Search results

This paper aims to briefly review the history and future expectations for space tourism.

Historical review.

After a series of successes in space travel, culminating by the Apollo 11 Moon landings in 1969, governmental efforts at space travel stalled. In the early twenty-first century, private entrepreneurs inspired new life into space travel and tourism, offering commercial suborbital trips, but none have as yet actually taken place. However, despite impediments, a significant expansion of space travel and tourism is expected to occur in the course of the twenty-first century.

The paper offers a synoptic view of past and projected future developments in space travel and tourism.

In the year 1900 Koch expressed the view that human and bovine tuberculosis were distinct diseases, that the bacillus of bovine tuberculosis could not produce this disease in the human subject, and that the bacillus of human tuberculosis could not set it up in the bovine species. As is now well known. these conclusions have not received the slightest confirmation from other workers in the same field, and it may be said that the consensus of scientific opinion is now to the effect that the bacilli of human and bovine tuberculosis are identical—at any rate, so far as the effects attributed to them are concerned. The Royal Commission appointed in 1901, and consisting of the late Sir MICHAEL FOSTER, Drs. SIMS WOODHEAD, SIDNEY MARTIN, MACFADYEAN, and BOYCE, have issued a further interim report on their investigations. The first interim report was published in 1904, the conclusions stated in it being to the effect that the human and animal diseases were identical, and that no characteristics by which the one could be distinguished from the other had been discovered. The report now issued shows that these conclusions are confirmed by the results of a very large number of fresh experiments. The main conclusions set forth in the present report are as understated :—

The Milk and Dairies Bill introduced by Mr. SAMUEL aims at securing better inspection of dairies, including all premises in which milk is obtained, stored, or sold, such as cowsheds, milk depots, and milk shops. It also aims at the tracing of impure milk and the prevention of its infection, as well as the elimination of cows yielding tuberculous milk.

This study examined the relationship between safety climate and employees' voluntary work behaviours (i.e. organisational citizenship behaviour and counterproductive work behaviour). It also examined the moderating role of employees' voice on the relationship between safety climate and employees' voluntary work behaviours.

Using the quantitative survey research design, data were collected from 220 respondents from three manufacturing companies in Accra, Ghana. Pearson's correlation test (r) and hierarchical multiple regression were used for data analysis.

Results showed that safety climate plays a significant role in predicting employees' voluntary work behaviours. Also, employees' voice was found to moderate the relationship between safety climate and organisational citizenship behaviour but does not moderate the relationship between safety climate and counterproductive work behaviour.

Data was collected from manufacturing firms in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana; hence, the findings may be limited to just the manufacturing industry in the Ghanaian setting.

This paper positions safety climate as a catalyst for positive voluntary work behaviours in the workplace and an antidote to negative workplace behaviours. It also highlights the role of employees' voice in enhancing positive voluntary workplace behaviours of employees.

The British Food Journal is in no way concerned with politics, and as it would appear that the propositions put forward by Mr. CHAMBERLAIN are commonly regarded as constituting matter for political controversy instead of being looked upon as subjects for serious investigation and discussion entirely outside the field of politics, it would be an undesirable course and one likely to be misunderstood and, no doubt, misrepresented, were we to refer to the great question which is now before the country without plainly indicating at the outset that we have no intention of supporting or opposing any political party or any section of politicians. We believe Mr. CHAMBERLAIN'S suggestion that the subjects which he has brought forward should be discussed on a higher plane than on the muddy plane of party politics was a reasonable and proper suggestion which all men of sense who are not blinded by political bias should applaud and endeavour to adopt. We do not mean to say that problems of so complicated a character are capable of being accurately solved, in the present state of knowledge, by scientific methods other than actual experiment. They certainly cannot be solved by abstract discussions of a pseudo‐scientific character. The factors which enter into the problems of political economy are so numerous, so complex, and so little understood, that to endeavour to argue even on the basis of what are alleged by political economists to be well‐ascertained facts in the so‐called “dismal science” is to lay oneself open to the charge of theorising from insufficient data. HERBERT SPENCER has lucidly demonstrated the universality of this scientific crime. On comparatively simple subjects, in regard to which a man has no special knowledge, he will, if possessed of the quality known as common sense, generally decline to deliver oracular opinions; but, let a subject be sufficiently complex and let the data relating to it be few, obscure, and uncertain, then decisive opinions will be delivered by all and sundry,—and the more profound the ignorance the more decisive will be the expression of opinion.

In the present European crisis every intelligent individual of British birth must feel that a tremendous debt of gratitude is due to the British Navy, which, by keeping open the lines of traffic across the seas, has ensured the supply of daily food to the country. Although this journal does not concern itself with political matters, it does concern itself with the question of the maintenance of an efficient food supply in this country at all times, and the one question is indissolubly bound up with the other. Few people probably have any idea of the enormous extent to which they are dependent for the very food which nourishes them upon the ships that enter London and other ports of the English coast. Every day in the year nearly three‐quarters of a million pounds' worth of provisions are imported into this country, in addition to what we actually produce ourselves, and last year no less than two and a quarter million tons of grain, 360,000 tons of chilled and frozen beef and mutton, 170,000 tons of tea, 250,000 tons of sugar, and many other foods in proportion, were landed in the port of London alone. These figures, in view of the present crisis, completely shatter the absurd position of the “Little Navy” nincompoops.

We publish this month a report of a case which was recently heard by the Stipendiary at Middlesbrough, in which a Co‐operative Society was summoned for being in possession of meat which was condemned as tuberculous and as unfit for human food. In view of the magisterial decision, it is of interest to review the facts of the case. It appears that Inspector WATSON visited the defendant society's slaughter‐house, and that he saw there several carcases hanging up and an employee dressing a carcase which was obviously tuberculous. In reply to Inspector WATSON'S demand, the internal organs of the animal were produced and were found to be covered with tuberculous nodules. Dr. DINGLE, the Medical Officer of Health, accompanied by Mr. G. ANDERSON, the Chief Sanitary Inspector, subsequently visited the slaughter‐house and agreed that the carcase was undoubtedly tuberculous and quite unfit for human food. Accordingly they seized the carcase which was subsequently condemned by order of the magistrate. When the defendant society was summoned before the Court, the counsel for the prosecution pointed out that when Inspector ANDERSON visited the slaughter‐house he asked the slaughterer why he had continued dressing the carcase when it was obvious to anyone that the meat was tuberculous. The condition of the carcase was not disputed by the defendants, but it was contended that the slaughter‐house was under the control of the manager and that no carcase would be removed until it had been inspected by him. In view of this contention for the defence, the magistrate held that it had not been proved that the meat was intended for human food, despite the fact that the diseased internal organs had been removed, and that the carcase had been dressed as if it were intended for use as food. If the decision in all such cases rested upon evidence of a similar nature, it is obvious that the Public Health Acts would become inefficient and useless, inasmuch as it would only be necessary for a defendant to state that any diseased meat found in his slaughter‐house was awaiting the inspection of the manager, and then the law could not interfere. Such a condition of things would obviously be unsatisfactory. The Stipendiary observed that the prosecution was justified, and commended the ability with which the Health Department carried on its work.

The decision of the Wolverhampton Stipendiary in the case of “Skim‐milk Cheese” is, at any rate, clearly put. It is a trial case, and, like most trial cases, the reasons for the judgment have to be based upon first principles of common‐sense, occasionally aided, but more often complicated, by already existing laws, which apply more or less to the case under discussion. The weak point in this particular case is the law which has just come into force, in which cheese is defined as the substance “usually known as cheese” by the public and any others interested in cheese. This reliance upon the popular fancy reads almost like our Government's war policy and “the man in the street,” and is a shining example of a trustful belief in the average common‐sense. Unfortunately, the general public have no direct voice in a police court, and so the “usually known as cheese” phrase is translated according to the fancy and taste of the officials and defending solicitors who may happen to be concerned with any particular case. Not having the general public to consult, the officials in this case had a war of dictionaries which would have gladdened the heart of Dr. JOHNSON; and the outcome of much travail was the following definition: cheese is “ coagulated milk or curd pressed into a solid mass.” So far so good, but immediately a second definition question cropped up—namely, What is “milk?”—and it is at this point that the mistake occurred. There is no legal definition of new milk, but it has been decided, and is accepted without dispute, that the single word “milk” means an article of well‐recognised general properties, and which has a lower limit of composition below which it ceases to be correctly described by the one word “milk,” and has to be called “skim‐milk,” “separated milk,” “ milk and water,” or other distinguishing names. The lower limits of fat and solids‐not‐fat are recognised universally by reputable public analysts, but there has been no upper limit of fat fixed. Therefore, by the very definition quoted by the stipendiary, an article made from “skim‐milk” is not cheese, for “skim‐milk” is not “milk.” The argument that Stilton cheese is not cheese because there is too much fat would not hold, for there is no legal upper limit for fat; but if it did hold, it does not matter, for it can be, and is, sold as “Stilton” cheese, without any hardship to anyone. The last suggestion made by the stipendiary would, if carried out, afford some protection to the general public against their being cheated when they buy cheese. This suggestion is that the Board of Agriculture, who by the Act of 1899 have the legal power, should determine a lower limit of fat which can be present in cheese made from milk; but, as we have repeatedly pointed out, it is by the adoption of the Control system that such questions can alone be settled to the advantage of the producer of genuine articles and to that of the public.