SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Sweeney C) ;lar1:(uu)"

Sökning: WFRF:(Sweeney C) > Uppsala universitet

  • Resultat 1-3 av 3
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  • Clack, Christopher T. M., et al. (författare)
  • Evaluation of a proposal for reliable low-cost grid power with 100% wind, water, and solar
  • 2017
  • Ingår i: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. - : NATL ACAD SCIENCES. - 0027-8424 .- 1091-6490. ; 114:26, s. 6722-6727
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • A number of analyses, meta-analyses, and assessments, including those performed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and the International Energy Agency, have concluded that deployment of a diverse portfolio of clean energy technologies makes a transition to a low-carbon-emission energy system both more feasible and less costly than other pathways. In contrast, Jacobson et al. [Jacobson MZ, Delucchi MA, Cameron MA, Frew BA (2015) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112(49): 15060-15065] argue that it is feasible to provide "low-cost solutions to the grid reliability problem with 100% penetration of WWS [wind, water and solar power] across all energy sectors in the continental United States between 2050 and 2055", with only electricity and hydrogen as energy carriers. In this paper, we evaluate that study and find significant shortcomings in the analysis. In particular, we point out that this work used invalid modeling tools, contained modeling errors, and made implausible and inadequately supported assumptions. Policy makers should treat with caution any visions of a rapid, reliable, and low-cost transition to entire energy systems that relies almost exclusively on wind, solar, and hydroelectric power.
  •  
2.
  • Holmes, Emily A., et al. (författare)
  • Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic : a call for action for mental health science
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Lancet psychiatry. - 2215-0374 .- 2215-0366. ; 7:6, s. 547-560
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.
  •  
3.
  • Lee, Jung Eun, et al. (författare)
  • Fat, Protein, and Meat Consumption and Renal Cell Cancer Risk : A Pooled Analysis of 13 Prospective Studies
  • 2008
  • Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC. - 0027-8874 .- 1460-2105. ; 100:23, s. 1695-1706
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Results of several case-control studies suggest that high consumption of meat (all meat, red meat, or processed meat) is associated with an increased risk of renal cell cancer, but only a few prospective studies have examined the associations of intakes of meat, fat, and protein with renal cell cancer. We conducted a pooled analysis of 13 prospective studies that included 530 469 women and 244 483 men and had follow-up times of up to 7-20 years to examine associations between meat, fat, and protein intakes and the risk of renal cell cancer. All participants had completed a validated food frequency questionnaire at study entry. Using the primary data from each study, we calculated the study-specific relative risks (RRs) for renal cell cancer by using Cox proportional hazards models and then pooled these RRs by using a random-effects model. All statistical tests were two-sided. A total of 1478 incident cases of renal cell cancer were identified (709 in women and 769 in men). We observed statistically significant positive associations or trends in pooled age-adjusted models for intakes of total fat, saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, polyunsaturated fat, cholesterol, total protein, and animal protein. However, these associations were attenuated and no longer statistically significant after adjusting for body mass index, fruit and vegetable intake, and alcohol intake. For example, the pooled age-adjusted RR of renal cell cancer for the highest vs the lowest quintile of intake for total fat was 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08 to 1.56; P-trend = .001) and for total protein was 1.17 (95% CI = 0.99 to 1.38; P-trend = .02). By comparison, the pooled multivariable RR for the highest vs the lowest quintile of total fat intake was 1.10 (95% CI = 0.92 to 1.32; P-trend = .31) and of total protein intake was 1.06 (95% CI = 0.89 to 1.26; P-trend = .37). Intakes of red meat, processed meat, poultry, or seafood were not associated with the risk of renal cell cancer. Intakes of fat and protein or their subtypes, red meat, processed meat, poultry, and seafood are not associated with risk of renal cell cancer.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-3 av 3

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy