if the contract or SLA includes the safeguard provisions required by the Code of Treasury Regulations (CTR) 301.6103(n)-1. The required safeguard language is contained in Exhibit 7, Contract Language for General Services.
Destruction of FTI should be certified by the contractor when agency participation is not present and signed documentation must be provided to the agency. It is recommended the agency periodically observe the process to ensure compliance with security of FTI until it reaches a non-disclosable state and an approved destruction method is utilized.
Furthermore, agencies must report on disposal of FTI as part of the annual Safeguard Security Report (SSR). The SSR requires agencies to summarize the amount and method of destruction of FTI (paper and/or electronic, including backup tapes) disposed during the processing period. The description may be a summary from logs which track FTI from receipt through destruction. Agencies need to ensure that their system of record for documentation of the destruction of electronic media will provide them with appropriate information for the annual SSR.