#Anti ageing treatment Dublin

[lisathompsonaesthetics]

Aesthetic Clinic: Why Is It Better Than a Normal Salon?

Experts in minimally invasive or completely non-surgical treatments can be found in an aesthetic clinic. While they might also provide pampering services, the primary goals of aesthetic treatments are anti-ageing therapies and the reduction of signs of ageing. The treatments include facials, fillers, and botox!  

Many now favour aesthetic clinics over traditional salons, as they have become more and more well-liked in Dublin. We will explain why there has been such a change from traditional salons to aesthetic salons in this blog! 

Certified Medical Professionals 

One of the biggest benefits of visiting an aesthetic clinic is being treated by certified doctors! These procedures involve delicate materials and techniques.

 Medical professionals are trained to employ the newest tools and technologies to provide patients with the exact answers they have been seeking. 

Medical Facilities and High-Grade Items 

Given that aesthetic treatments can be either surgical or non-surgical, a Dublin aesthetic treatment clinic should be equipped with clinical equipment and medical-grade facilities. 

You can be confident that delicate and precise procedures like fillers will be carried out safely and provide the exact result you have been looking for because the doctors are qualified and experienced professionals. 

Modern Apparatus and Technology 

Every day, you will read in the newspapers or magazines about some new advancements in cosmetic technology. The good news is that these treatments will also be available at aesthetic clinics! 

Aesthetic clinics are becoming more and more popular because they provide longer-lasting results with less recovery time! You only need to make one trip to the aesthetic clinic every few weeks; you do not have to visit the salon every day! 

Where Can I Find the Best Aesthetic Clinic in Dublin? 

When we consider an aesthetic clinic, we should keep in mind the sensitivity of the procedures and the importance of having a certified doctor, as mentioned before. You can eliminate the hassle and the tension by calling Lisa Thompson Aesthetics! They are the premier aesthetic clinic in Dublin, with cutting-edge technology and certified doctors. 

[gaskincare]

Why Visit Skin Clinic In Dublin? 

Are you a Dublin resident? If yes, then you don’t need to roam anywhere for advanced toxin treatments in Dublin. The best skin clinics in Dublin offer great and amazing services to people who are looking for radiant and flawless skin like never before. 

So let us dive deeper into this blog and learn more about the Dublin skin clinics. 

Is Skin Care Necessary?

Yes, Skincare is a necessary routine for proper health and well-being: 

Prevention of skin cancer: Protects the body from harmful UV rays, so one has to always protect his skin using sunscreen for everyday activities. One can also wear a brimmed hat as well as cloth that protects from sun UV light.

Dry skin: Moisturizing acts as an avoidance measure for dry skin hence making skin prone to cracks that predispose to infection.

Anti-aging: As you get older, your skin loses collagen and elastin which may lead to wrinkling and bruising.

Skin barrier: Skin serves as a barrier to your internal systems, so it continues protecting it by taking proper care of it.

Acne prevention: Proper skin care prevents acne.

What Does Skin Clinic Dublin do?

Many of the reasons for regular visits to skin care specialists go beyond superficial cosmetic considerations. At Skin Clinics in Dublin, the emphasis on holistic health and personalized attention sets the standard of distinction in quality service for skin care. By gifting yourself with preventive care, targeted treatments, and a patient-centric approach, you can really develop your skin and unlock the full range of benefits from regular visits to skin care specialists. This has made the centers of advanced toxin treatment in Dublin the gateways to radiant and healthy skin, all under the plank of expertise and transformative care.

Facilities Offered by Skin Clinics in Dublin

Along with the expert team, skin clinics in Dublin have great facilities to offer. Here are some of the primary services:

PRP Facial Treatment.

Dermal Fillers.

Anti-wrinkle Injections.

Medical grade microneedling.

Philart Polynucleotide booster.

Advanced toxin treatment. 

Mesotherapy.

Valmont Spa.

Restylane Skin Boosters.

Fat-dissolving injections.

Restylane skin boosters.

Profile Treatment.

GA facial treatments. 

Why Choose GA Skin Care?

At GA Skincare we spend ourselves bringing out the best from the heart of Dublin in St Stephen's Shopping Centre. We offer advanced skincare routines with high-quality products and aesthetic treatments including anti-wrinkle injections, dermal fillers, and medical-grade microneedling. We also offer luxurious facial treatments and Valmont SPA treatments. As all our clients are matched with among the best professional practitioners in their field, we tend to focus more on superior results, using the leading global skincare brands such as Zo Skin Health, SkinCeuticals, Valmont, and many others to give our clients only high-class experiences. 

Conclusion 

After going through this blog, I hope now you understand why Skincare consultation is an essential tool to help you understand the state of your skin as well as recommend good products to use. It assists one in assessing your skin requirements possibly in relation to some factors such as lifestyle and the surrounding environment to help him/her achieve healthy skin. It helps people get expert advice for the betterment of their skin. 

[ptsalon123]

Best Facial Salon in Dublin, CA: Your Guide to Glowing Skin

Dublin, CA, a vibrant city in the heart of the San Francisco Bay Area, is home to many top-notch beauty and wellness centers. When it comes to achieving glowing, healthy skin, finding the best facial salon is key. Whether you’re looking for a relaxing spa experience or a targeted treatment for specific skin concerns, Dublin offers a variety of salons that cater to all your skincare needs. Here’s your guide to finding the best facial salon in Dublin, CA.

Why Getting a Facial is Important

Facials are more than just a luxury; they are an essential part of maintaining healthy, radiant skin. Here’s why you should consider incorporating facials into your skincare routine:

1. Deep CleansingFacials provide a deep cleanse that goes beyond what you can achieve at home. They remove dirt, oil, and impurities that clog pores, leading to clearer, healthier skin.

2. ExfoliationExfoliating treatments during a facial help remove dead skin cells, promoting cell turnover and revealing a brighter, smoother complexion.

3. Anti-Aging BenefitsMany facials include anti-aging treatments that help reduce fine lines, wrinkles, and age spots. Regular facials can keep your skin looking youthful and radiant.

4. Customized SkincareA professional facial is tailored to your skin type and concerns. Whether you have dry, oily, sensitive, or combination skin, a skilled esthetician will choose the right products and techniques to address your specific needs.

5. Stress ReliefFacials are not only beneficial for your skin but also provide a relaxing, stress-relieving experience. The soothing environment and gentle massage can help you unwind and rejuvenate.

Top Facial Salons in Dublin, CA

1. The Rouge Esthetics and SpaKnown for its personalized approach and high-quality treatments, The Rouge Esthetics and Spa is a favorite among Dublin residents. They offer a wide range of facials, including deep cleansing, hydrating, and anti-aging treatments. The spa uses top-notch skincare products, ensuring that your skin receives the best care possible.

2. LaBelle Day Spas & SalonsWith a reputation for excellence, LaBelle Day Spas & Salons offers luxurious facials that leave your skin glowing and refreshed. Their skilled estheticians customize each treatment to suit your skin type and concerns, from acne-prone to mature skin. The tranquil environment and professional service make this a top choice for those seeking a premium facial experience.

3. Skin ReflectionsIf you’re looking for advanced skincare solutions, Skin Reflections is the place to go. This salon specializes in medical-grade facials that target specific skin issues such as hyperpigmentation, fine lines, and acne. Their knowledgeable staff and state-of-the-art equipment ensure that you receive effective, results-driven treatments.

4. The Bloom Room EstheticsThe Bloom Room Esthetics offers a range of organic and holistic facial treatments that focus on nourishing and rejuvenating the skin. Their facials are designed to be gentle yet effective, using natural products that are free from harsh chemicals. This salon is ideal for those who prefer a more natural approach to skincare.

5. Rejuvenate Day SpaRejuvenate Day Spa is known for its calming ambiance and expert skincare services. Their facial treatments are tailored to your needs, whether you’re looking to hydrate, brighten, or detoxify your skin. The spa’s experienced estheticians take the time to understand your skin concerns and recommend the best treatments for optimal results.

How to Choose the Best Facial Salon in Dublin, CA

1. Read Reviews and TestimonialsBefore booking an appointment, take the time to read reviews and testimonials from previous clients. This can give you insight into the quality of service, the expertise of the staff, and the overall experience at the salon.

2. Consider the Range of ServicesLook for a salon that offers a variety of facial treatments, from basic cleansing facials to advanced anti-aging and acne treatments. A salon with a comprehensive menu ensures that you can find the right facial for your needs.

3. Check the Products UsedThe quality of products used in your facial can make a significant difference in the results. Opt for salons that use high-quality, professional-grade skincare products, especially if you have sensitive skin or specific concerns.

4. Experience and Expertise of EstheticiansThe skill and knowledge of the esthetician are crucial for a successful facial. Choose a salon where the staff is well-trained, experienced, and able to provide personalized advice and treatments.

5. Ambiance and CleanlinessA clean, relaxing environment is essential for an enjoyable facial experience. Visit the salon beforehand if possible, or take a virtual tour on their website to ensure that the ambiance meets your expectations.

Conclusion

Finding the best facial salon in Dublin, CA, is key to achieving healthy, glowing skin. Whether you prefer a luxurious spa experience or a more targeted, medical-grade treatment, Dublin has a salon that will meet your skincare needs. By considering factors like reviews, services offered, and the expertise of estheticians, you can choose the perfect place to pamper your skin and enjoy a radiant complexion.

[repromed15062023]

Unlocking Fertility Insights: The Role of AMH Testing in Reproductive Health

Understanding AMH Testing

AMH testing has revolutionized the way we assess female fertility and ovarian reserve. As one of the most reliable indicators of a woman's reproductive potential, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels in the blood provide valuable insights into ovarian function and egg supply. This article delves into the significance of AMH testing in reproductive health and fertility planning.

Deciphering AMH: A Key to Ovarian Reserve

AMH, produced by cells within the ovarian follicles, reflects the number of small follicles containing eggs in a woman's ovaries. Since these follicles represent the ovarian reserve, AMH levels offer critical information about a woman's reproductive capacity. Unlike other hormones that fluctuate throughout the menstrual cycle, AMH levels remain relatively stable, making it a reliable marker for ovarian reserve assessment.

The Importance of AMH Testing in Fertility Planning

The AMH fertility test serves several essential purposes in fertility planning:

Predicting Response to Fertility Treatment: For women undergoing assisted reproductive technologies such as IVF, an AMH test helps predict how ovaries will respond to stimulation medications, guiding treatment protocols and optimizing outcomes.

Assessing Age-related Fertility Decline: While age remains the most significant factor in female fertility, AMH testing provides additional insights, especially for women with irregular menstrual cycles or other fertility concerns.

Identifying Ovarian Dysfunction: Abnormal AMH levels can indicate underlying ovarian dysfunction or conditions such as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), prompting further evaluation and treatment.

The AMH Testing Process

An AMH blood test involves a simple blood draw, typically performed on any day of the menstrual cycle. The blood sample is then analyzed in a laboratory to measure AMH levels. Results are usually available within a few days and are interpreted in conjunction with other fertility assessments, such as ultrasound evaluations and hormone tests.

Where to Access AMH Testing

In Ireland, accessing an anti mullerian hormone test is convenient, with many fertility clinics and reproductive health centers offering this service. Reputable clinics like ReproMed Ireland in Dublin specialize in comprehensive fertility assessments, including AMH testing. These clinics provide expert interpretation of results and personalized fertility consultations to guide individuals on their fertility journey.

Interpreting AMH Test Results

AMH test Ireland results are typically reported in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL). While interpretation may vary based on factors such as age and menstrual cycle regularity, generally:

High AMH Levels: High AMH levels may indicate a robust ovarian reserve, which can be advantageous for fertility treatment but may also be associated with conditions such as PCOS.

Low AMH Levels: Low AMH levels may suggest diminished ovarian reserve, potentially impacting natural conception and response to fertility treatment.

AMH test Dublin plays a pivotal role in assessing ovarian reserve and guiding fertility planning. By providing valuable insights into ovarian function and egg supply, AMH testing empowers individuals to make informed decisions about family planning and fertility treatment. With AMH testing readily available in Ireland, individuals can proactively manage their reproductive health and take proactive steps toward achieving their family-building goals.

[scienceandskincare]

Kiehls Launches 1L Refillable's For It's Best Sellers

Kiehls Launches 1L Refillable’s For It’s Best Sellers

Since 1851, Kiehl’s has always strived for better. From responsible formulations, packaging &manufacturing, to supporting communities and helping to reduce environmental impact. Kiehl’s is proud to continue its journey towards a Future Made BetterTM with its first foray into refillable beauty. Kiehls New refillable 1L products The NEW Kiehl’s Pouch Refillables are apart of their ever-evolving…

[corkcitylibraries]

Betty Friedan and Second Wave Feminism in the USA and Ireland

by Deirdre Swain

The Cork City Reference Library holds a large collection of books about feminism, particularly Irish feminism. BorrowBox also possesses a range of eBooks on feminism that were published in the last 7 years. In this article, I will discuss Betty Friedan, a well-known American feminist who was born in February 1921, and the second-wave feminist movement in Ireland. I will then introduce a reading list of books on feminism which are available on BorrowBox. I will also provide a reading list of books on feminism which will be available in the Reference Library once it re-opens to the public.

Betty Friedan and Second Wave Feminism in the USA

The recent TV drama, Mrs. America depicts the struggle to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment in the USA in the 1970s. The popularity of this TV series demonstrates a renewed interest in the women’s liberation movement and certain prominent and influential American feminists, namely Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm and Bella Abzug.

February 2021 marks the 100th anniversary of the birth of Betty Friedan, one of these second wave feminists and author of the seminal feminist text, The Feminine Mystique. She was born Bettye Naomi Goldstein to a Jewish family in Peoria, Illinois on 4 February 1921. Her mother, Miriam Horwitz, was an unhappy housewife whose parents, Hungarian Jewish immigrants, did not allow her to go to university. Miriam encouraged Betty to do the opposite, and she strongly supported her daughter’s education. Betty went to university in Smith College, graduating in 1942. She then studied Psychology in the University of California, Berkeley, for a year. Thereafter, she worked as a journalist in New York, writing about the Jim Crow laws and anti-Semitism. Later, she worked as a women’s magazine writer. In 1949, she married Carl Friedman (later Friedan), and they had 3 children. They got divorced in 1969.

In 1957, Betty attended the 15th anniversary of her graduation from Smith College. At this reunion, she conducted a survey on her former fellow students (females) to explore the direction of their lives since graduation. She was perturbed by the amount of discontent among them. This revelation about the lives of her peers led to the writing of her book, The Feminine Mystique. This publication recounts the dilemma of suburban housewives, who are expected to spend all of their time on domestic duties and the rearing of children. They are overshadowed constantly by the thought, “Is this it?” They feel guilty for not being satisfied with their role, but they cannot deny the fact that they are unfulfilled. The “feminine mystique” of the book’s title is the societal assumption that household duties and motherhood alone will give women a sense of achievement. Friedan coined the phrase “the problem with no name” to describe women’s unhappiness with and inability to live up to this feminine mystique. She contended that women could have a successful career as well as a family.

The book sold three million copies and resonated with many suburban women because it showed them that they were not alone in their feelings of dissatisfaction. It was also strongly criticised for its homophobic language and for excluding Black and working class women. It spoke from a standpoint where every American housewife was white and middle class. Her solution to the problem of “the feminine mystique” (delegating housework) were also criticised for being inadequate and for failing to tackle the problem fully.

Friedan was aware of some of the shortcomings of The Feminine Mystique, and she wrote a second book to tackle some of the problems not resolved in the first one, including the double enslavement of working women who still had to do all the housework. The title of this book is The Second Stage. She also wrote numerous other books, including It Changed My Life: Writings on the Women’s Movement, which was published in 1976 and Beyond Gender: the New Politics of Family and Work, which was published in 1998.

Betty Friedan was a women’s activist and fought for reproductive rights, equal pay, equal representation and equality in hiring. She co-founded the National Organisation for Women (NOW) in 1966. In 1969, she launched the National Association for Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL Pro-Choice America). She co-founded the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) with Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug and several other women in 1971. The NWPC is a US organisation which supports and trains women who seek elected and appointed offices in all levels of government. Betty was quick-tempered, and she tended to lash out at people, including other feminists such as Gloria Steinem, even though they had similar aspirations for women. She was also quite disparaging in her treatment of lesbian women, referring to them as “the lavender menace”.

Later in her life, Friedan became a Zionist and fought to expose Anti-Semitism in the women’s movement. She received the Eleanor Roosevelt Leadership Award in 1989 and was awarded honorary degrees by the State University of New York and Columbia University. She died on her birthday, 4 February, in Washington DC in 2006, aged 85.

What advances for women were taking place in Ireland during the time of Betty Friedan’s activism in the United States?

The Irish Women’s Liberation Movement

In the summer of 1970, five women met in Bewley’s café in Dublin and decided that it was time for some drastic changes in Irish women’s lives; time to fight for equal rights. That day, these women held what was to be the first meeting of the Irish Women’s Liberation Movement (IWLM) group, the first radical women’s liberation group in Ireland. Although the group lasted little more than seven months, its legacy changed women’s lives significantly and positively. As proof of the success of the IWLM, the two injustices that this group fought hardest against – the marriage bar, which was abolished in 1973, and the illegality of contraception – are unimaginable in today’s world.

Margaret Gaj owned the restaurant, Gaj’s, on Baggot Street, where the IWLM would meet every Monday night. Margaret Gaj was passionate about women’s rights. Her circle of friends included Sinn Féin official Máirín de Búrca, journalist Mary Maher, who was interested in socialist issues, Máirín Johnston, who was a member of the Communist Party and who was also active in the Labour Party and Dr. Moira Woods, who was in an organisation called Irish Voice on Vietnam, which protested against the war in Vietnam. These five women started the IWLM group that day in the summer of 1970 in Bewley’s café, but around a dozen women were actively involved in the founding of this women’s organisation, the majority of them journalists. Nell McCafferty and Mary Kenny, both journalists, were two prominent founders of the IWLM.

Chains or Change was the title of the IWLM charter. It was put together in the form of a booklet which detailed the goals and ideals that the IWLM strove for. There were 6 demands: equal pay; an end to the marriage bar that kept women from working after they got married; equal rights in law; justice for widows, deserted wives and “unmarried mothers”; equal education opportunities; and the legalisation of contraception. Neither abortion nor divorce were mentioned at all in Chains or Change. When the most basic civil rights for women were being fought for, abortion and divorce did not even arise because they were not considered to be a priority. The booklet was a milestone in the history of women’s rights in Ireland, because it was the first time that anyone had published a comprehensive list of the injustices that church, state and social code perpetuated against women.

Nell McCafferty

Nell McCafferty was born in Derry. She got her degree from Queen’s University in Belfast and trained as a teacher, but she could not get a job in Derry, because the Protestant schools knew she was Catholic, and the Catholic schools did not think she was a real Catholic but, rather, a communist. She moved to Dublin to work as a journalist for the Irish Times. Nell writes in her autobiography of an incident from when she first moved to Dublin; she wanted to buy a record player on hire purchase but was told that no woman could sign an agreement without the co-signature of a male guarantor. A male stranger signed for her because she did not know any men in Dublin. This man was unemployed, and her own earnings amounted to five times more than his welfare entitlements.

Nell was a founding member of the Irish Women’s Liberation Movement (IWLM). In the IWLM, Nell was someone who could be depended upon to put forward forceful arguments that were backed up by accurate facts, and she could convey them both in writing and in person.          

Nell’s journalism was objective, and she used it to bear witness to the struggles of the oppressed. She did not even have to give her opinion; her writing style and her description of what she observed in society were enough to expose hypocrisy and injustice without her having to comment on the issues herself. As well as being a feminist activist, Nell was also a civil rights activist on issues in Northern Ireland. When she started to work at the Irish Times, she joined the “women’s page” staff. Initially, she was fearful that this would involve writing about fashion, cooking and babies, but it actually enabled her to write on issues regarding women’s liberation and women’s rights.                    

The Contraceptive Train

In May 1971, the IWLM founders organised what became known as the “contraceptive train”, which was a protest against the fact that contraceptives were illegal in the Republic of Ireland. Nell McCafferty said that she had got the idea for the contraceptive train when she was in Northern Ireland at a civil rights march. The march went from North to South, and at the border, a student activist called Cyril Tallman held up a copy of Edna O’Brien’s novel Country Girls in one hand and a Durex condom in the other, saying that both were banned in the South. Nell was initially indignant about the condom, but the following year when the IWLM was talking about contraceptives, Nell got the idea of reversing the journey from Dublin to the North.

There was a ban on contraception in the Republic of Ireland, which was enshrined in the 1935 Criminal Law Act. This made the importation, distribution and sale of contraceptive devices a criminal offence. Advertising contraceptives was also illegal. The contraceptive pill was available in Ireland only on prescription, as a “menstrual cycle regulator”.

There were 47 founders and members of the IWLM on the contraceptive train on 22 May 1971, just enough to fill two carriages. However, when Nell McCafferty asked for a packet of contraceptive pills in a Belfast pharmacy, she was asked for a prescription, and the same happened when she asked for a coil, loop and Dutch cap. It turned out that the only contraceptives that were available in Belfast without prescription were condoms and spermicidal jelly. Nell was not happy with the prospect of taking a stand at Dublin customs with just condoms and spermicidal jelly, so it was decided that packets of aspirins would be bought, since they were similar enough in appearance to contraceptive pills that it was hoped they would pass for same! When the women arrived at customs in Dublin, the customs officers told them they were breaking the law, but let them through, because arresting them was not an option for them. The contraceptive train accomplished what it set out to do; the state refused to lift the ban on contraceptives, but it also failed to enforce it. The IWLM exposed this hypocrisy and proved that women would be free to import contraceptives from the North into the Republic from then on without any interference from law enforcement officials. Nell McCafferty made a statement at the train station, and two of the women went on the Late Late Show on TV to talk about the experience.

Mary Robinson failed in March and May of 1971 to get the Senate to add her Contraceptive Bill to its order paper. Despite Mary Robinson’s and the IWLM’s efforts to legalise contraceptives, it was not until 1979 that the government passed the Family Planning Act. This Act allowed solely married couples to get access to contraceptive devices other than the pill with a prescription. Family Planning clinics were already selling condoms, but the government was turning a blind eye to this because they were accepting “donations” in exchange for the condoms. In 1990, the Irish Family Planning Association was fined £500 for selling condoms in the Virgin Megastore in Dublin. Finally, in 1992, the government extended legislation to allow supermarkets and retail stores to sell condoms. The contraceptive train literally set the wheels in motion regarding the legalisation of contraceptives, but it took a long time before the law was changed for the benefit of women.

References

-Code, L., ed. (2000). Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. London: Routledge.

-Parry, M. (2010). ‘Betty Friedan: Feminist Icon and Founder of the National Organization for Women’, American Journal of Public Health, 100 (9), pp. 1584-1585.

-Shteir, R. (2021). ‘Why We Can’t Stop Talking about Betty Friedan’, New York Times, 3 February. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/us/betty-friedan-feminism-legacy.html (Accessed: 9 February 2021).

McCafferty, N. (2004). Nell: a Disorderly Woman. Dublin: Penguin Ireland.

Stopper, A. (2006). Mondays at Gaj’s: The Story of the Irish Women’s Liberation Movement. Dublin: The Liffey Press.

Reading list of books on feminism

Available on BorrowBox:

-Dear Ijeawele, or a Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions, by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (published in 2017): https://fe.bolindadigital.com/wldcs_bol_fo/b2i/productDetail.html?productId=HCU_469861&fromPage=1&b2bSite=4813

-Feminist Fight Club, by Jessica Bennett (published in 2016): https://fe.bolindadigital.com/wldcs_bol_fo/b2i/productDetail.html?productId=PRU_398091&fromPage=1&b2bSite=4813

-Feminists Don’t Wear Pink (And Other Lies), by Scarlett Curtis (published in 2018): https://fe.bolindadigital.com/wldcs_bol_fo/b2i/productDetail.html?productId=PRU_574840&fromPage=1&b2bSite=4813

-Give Birth Like a Feminist, by Milli Hill (published in 2019): https://fe.bolindadigital.com/wldcs_bol_fo/b2i/productDetail.html?productId=HCU_655895&fromPage=1&b2bSite=4813

-We Should All Be Feminists, by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (published in 2014): https://fe.bolindadigital.com/wldcs_bol_fo/b2i/productDetail.html?productId=HCP_402800&fromPage=1&b2bSite=4813

Available in the Reference Library, Grand Parade

-Code, L., ed. (2000). Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. London: Routledge.

-McCafferty, N. (1984). The best of Nell: a selection of writings over fourteen years. Dublin: Attic Press.

- Stopper, A. (2006). Mondays at Gaj’s: The Story of the Irish Women’s Liberation Movement. Dublin: The Liffey Press.

-Pierse, Mary S. (ed.) (2010). Irish Feminisms, 1810-1930. Abingdon: Edition Synapse/Routledge (5 volumes).

-Owens, R. (2005). A social history of women in Ireland, 1870-1970. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan.

-Connolly, L. and O’Toole, T. (2005). Documenting Irish Feminisms: the Second Wave. Dublin: The Woodfield Press.

-Connolly, L. (2002). The Irish women’s movement: from revolution to devolution. Dublin: Lilliput Press.

-Rose, C. (1975). The female experience: the story of the woman movement in Ireland. Galway: Arlen House.

[materialsworld]

Materials World’s top feature of 2019

As 2019 is drawing to a close, the Materials World team wanted to highlight a couple of stories to end the year on a high note. On Wednesday we shared the news story that got the most clicks on our website in 2019.  Today, we are sharing the top feature. We hope you enjoy and Merry Christmas from the editorial team. 

15 UNDER 30

By: Idha Valeur 

IOM3 is looking to the future and celebrating young talent and ambition. Idha Valeur talks to the ones to watch in STEM.

Kyle Saltmarsh Age: 27 Job: Robotics Engineer at Woodside Energy. Education: PhD Engineering in Submarine Vibration and Acoustics, BSc in Physics and Applied Mathematics, BME (Honours). Current project: Deployment of robotic technology onto Woodside’s oil and gas plant for surveillance, and performing tasks through robot manipulation. Achievements: Best honours thesis, several hackathon wins, top IBM 2018 graduate in Australia/New Zealand, 2018 Young Persons’ World Lecture Competition Winner, world’s largest bungee jumper, blogger and hosting a podcast to inspire people in technology. Ultimate goal: To positively impact the world through the power of technology.

Kyle Saltmarsh     Image credit: Brent Campbell 

Jennie Palmer Age: 26 Job: Research Engineer. Education: Undertaking an EngD in Structural Metals for Gas Turbine Applications, BEng in Aerospace Engineering, with a year in industry, Swansea University. Current project: I am researching the development of bespoke test facilities and fundamental understanding of thermo-mechanical fatigue crack growth behaviour in titanium alloys. Achievements: Graduating with a BEng in Aerospace Engineering with First-Class Honours, presenting my research at national and international conferences, having research published in an internationally recognised journal and a Green Belt Certificate in Lean Six Sigma. Ultimate goal: To become a well-established, technical expert in my engineering field.

Jennie Palmer     Image credit: Jemima Bond 

Ilija Rašović Age: 27 Job: Lecturer at University of Birmingham Education: MEng in Materials Science at Corpus Christi College, Oxford. DPhil in Materials at St Cross College, Oxford. Current project: The use of fullerenes — nanometre-sized balls of carbon — in biomedical applications. One of the methods I have devised, to make them soluble in water, helps in the formation of large self-assembled structures that hold great promise as multi-modal drug delivery vehicles. Achievements: The IOM3 international Literature Review Prize in 2016. Final of the IOM3 Young Persons’ World Lecture Competition in 2017. I joined the P1 Graphene Solutions as an advanced materials engineer and became a lecturer at the University of Birmingham. In 2019, I joined IOM3’s Younger Members’ Committee. Ultimate goal: To make a contribution to the wide deployment of transformative nanomedicine in a clinical setting within my lifetime. My broader vision is to continue to champion materials science and make more accessible the obfuscated world of academic research.

Ilija Rašović     

Amanda Field Age: 25 Job: Development Engineer. Education: BEng Materials Science and Technology, University of Birmingham. Current project: Trying to finish my PhD on additive manufacturing of tungsten for nuclear fusion reactors. It’s challenging but worthwhile because the success of nuclear fusion would go a long way to solving the energy crisis. I’m working in additive manufacturing. Achievements: I have presented my work at international conferences. I was involved with an experimental parabolic flight campaign for the European Space Agency where we used a demonstrator device to 3D print metal in zero gravity. I came second in the IOM3 Young Persons Lecture Competition. Ultimate Goal: To keep working in additive manufacturing. I’d like to stay in R&D as you get such variety in your role and you have the potential to make significant improvements to a product or a technology, or design new ones yourself.

Amanda Field    Image credit: Luke Carter 

Jack Saunders Age: 25 Job: PhD Student in Materials Chemistry. Education: MChem with a year in industry, University of Manchester. Undertaking a PhD in Materials Chemistry, University of Manchester, in collaboration with AkzoNobel. Current project: To analyse the impact of different polymers on the corrosion protection afforded by emulsion paints. I aim to achieve this by synthesising and testing polymer’s corrosion performance. This is to better understand how polymer chemistry can affect the corrosion protection offered by the dried paint. Achievements: A First Class Master’s degree in chemistry. My PhD at the School of Materials at The University of Manchester. Awarded the President’s Doctoral Scholar Award. Presented my work at conferences such as the RSC’s MacroGroup YRM, Dublin, 2018. Won the regional Young Persons’ Lecture Competition this year. Ultimate goal: To develop my research and management skills in order to have my own research group in the field of polymer chemistry and colloid science.

Jack Saunders    Image credit: University of Manchester  Megan McGregor Age: 25 Job: PhD Candidate at the Department of Materials Science & Metallurgy, University of Cambridge. Education: MSci in Natural Sciences, University of Cambridge, specialising in Materials Science. Current project: A PhD project investigating a new intermetallic alloy for commercial gas turbine engines. Specifically, trying to develop a novel coating material required to attach abrasives onto the end of rotating turbine blades, in pursuit of a more efficient sealing system. Achievements: I enjoy teaching in the department, and was recently awarded the Departmental Demonstrator Prize. I talked at the Cambridge Science Festival and the inaugural Cambridge Soapbox Science event. I will be representing the South Eastern Region in the final of the IOM3 Young Persons’ Lecture Competition this year, selected for an RCUK Public Policy Internship at the Government Office for Science in 2018, where I got to contribute to government policy. Ultimate goal: To see the material I am working on make it into a commercial gas turbine engine. I want to take my expertise in this area into industry, and be able to contribute to the development of the hybrid-electric aircraft sector.

Megan McGregor    Image credit: Andrew Jeskins 

Abigail Georgia Robinson Age: 22 Job: Geology student. Education: MGeol in Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of St Andrews, graduating in 2020. Current project: I will co-lead an expedition to the Lofdal Complex, Namibia, which hosts a suite of carbonatitic and silicic igneous rocks, some of which are enriched in heavy rare earth elements. I aim to integrate geological field data with geochemical and isotopic datasets to model the petrogenesis of the scientifically interesting igneous rocks. Achievements: I was awarded the prestigious Laidlaw Scholarship in Research and Leadership in 2018. This supported my field campaign in Armenia, to investigate the interplay between climate change, hydrology and medieval irrigation systems. I did a research placement at the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre where I learned to code in Python and used this to statistically investigate the geographical origin of lunar meteorites across the lunar surface. This work was included in Dr Marissa Tremblay’s published abstract and presentation at the 2019 Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, USA. Ultimate goal: I plan to embark on a PhD on the tectonically imposed planet-wide cycling of the volatile elements. I plan to be an active communicator promoting an understanding of geoscience and the global scale problems that we, the geoscientists, can work to solve.

Abigail Robinson      Image credit: Evan Margerum 

Federica Rosaria Lisa Age: 24 Job: Technical Graduate at British Steel. Education: MChem Chemistry with Forensic Science with a year in industry, University of Leicester. Current project: A variety of research and development projects – one on understanding and reducing the factors that influence power and electrode consumption at the ladle arc furnaces in the secondary steelmaking process. Achievements: Graduated with a First Class Honours and secured a 12-month industrial placement and a place on a graduate programme. I succeeded in my secondary school exams after moving to a new continent and starting International School. Ultimate goal: To work for a sustainable discovery/development that will improve lives and I would like to lead a company. I would also like to promote the importance of education, support developing countries in the construction of more schools and strengthen the educational system.

Frederica Lisa    Image credit: Johnny Gallagher  Daniel Everington Age: 26 Job: Materials Technologist – Surface Engineering. Education: MEng Aerospace Engineering with a year in industry, University of Sheffield. Current project: Surface engineering at Rolls-Royce. I’m involved with different projects across the engine, including compressor sealing systems, hot end environmental protection and anti-seize coatings. Achievements: Developed a novel method to flow test ceramic filters used in the investment casting process. The technique contributed to a 3% improvement in casting yield and the reduced variation helps lower the amount of metal. Patents may be filed on the work. Ultimate goal: I’d like to work with academia to co-develop novel coatings/surface treatments. I enjoy the challenges that come with working on new technology as the answers can’t simply be found in a textbook.

Daniel Everington     Image credit: Alistair Coast-Smith 

Louise Gale Age: 28 Job: Materials Engineer at Rolls-Royce Plc. Education: MSci & MA in Natural Sciences, specialising in Materials Science, University of Cambridge. Current project: The development of ceramic matrix composites for introduction into aerospace gas turbine engines. My responsibilities include running mechanical testing programmes, supervising work at our university partners as well as the analysis and fractography of tested samples to elucidate damage mechanisms. Achievements: Completing the Rolls-Royce Graduate Scheme, including obtaining funding for an international placement in the Materials Testing Department in Berlin. I became Technical Lead of a £2.5mln project which was part of a government-funded programme to develop SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composites. I developed the £7mln, three-year materials development component to the follow on project that was approved in late 2017. Ultimate goal: To become an expert on ceramic and composite materials systems.

Louise Gale      Image credit: Stephen Gale 

James Grant Age: 24 Job: EngD student with TATA Steel and M2A, Materials and Manufacturing Academy. Education: School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff University, College of Engineering, Swansea University. Current project: Development of novel coating solutions for the improvement of pre/post heat treatment of carbon steel conveyance tubes. My project aims to reduce high-temperature oxidation caused by the normalising process. Achievements: I developed a novel anodisation system for fabricating alumina masks in the molecular beam epitaxy application. In addition to this, my placement with Merck successfully optimised electrophoretic fluids to further enhance the E-ink display technology. I’ve been competing in the 2019 IOM3 Young Persons Lecture Competition. Having won the SWMA heat and the South West Regional, presenting at the national final in May. Ultimate goal: To educate and encourage the next generation of students to take up STEM subjects. I hope I can engage and excite a younger audience about materials science and demonstrate the opportunities available in engineering.

James Grant      Image credit: James Grant 

Vidya Chamundeswari Narasimhan Age: 28 years Job: Post-doctoral Research Fellow Department of Materials Science and Engineering, NTU. Education: PhD in Materials Engineering. Current project: Developing responsive nasogastric tubes for the elderly and using nature-derived biopolymers for biomedical applications. Achievements: Young Scientist Award conferred by VIWA in India, Title Winner of the IOM3 Young Persons’ World Lecture Competition 2017, Women in Engineering Travel Grant in 2018, Chair of the Young Scientists Forum at the European Materials Research Society conference in Poland 2018. Ultimate goal: To lead and manage a diverse team, foster interdisciplinary collaboration and offer R&D support for cutting edge research in the healthcare sector. I also want to contribute significantly towards mentoring the next generation of young girls towards pursuing exciting careers in STEM fields.

Vidya Chamundeswari     Image credit: Dr Rohit Satish  Frederick Cooper Age: 28 Job: Research Engineer and PhD student. Education: BEng with Honours, Swansea University. Current project: Microstructural and mechanical characterisation of flow formed F1E – a novel, maraging steel. Achievements: Used flow form to develop materials for detailed metallographic, micro-textural, and mechanical assessment. I run two small businesses, have an Associate Diploma from the National College of Music, and an Associate Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy and was appointed as a Yeoman of the Worshipful Company of Tin Plate Workers. Ultimate goal: To complete my current project and transfer a comprehensive mechanical property database detailing static and fatigue performance to a major engineering sponsor – to enable novel component manufacture. Further, I would like to use my experience to develop a career in public engagement or education.

Frederick Cooper    Image credit: Lauren Ednie Photography 

Robert Hoye Age: 28 Job: Royal Academy of Engineering Research Fellow. Education: PhD, Cambridge University, BE(Hons). Current project: I am looking at two areas that could accelerate the scale of photovoltaics. This makes an attractive technology for producing clean energy, especially in remote regions. Achievements: Developed a recombination contact to couple a metal-halide perovskite top-cell with an n-type silicon bottom cell, which lead to new design rules to identify promising classes of materials that could tolerate defects, and an all-inorganic device structure that led to 80% external quantum efficiency in solar cells. This went on display in the Deutsches Hygiene-Museum in Dresden, Germany. 2018 Young Engineer of the Year Award by the Royal Academy of Engineering, which also awarded me £500,000 to start an independent group at the University of Cambridge. European Forbes 30 under 30 list. Ultimate goal: To create new classes of defect-tolerant semiconductors that can be used as low-cost and efficient top-cells in tandem with silicon.

Robert Hoye      Image credit: Zoe Chung 

Matthew Wadge Age: 24 Job: PhD Researcher. Education: BSc(Hons) Biomedical Materials Science & PhD (ongoing), University Of Nottingham. Current project: Exploring novel formation and ion-exchange reactions of titanate surfaces for biomedical applications. Achievements: Achieved eight awards during my undergraduate degree including the Best Student Prize, Best Project Prize, and The Armourers and Brasiers’ Best Student Prize for achieving the highest project mark within the faculty. I have since won the Armourers and Brasiers’/TWI Best BSc/BEng Student of the Year Award, Best Oral Presentation Prize from the UK Society for Biomaterials Conference in 2018. Published my first journal paper during the first year of my PhD. I am one of the Nottingham coordinators for this year’s Pint of Science festival. Ultimate goal: To try and improve a patient’s quality of life, from improving fixation of hip stems for improved longevity, through to antibacterial surfaces for minimising infections. I aim to continue on into academia post PhD to share my experiences, and hopefully train the next generation of bioengineers and biomaterial scientists.

Matthew Wadge     Image credit: Matthew James 

[questlation]

Methuselah Foundation Unveils ELONgevity Protection to Support Human Longevity Initiatives, Provide Access to Promising Experimental Therapies

Methuselah Foundation Unveils ELONgevity Protection to Support Human Longevity Initiatives, Provide Access to Promising Experimental Therapies

Dogelon Mars (ELON) will be the key for terminally ill participants to unlock investigational treatments that offer a fighting chance to overcome deadly diseases DUBLIN, Sept. 20, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — Methuselah Foundation Co-founder and CEO David Gobel announced the formation of the ELONgevity Protection Project to promote human anti-aging efforts and provide members diagnosed with terminal…

[lisathompsonaesthetics]

Profhilo Fillers for a Picture-Perfect Wedding Look

The wedding day is one of the most important days of any woman’s life. Hence, it is quite natural that she would want to look her very best for her husband-to-be and everyone in attendance. Rather than going for superficial skin treatments, why not go in for something that’s skin-deep?

Lisa Thompson Aesthetics provides the most sought-after Profhilo Filler treatment in Dublin that gives you a rush of youthful glow and radiance that is bound to make you steal the show. So, what exactly are Profhilo Fillers? Let’s have a good look.

What is the Profhilo Filler Treatment?

Profhilo fillers are a non-surgical and minimally invasive way to boost collagen from deep within the skin. The pain-free skin revitalising fillers smooth out wrinkles, reduce fine lines, and restore lost glow to the skin. The treatment makes use of injections with fine needles to inject naturally derived hyaluronic acid that helps boost collagen within the skin.

Where can Profhilo Fillers be used?

The fillers are used for filling and smoothening out different areas of the face such as the mouth area, cheeks, forehead, laugh lines, nasolabial folds, and around the eyes. The treatment is very quick as it takes only 30 minutes and is virtually painless.

So, choose Lisa Thompson Aesthetics for the best Profhilo Filler treatment in Dublin right away!

[hallsp]

When Fred Halliday—scholar, activist, journalist and teacher—died two years ago at the too-early age of 64, obituaries and tributes swamped the British press; the New Statesman subtitled its remembrance “The death of a great internationalist.” Halliday was a truly original thinker, a combination of Hannah Arendt (in her concern for the connection between ethics and politics) and Isaac Deutscher (in his materialist yet supple approach to history). Halliday also knew a little something about the Middle East: he spoke Arabic, Farsi and at least seven other languages, and he traveled widely throughout the region, including in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Israel, Libya and Algeria. He is one of the very few writers who, after 9/11, understood the synthesis between fighting radical Islam and opposing the brutal inequities of the neoliberal global order. He was an uncategorizable independent, supporting, for instance, the communist government in Afghanistan and the US invasion of that country. He embodied the dialectic between utopianism and realism. In his scholarship and research, in his outspokenness and courtesy, in the complexity of his thinking, he was the model of a public intellectual. It is Halliday’s writings—not those of Noam Chomsky, Edward Said, Alexander Cockburn, Christopher Hitchens or Tariq Ali—that can elucidate the meaning of today’s most virulent conflicts; it is Halliday who represented radicalism with a human face. It says something sad, and discouraging, about intellectual life in our country that Halliday’s death—which is to say, his work—was ignored not only by mainstream publications like The New York Times but by their left-wing alternatives too (including this one).

It is cheering, then, that a selection of essays, written by Halliday for the website openDemocracy between 2004 and 2009, has just been published by Yale University Press. Called Political Journeys, it gives a taste—though only that—of the extraordinary range of Halliday’s interests; included here are analyses of communism , the cold war, Iran’s revolution, post-Saddam Iraq, violence and politics, radical Islam, the legacies of 1968 and feminism. The book gives a sense, too, of Halliday’s dry humor—he loved to recount irreverent political jokes from the countries he had visited—and his affection for lists, as in the essay “The World’s Twelve Worst Ideas” (No. 2: “The only thing ‘they’ understand is force”). But most of the articles, written as they were for the Internet, are comparatively short and represent a brief span in a long career; this necessarily sporadic volume will, one hopes, lead readers to some of Halliday’s two dozen other books and more extensive essays.

Political Journeys is a well-chosen title for the collection. It alludes not just to Halliday’s travels but also to the ways his ideas—especially about revolution, imperialism and human rights—changed in reaction to tumultuous world events over the course of four decades. For this he has often been attacked, even posthumously. Earlier this year, Columbia University professor Joseph Massad opened a piece about Syria, published on the Al Jazeera website, by dismissing Halliday—along with his “Arab turncoat comrades”—as a “pro-imperial apologist.” (Massad also put forth the novel idea that Syria “has been…an agent of US imperialism,” which might be news to Bashar al-Assad and the leaders of Iran and Hezbollah, Syria’s allies in the so-called axis of resistance.) Yet it was precisely Halliday’s intellectual flexibility—his ability to derive theory from experience rather than shoehorn the latter into the former—that was one of his greatest strengths. Pace Massad,

Halliday didn’t move from Marxism into imperialism, neoconservatism, neoliberalism or “turncoatism”; rather, he developed a deeper, more humane and far sturdier kind of radicalism. It was one that refused to hide—much less celebrate—repression, carnage and virulent nationalism behind the banner of progress, world revolution, selfdetermination or anti-colonialism. Halliday sought not to reject the socialist tradition but to reconnect it to its heritage—derived from the Enlightenment, from 1789, from 1848— of reason, rights, secularism and freedom. He would also develop an unsparing critique of the anti-humanism that, he thought, was ineradicably embedded in the revolution of 1917 and its successors.

Halliday believed that the duty of committed intellectuals is to keep their eyes open, to learn from history, to be humble enough to be surprised (and to admit being wrong). The alternative was what he called “Rip van Winkle socialism.” He sometimes told his friends, “At my funeral the one thing no one must ever say is that ‘Comrade Halliday never wavered, never changed his mind.’”

* * *

Fred Halliday was born in 1946 in Dublin and raised in Dundalk, a town near the northern border that, he pointed out, The Rough Guide to Ireland advises tourists to avoid. The Irish “question” and Irish politics remained, for him, a touchstone—though more as a warning than an inspiration, especially when it came to Mideast politics. The unhappy lessons of Ireland, he wrote in 1996, included “the illusions and delusions of nationalism” and “the corrosive myths of deliverance through purely military struggle.” He added: “A good dose of contemporary Irish history makes one sceptical about much of the rhetoric that issues from dominant and dominated alike.… [A] critique of imperialism needs at the very least to be matched by some reserve about most of the strategies proclaimed for overcoming it.” Growing up in the midst of the Troubles, Halliday developed, among other things, a healthy aversion to histrionic nationalism and the repugnant concept of “progressive atrocities.”

Halliday graduated from Oxford in 1967 and then attended the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). Later he would earn a PhD from the London School of Economics (LSE), where, for over two decades, he taught students from around the world and was a founder of its Centre for the Study of Human Rights. (The intellectual and governing classes of the Middle East are sprinkled with his graduates.) He was an early editor of the radical newspaper Black Dwarf and, from 1969 to 1983, a member of the editorial board of the New Left Review, a journal for which he occasionally wrote even after he broke with it over key political issues. He immersed himself in the revolutionary movements of his time and gathered an enviable range of friends, interlocutors and contacts along the way: traveling with Maoist Dhofari rebels in Oman; working at a student camp in Cuba; visiting Nasser’s Egypt, Ben Bella’s Algeria, Palestinian guerrillas in Jordan and Marxist Ethiopia and South Yemen (the subject of his dissertation). He wasn’t shy: he proposed a two-state solution to Ghassan Kanafani of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, infamous for its hijackings; argued with Iran’s foreign minister about the goals of an Islamic revolution; told Hezbollah’s Sheik Naim Qassem that the group’s use of Koranic verses denouncing Jews was racist—“a point,” Halliday dryly noted, “he evidently did not accept.”

Halliday received, and accepted, invitations to lecture in some of the Middle East’s most repressive countries, including Ahmadinejad’s Iran, Qaddafi’s Libya and Saddam’s Iraq, where a government official told him, without shame or embarrassment, that Amnesty International’s reports on the regime’s tortures and executions were correct. Clearly, he was no boycotter. But neither was he seduced by these visits: in 1990, he described Iraq as a “ferocious dictatorship, marked by terror and coercion unparalleled within the Arab world”; in 2009, he reported that the supposedly new, rehabilitated Libya was just like the old, outcast Libya: a “grotesque entity” and “protection racket” that was regarded as a joke throughout the Arab world. His moral compass remained intact: that year, he warned the LSE not to accept a £ 1.5 million donation from the so-called Charitable and Development Foundation of the dictator’s son, Saif el-Qaddafi. Alas, greed trumped principle, and Halliday’s arguments were rejected—which led, once the Arab Spring reached Libya, to the LSE’s public disgrace and the resignation of its director.

* * *

In May 1981, Halliday published an article on Israel and Palestine in MERIP Reports, a well-respected Washington journal that focuses on the Middle East and is closely identified with the Palestinian cause. It is an astonishing piece, especially in the context of its era, more than a decade before the Palestine Liberation Organization recognized Israel’s right to exist and the signing of the Oslo Accords. It is no exaggeration to say that, at the time, the vast majority of the left, Marxist and not, held anti-Israel positions of various degrees of ferocity; to do otherwise was to risk pariahdom.

While harshly critical of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and of the occupation , Halliday proceeded to question—and forcefully rebuke—the bedrock beliefs of the left: that Israel was a colonial state comparable to South Africa; that Israelis were not a nation and had no right to self-determination; that Israel was a recently formed and therefore inauthentic country (most states in the Middle East—including, for that matter, Palestine— are modern creations of imperialist powers); that a binational state was desired by either Israelis or Palestinians and, therefore, could be a recipe for anything other than civil war and a harshly authoritarian government. (Halliday asked a question often ignored by revolutionaries: Why would anyone want to live under such a regime?)

Most of all, he challenged the irredentism of the Palestinian movement and its supporters. Partition, he presciently warned, is “the only just and the only practical way forward for the Palestinians. They will continue to pay a terrible price, verging on national annihilation, if they prefer to adopt easier but in fact less realizable substitutes, and if their allies and supposed friends continue to urge such a course upon them.” Halliday stressed that a truly revolutionary strategy cannot be “at variance with reality.” Solidarity without realism is a form of betrayal.

The reality principle, and its absence, was a theme Halliday would return to frequently, as in his reappraisal of the legacy of 1968. “It does not deserve the sneering, partisan dismissal,” he wrote in 2008. But nostalgic celebration was also unearned, for “the problem is that in many ways, we lost.” Despite triumphal rhetoric, the year of the barricades led not to worldwide revolution but to conservative governments in France, England and the United States (Richard Nixon). In the communist world, the situation was even worse: “It was not the emancipatory imagination but the cold calculation of party and state that was ‘seizing power.’” In Prague, socialist reform was crushed; in Beijing, the Cultural Revolution’s frenzy reached new heights.

Yet Halliday, like most of us, was sometimes guilty of letting wishful thinking cloud his vision too. In 2004, he called for the United Nations to assume authority in Iraq, which was then in free fall. This ignored the fact that Al Qaeda’s shocking bombings of the UN’s Baghdad mission the previous year—resulting in the death of Sergio de Mello, the secretary general’s special representative in Iraq, and so many others—had disposed, rather definitively, of that issue; the UN had withdrawn its staffers and, clearly, could not ask them to undertake another death mission. (Nor was there any indication that the UN’s member nations—many of whom opposed any intervention in Iraq—would have supported such a proposition.) And his claim, made in 2007, that “a set of common values is indeed shared across the world,” including a commitment to “democracy and human rights,” is hard to square with much of Halliday’s own reporting—such as his 1984 encounter with a longtime acquaintance named Muhammad, who had formerly been a member of the Iranian left. Now a supporter of the regime, Muhammad visits Halliday in London and explains, “We don’t give a damn for the United Nations.… We don’t give a damn for that bloody organisation, Amnesty International. We don’t give a damn what anyone in the world thinks.… We have made an Islamic Revolution and we are going to stick to it, even if it means a third world war.… We want none of the damn democracy of the West, or the socalled freedoms of the East.… You must understand the culture of martyrdom in our country.” Indeed, Halliday’s optimism of the intellect here is belied by even a casual look at any of the world’s major newspapers— whether from New York or Paris, Baghdad or Beirut—on any given day.

* * *

Iran, which Halliday first visited in the 1960s as an undergraduate, was foundational to his political development; he analyzed, and re-analyzed, its revolution many times, as if it was a wound that could not stop hurting. (Iran is the only country to which Political Journeys devotes an entire section of essays.) His initial study of the country, Iran: Dictatorship and Development, was written just before the anti-Shah revolution of early 1979. Based on careful observation and research, the book scrupulously analyzed Iran’s class structure, economy, armed forces, government, opposition movements, foreign policy—everything, that is, but the role of religion, which Halliday seemed to regard as essentially a front for political demands, and which he vastly underestimated. The book’s last sentence reads, “It is quite possible that before too long the Iranian people will chase the Pahlavi dictator and his associates from power… and build a prosperous and socialist Iran.”

Events moved quickly. In August 1979, Halliday filed two terrifying dispatches from Tehran, published in the New Statesman, documenting the chaotic atmosphere of fear and xenophobia, the outlawing of newspapers and political parties, and the brutal crackdown on women, intellectuals, liberals, leftists and secularists. “It does not take one long to sense the ferocious right-wing Islamist fervour that grips much of Iran today,” he began. Later, he would write, “I have stood on the streets of Tehran and seen tens of thousands of people…shouting, ‘Marg bar liberalizm’ (‘Death to liberalism’). It was not a happy sight; among other things, they meant me.” A revolution, he realized, could be genuinely anti-imperialist and genuinely reactionary.

But the problem wasn’t only Iran or radical Islam. As the ’70s turned into the ’80s, it became clear—or should have—that most of the third world’s secular revolutions and coups (in Algeria, Syria, Libya, Ethiopia and, especially, Iraq) had failed to fulfill their emancipatory promises. Each became a one-party dictatorship based on repression, torture and murder; each stifled its citizens politically, intellectually, artistically, even sexually; each remained mired in inequality and underdevelopment. None of this could be explained, much less justified, by the legacy of colonialism or the crimes of imperialism, real as those are. These were among the central issues that led to Halliday’s rift with the New Left Review—and that continue to divide the left, both here and abroad. Indeed, it is precisely these issues that often underlie (and sometimes determine) the debates over humanitarian intervention, the meaning of solidarity, the US role as a global power, the centrality of human rights and of feminism, and the Israel-Palestine conflict. (In 2006, Halliday would sum up his points of contention with his former comrades, especially their support of death squads and jihadists in the Iraq War : “The position of the New Left Review is that the future of humanity lies in the back streets of Fallujah.”)

Halliday’s revised thinking—his emphasis on democracy and rights; his aversion to the particularist claims of tribe, nation, religion or identity politics; his unapologetic secularism; his questioning of imperialism as a purely regressive force—is evident in his enormously compelling book Islam and the Myth of Confrontation, published in 1996. (Halliday dedicated it to the memory of four Iranian friends, whom he lauded as “opponents of religiously sanctioned dictatorship.”) In this volume he took on two still prevalent, and still contested, concepts: the idea of human rights as a Western imposition on the third world, and the theory of “Orientalism.”

Halliday argued that, despite the assertions of covenants such as the 1981 Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (which defines “God alone” as “the Source of all human rights”) and the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (which defines “all human beings” as “Allah’s subjects”), there is no such thing as Islamic human rights—or, indeed, of rights derived from any religious source. Such rights apply to everyone and, therefore, must be based on man-made, universalist principles or they are nothing: it is the “equality of humanity,” not the equality before God, that they assert. (That is why they are human rights.) Because rights are grounded in the dignity of the individual, not in any transcendent or divine authority, they can be neither granted nor rescinded by religious authorities, and no country, culture or region can claim exemption from them by appealing to holy texts, a history of oppression, revered traditions or because rights “somehow embody ‘Western’ prejudice and hegemony.”

In this light, the search for a kinder, gentler version of Islam—or, for that matter, of any religion—as the basis of rights is “doomed” to failure; for Halliday, the question of a religion’s content was entirely irrelevant. “Secularism is no guarantee of liberty or the protection of rights, as the very secular totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century have shown,” he argued. “However, it remains a precondition, because it enables the rights of the individual to be invoked against authority.… The central issue is not, therefore, one of finding some more liberal, or compatible, interpretation of Islamic thinking, but of removing the discussion of rights from the claims of religion itself.… It is this issue above all which those committed to a liberal interpretation of Islam seek to avoid.” The issues that Halliday raised in 1996 are by no means settled today, and they are anything but abstract; on the contrary, the Arab uprisings have forced them insistently to the fore. In Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, secularists and Islamists struggle over the role (if any) of Islam in writing new constitutions and legal codes; at the United Nations, new leaders such as Egypt’s Mohamed Morsi and Yemen’s Abed Rabbu Mansour Hadi argue that the right to free speech ends when it “blasphemes” against Islamic beliefs.

But more than a defense of secularism is at stake here. Halliday argued that the very idea of a unitary, reliably oppressive behemoth called the West—on which so much antiimperialist and “dependency” theory rested— was false. “Far from there having been, or being, a monolithic, imperialist and racist ‘West’ that produced human rights discourse, the ‘West’ itself is in several ways a diverse, conflictual entity,” he wrote. “The notion of human rights was not the creation of the states and ruling elites of France, the USA, or any other Western power, but emerged with the rise of social movements and associate ideologies that contested these states and elites.” The West embodied emancipation and oppression, equality and racism, abolitionism and slavery, universalism and colonialism. Political theories and practices that refuse to acknowledge this—proudly brandishing their “anti-Western” credentials—will be based on the shakiest foundations.

* * *

The argument between advocates of the concept of “Orientalism,” put forth most famously by Edward Said, and its critics—often associated with the scholar Bernard Lewis—was close to Halliday. Lewis had been a mentor of his at SOAS, and one he admired; Said, whom Halliday described as “a man of exemplary intellectual and political courage,” was a friend. (Though not forever: Said stopped talking to Halliday when the two disagreed on the first Gulf War.) Yet on closer look, Lewis and Said shared an orientation: both had rejected a materialist analysis of Arab (and colonial) history and politics in favor of a metadebate about literature. “For neither of them,” Halliday argued, “does the analysis of what actually happens in these societies, as distinct from what people say and write about them…come first.” Increasingly, Halliday would regard the Orientalist debate as one that deformed, and diverted, the discipline of Mideast studies and helped to foster a vituperative atmosphere.

Said had argued that, for several centuries, British and French writers, statesmen and others had created a static, mythical Middle East—sometimes romanticized, sometimes denigrated, always objectified— as part of an unwaveringly racist, imperialist project. (Indeed, Said’s book has turned the word “Orientalist,” which used to refer to scholars of the Muslim, Arab and Asian worlds, into a term of opprobrium.) With sobriety and respect, Halliday considered and, in the end, devastatingly refuted the theory’s major tenets. With its sweeping, all-encompassing claims, he argued, the concept of Orientalism was a form of fundamentalism: “We should be cautious about any critique which identifies such a widespread and pervasive single error at the core of a range of literature.” It was based on a widely held yet entirely unsubstantiated belief that Europe bore a particular hostility toward the Muslim world: “The thesis of some enduring, transhistorical hostility to the orient, the Arabs, the Islamic world, is a myth.” It was undialectical, ignoring not only the myths that Easterners projected against the West—ignorant stereotyping is, if nothing else, a busy two-way street—but the ways the East itself reproduced the tropes of Orientalism: “A few hours in the library with the Middle Eastern section of the Summary of World Broadcasts will do wonders for anyone who thinks reification and discursive interpellation are the prerogative of Western writers on the region.” In fact, Islamists can be among the greatest Orientalists, for many insist on an Islam that is eternal, opaque and monolithic.

Most of all, though, Halliday questioned the assumption that the presumably impure origin of an idea necessarily negates its truth value. “Said implies that because ideas are produced in a context of domination, or directly in the service of domination, they are therefore invalid.” Carried to its logical conclusion, of course, this would entail a rejection of modernity itself—from its foundational ideas to its medical, technological and scientific advances—for all were produced “in the context of imperialism and capitalism: it would be odd if this were not so. But this tells us little about their validity.” (“Antiimperialism” and “self-determination” are, we might note, Western concepts, just as penicillin, the computer, the machine gun and the atom bomb are Western inventions.) And he questioned a key tenet of postcolonial studies and postcolonial politics: that the powerless are either more insightful or more ethical than their oppressors. “The very condition of being oppressed…is likely to produce its own distorted forms of perception: mythical history, hatred and chauvinism towards others, conspiracy theories of all stripes, unreal phantasms of emancipation.” Suffering is not necessarily the mother of wisdom.

But if Halliday was a foe of the simplicities of Orientalism, he was equally opposed to Samuel Huntington’s notion of “the clash of civilizations”—a concept that, he pointed out, was as beloved by Osama bin Laden as by neoconservatives—and to essentialist fictions like “the Islamic world” and “the Arab mind.” (On this, he and Said certainly agreed.) More than fifty diverse countries contain Muslim majorities; the job of the intellectual—whether located inside or outside the region—was to specify and demystify rather than deal in lumpy, ignorant generalities. “Disaggregation and explanation, rather than invocations of the timeless essence of cultures,” was the Mideast scholar’s prime task, Halliday insisted. He rejected mystified concepts such as Islamic banking and Islamic economics (“Anyone who has studied the economic history of the Muslim world…will know that business is conducted as it is everywhere, on sound capitalist principles”); the Islamic road to development (Iran’s economy was “a perfectly recognisable ramshackle rentier economy, laced with corruption and inefficiency”); and Islamic jurisprudence (Sharia, Halliday noted, has virtually no basis in the Koran). Echoing E.P. Thompson, Halliday argued that much of what passes for the ancient and authentic in the Islamic world—including Islamic fundamentalism itself—is the creation of modernity, and can be productively analyzed only within a political context.

Halliday proposed that even the Iranian Revolution—with its mobilization of the masses, consolidation of state power, repressive security institutions and attempts to export itself—had, despite its peculiar ideology, reprised the basic dynamics of modern, secular revolutions: “not that of Mecca and Medina in the seventh century but that of Paris in the 1790s and Moscow and St Petersburg in the 1920s.” Islam, Halliday insisted, could not explain the trajectory of that revolution or, for that matter, the politics of the greater Middle East.

Was Halliday right? Surely yes, in his refusal of essentialist fantasies and apolitical thinking. And in some ways, the Arab uprisings have confirmed everything for which he had spent a lifetime arguing. Here were populist movements demanding democratic institutions, transparency, and an end to tyranny and corruption; here were hundreds of thousands of protesters demanding entry into the modern world, not its negation; here was the assertion of participatory citizenship over passive subjecthood. Yet the subsequent trajectory of those initial revolts also proved him wrong: nowhere else in the contemporary world have democratic elections led to the triumph of religious parties. Nowhere else do intra-religious schisms result in the widespread carnage of the Shiite-Sunni split. Nowhere else do the democratic rights to freely speak, publish and create collide with strictures against blasphemy—even among some presumed democrats. Nowhere else does the fall of dictatorship and the assertion of self-determination translate, so quickly and so often, into attacks on women’s equality. “Islam explains little of what happens” in Turkey and Pakistan, Halliday wrote in 2002, and he believed this to be true of the region as a whole. Yet I doubt there are many Turks or Pakistanis (or, for that matter, Iranians, Egyptians, Algerians, Lebanese, Afghans, Saudis or Yemenis) who would agree. Can they all be the victims of false consciousness?

Here, I think, lies the problem: in his fight against lazy generalizations about Islam and its misuse as a univocal explanation, Halliday sometimes sought to scrub away, or at least radically minimize, Islam itself, as was demonstrated by his early book on Iran. It is almost as if he—the confirmed skeptic, the lover of reason, the staunch secularist, the self-proclaimed bani tanwir (“child of enlightenment”)—could not quite believe in religion as a force unto itself, and an astonishingly powerful one at that. “What people actually do,” he wrote in 2002, “is not determined by ideology.” This is, we might note, a classic Marxist position, in which the “superstructure” of belief is subsumed beneath class and politics. Yet Halliday’s erstwhile Iranian friend Muhammad— and, indeed, so many of the events that Halliday himself witnessed—told him otherwise. And as organizations as diverse as the Nazi Party and Al Qaeda have shown, rational, politically focused strategies and utterly lunatic ideologies can, alas, coexist.

* * *

In the immediate aftermath of September 11, Halliday was clear about several points: that the attacks would resonate throughout global politics, changing them for many decades to come; that Al Qaeda was a “demented” product not of ancient Islam but of modernity, and represented “the anti-imperialism of racists and murderers”; and that terrorist violence “from below,” though not directly caused by poverty, could not be severed from the grotesque inequalities that international capital had created. In 2004, he wrote, “The central challenge facing the world, in the face of 9/11 and all the other terrorist acts preceding and following it, is to create a global order that defends security while making real the aspirations to equality and mutual respect that modernity has aroused and proclaimed but spectacularly failed so far to fulfil.” This was not a question of either/or, but of and/ and. Ever the dialectician, Halliday observed that imperialism and terrorism are hardly antagonists; rather, they share a “central arrogance,” each “forcing their policies and views onto those unable to protect themselves, and proclaiming their virtue in the name of some political goal or project that they alone have defined.” And he noted with anger and sorrow how terrorism—which has killed far more people in the East than in the West —had transformed millions of people throughout the world into bewildered bystanders, creating an internationale of fear.

Afghanistan had been one of Halliday’s key areas of study, and he repeatedly pointed to several crucial facts that many Americans still resist understanding. Al Qaeda did not spring out of nowhere, much less from its beloved eighth century. It was Ronald Reagan’s arming of the anti-Soviet guerrillas— even after the Soviet pullout in early 1989, when Kabul’s communist government still stood—that was instrumental in creating the Islamist militias and warlord groups, some of which transformed themselves into the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Thus had our fanatical anti-communism led to the empowerment of “the crazed counter-revolutionaries of the Islamic right.” For Halliday there was no schadenfreude in this, no gloating, no talk of chickens coming home to roost or of blowback (a concept that fundamentally misunderstands— and moralizes—historic causation: was Sobibor the blowback from the Versailles Treaty?). But he insisted, rightly, that the crisis of 9/11 could not be understood, much less successfully confronted, in the absence of engaging this “policy of world-historical criminality and folly.”

Halliday had supported the US overthrow of both the Taliban and Saddam (in addition to military intervention against Saddam in the first Gulf War, and against Milosevic in Bosnia and Kosovo). He criticized three tendencies of the post-9/11 world with increasing dismay, though not quite despair: the retreat into rabid nationalism in both East and West; the Bush administration’s conduct in Iraq and in international affairs generally (“The United States is dragging the Western world…towards a global abyss,” he warned in 2004); and the left’s romance with jihad, especially in relation to Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iraqi “resistance.” And indeed, it was somewhat shocking to read Tariq Ali, writing in the New Left Review in the especially bloody year of 2006, exulting in the rise of “Hamas, Hizbollah, the Sadr brigades and the Basij.… A radical wind is blowing from the alleys and shacks of the latter-day wretched of the earth.” Or, more recently, to find his colleague Perry Anderson arguing that the “priority” of Egypt’s new, post-Mubarak government should be to annul the country’s “abject” peace treaty with Israel as a way of recovering “democratic Arab dignity.” Rip van Winkle socialism, indeed.

After September 11, Halliday focused much of his intellectual energy on explaining the ways the attacks and their serial, convulsive aftermaths were decisively changing international relations. While classic internationalism—in the sense of humane solidarity with the suffering of others—was imperiled, a kind of militarized internationalism was on the rise. Conflicts that had been relatively distinct, except on a rhetorical level, had become ominously entwined and the ante of violence—especially against civilians—cruelly raised. “Events in Lebanon and Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan, Turkey and Libya are becoming comprehensible only in a broader regional and even global context,” he wrote in 2006. This new dispensation, which he dubbed the “Greater West Asian Crisis,” represented a struggle for political supremacy in a region that now included not just the Arab world and Israel but also Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan, among others—including a plethora of volatile nonstate militias that are beholden to no constituencies and recognize no restraints. While some conflicts, such as Hezbollah versus Israel, might still be geographically confined, none could be politically or, because of the existence of transnational guerrillas, operationally confined. (Consider, for instance, the reported presence of Islamist fighters from Chechnya and Pakistan in Syria’s civil war.) Halliday warned that the resulting strife would be “more complex, multilayered and long-lasting than any of the individual crises, revolutions or wars that characterized the Middle East.” This was written six years ago; despite the hopefulness of the subsequent Arab Spring revolts, it would be difficult to dispute the alarming vision contained therein.

* * *

In the last decade of his life, Halliday turned, with an urgency both intellectual and moral, to the legacy of revolution in the twentieth century. His writings on this topic—precisely because they are the work of a writer deeply embedded in, and respectful of, the Marxist tradition and committed to the creation of what one can call, without cynicism, a more just world—are important for anyone who seeks to understand the history of the past century or the bewilderments of the present one. These essays make for painful reading, too—especially, I think, for leftists—in their willingness to question, and discard, comforting beliefs.

Halliday’s re-evaluation shared nothing with the smug rejection of revolution that had become so fashionable after 1989, or with the disparagement of communism as an “aberrant illusion.” To the contrary: “Millions of people struggled for and believed in this ideal,” he wrote in 2009. “As much as liberalism, communism was itself a product of modernity…and of the injustices and brutalities associated with it.” Nor had Halliday signed on to a celebration of the neoliberal world order: “The challenge that confronted Marx and Engels,” he wrote in 2008, “still stands, namely that of countering the exploitation, inequality, oppression, and waste of the contemporary capitalist order with a radical, cooperative, international political order.” Against flat-earthers like Thomas Friedman, he argued that the globalized world of the twenty-first century is more unequal than its predecessors.

And so the question of what is to be done still remained, but had to be faced with far more humility and critical acumen than ever before. If Halliday had little sympathy for talk of failed gods, he was equally impatient with the “vacuous radicalisms” and romanticized revival of tattered revolutionary ideals that permeate too much of the left, including—or perhaps especially— the anti-globalization and solidarity movements. The idealization of violence (“the second intifada has been a disaster for the Palestinians”); the eschewing of long-term political organizing in favor of dramatic but impotent protests; the failure to study the complex and blood-soaked trajectory of the past century’s revolutions; the Pavlovian identification with virtually every oppositional movement, regardless of its real political aims: all of this was, in Halliday’s view, the road to both tragedy and farce. “The anti-globalization movement has taken over a critique of capitalism without…reflecting on what actually happened in the 20th century,” he told an interviewer in 2006. “I read the stuff coming out of Porto Alegre and my hair falls out.”

For despite communism’s commitment to, and partial achievement of, certain economic and social values (including a planned economy, women’s equality and secularism)—values that, Halliday believed, must be preserved—its record of murder and authoritarianism could not be evaded. “The history of revolution in modern times is one not only of resistance, heroism and idealism,” he wrote in 2003, “but also of terrible suffering and human disaster, of chaos and incompetence under the guise of revolutionary transformation, of the distortion of the finest ideals by corrupt and murderous leaders, and of the creation of societies that are far more oppressive and inefficient than those they seek to overthrow.” What distinguished Halliday’s argument, however, was his insistence that these failures could not be rationalized as the divergence between “Marxist theory and communist practice”; twentieth-century revolution must be judged an inevitable failure, he concluded.

Thus Halliday rejected all “what if” forms of analysis: what if Lenin had not died, or Bukharin had come to power, or the Germans had turned to the left instead of to the Nazis. (These are questions that, I admit, still haunt me.) He did not believe that a more liberalized version of communism could have prevented the collapse of the Soviet Union. In his view, the key issue— one that many leftists want to avoid—is that communism’s “failure was necessary, not contingent.” This was because of four elements that were central to any communist program and, he argued, to Marxism itself: “the authoritarian concept of the State; the mechanistic idea of Progress; the myth of Revolution; and the instrumental character of Ethics.” (However, Halliday did not—at least as far as I know—ever adequately explain the relationship between the socialist tradition that grew out of the Enlightenment and the fatal flaws of communism.)

A kind of ethical wasteland was, in his view, socialism’s greatest failure. No socialist state, at least none derived from the Bolshevik revolution, had developed institutions that defended the rights of the individual or articulated any “justifiable criteria” for the use “of violence and state coercion.” The Russian Revolution had led not to a withering away of the state but, rather, to the establishment of fearsome regimes with almost unlimited powers to control, repress and terrorize their citizens. Halliday added tartly that many leftists “appear not to have noticed this…an index of how little they have learnt, or have noticed the sufferings of others. Unless and until they do, they have no right to claim that they are advancing the cause of human emancipation.”

The seriousness of such revolutionary failures, the massiveness of such defeats, led Halliday to revisit even such cherished notions as internationalism and solidarity: not as values but as practices. In a brilliant 2008 essay called “Revolutionary Internationalism and Its Perils,” he noted that internationalism, though always heralded by revolutionaries, has historically divided rather than united the left (think of the First, Second and Third Internationals, the Sino-Soviet split, etc.). And he noted a fascinating if counterintuitive process: it is nationalism, not its opposite, which has “spread across the world as a transnational force, crossing boundaries and cultures, to become the universally accepted normative code of modern politics.” At the same time, internationalism had, “in the practice of twentieth century revolutions, become an instrument of states”—had been used, that is, to further the interests and fortify the power of individual states rather than to create global unity. Within this dialectic, Halliday wrote, lies “much of the dynamic, and not a little of the tragedy, of the politics of the past century.” Stirring calls for international solidarity will have to confront this history, and these contradictions, if they wish to move from rhetoric to reality.

* * *

From the time of his break with the New Left Review (and haunted, I suspect, by the bitter fates of slaughtered friends in Iran, Lebanon and elsewhere), Halliday increasingly, and consistently, affirmed the defense of others’ rights—to civil, intellectual and political freedoms, to self-determination, to an unfettered press, to women’s equality, to human dignity and bodily integrity—as the nonnegotiable foundation of solidarity: “The concept of solidarity presupposes that of rights, and the two were so combined, in rhetoric and policy, in the French revolution.” But he opened a circa-2007 essay called “The Fate of Solidarity: Uses and Abuses” with a troubling observation: “In the course of the twentieth century something strange, and distorting, appears to have happened to the concept of ‘solidarity.’” He traced the circuitous history of solidarity—and the left’s practice of it—from the French Revolution through the era of colonialism to the anti-imperialist independence movements and the fall of communism. “Among the many ironies of this process has been the way in which solidarity has been declared with states, movements, and individuals who in their practice deny the very concepts of rights on which the solidarity is supposedly justified in the first place,” he argued. “At the same time, the ideal and practice of solidarity has been turned against those, in the communist movement, who most sought to espouse it.” To declare solidarity while ignoring human rights abuses and the suffering they entail was the worst sort of empty posturing.

For Halliday, to evade the concept of rights was to reject the very notion of a shared humanity—a tendency that, he argued, had only increased since 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. Indeed, a weird convergence had transpired, whereby the right (George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales) joined with Islamists, jihadis and their Western supporters in a mutually enthusiastic denigration of human rights, an embrace of “moral particularism” and a rejection of the laws of war. (From there it is a very short step—really no step at all— to waterboarding, Guantánamo, suicide bombings, and the murder of UN and humanitarian aid workers.) What made this more repellent was that each side proudly proclaimed its internationalist commitments while trampling them to death.

Halliday also questioned the very idea of revolution, and of whether it will prove to be the best way—either ethically or practically—to transform global capital in the twenty-first century. “We are much more certain about the structures, and inherent inequities, in the present system than we are about the alternatives, and the ways to get there,” he admitted in a 2003 essay. Had the traditional opposition between reform and revolution led to productive change, or was it a historic dead end? In any case, he noted, it was late modern capitalism, not revolutionary socialism, that had “formed the global vision of the future” in the 1990s; to succeed, a radical critique of the existing order would have to reverse this momentum and “wrest the initiative within a world of growing inequality and rancor.” This would necessitate the creation of new ideas, new strategies, new ethics and a new capacity for realism in place of reliance on 100-year-old truisms. Even so, it remains to be seen whether revolution—and, if so, what kind—can “fulfill the promise, in terms of economic distribution and the implementation of rights, which modernity has always propounded.” The explosions in the Arab world since December 2010 (and in Iran in 2009)—stirring and heartbreaking, inspiring and ominous—have proved how vital Halliday’s questions, hopes and doubts remain.

Fred Halliday did not live to see the democratic uprisings that have swept the Arab world, which seems like a cruel irony. (One might think of Moses gazing at the Promised Land, except that Halliday didn’t believe in promised lands.) In the days since, it is his voice—calm, knowledgeable, realistic, empathic yet sharply honest—that has been so sorely needed: to explicate the meanings of those events, to look beneath their surfaces, to place them within history, to discover their political and ethical contradictions, just as he did after 9/11. In a lovely essay written in 2005, Halliday praised his intellectual mentors, the Marxist historians Maxime Rodinson and Isaac Deutscher, for their skepticism, universalism, wisdom and independence. “Amid a world scarred by state and terrorist violence and debased public debate,” he wrote, these men—these values—are necessary “more than ever.” The same could be said of Halliday and his incisive yet generous intelligence; I never met the man, but I can’t stop missing him.

Susie Linfield, The Nation

[repromed15062023]

Demystifying AMH Testing: Understanding Your Fertility with AMH Test

Exploring AMH Testing

AMH testing has become an essential tool in assessing a woman's ovarian reserve and fertility potential. AMH, or anti-Müllerian hormone, is a protein produced by cells in the ovaries that reflects the number of eggs remaining in a woman's ovaries. AMH test measures the level of this hormone in the blood, providing valuable insights into a woman's reproductive health.

What is AMH?

Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is a hormone produced by small follicles in the ovaries. It plays a crucial role in regulating the development of ovarian follicles, which contain the eggs. The level of AMH in the blood reflects the number of these small follicles and, consequently, a woman's ovarian reserve.

The Importance of AMH Testing

An AMH test Dublin is a valuable tool for several reasons:

Assessment of Ovarian Reserve: AMH test provides valuable information about a woman's ovarian reserve, which refers to the quantity and quality of her remaining eggs.

Predicting Response to Ovarian Stimulation: For women undergoing fertility treatment such as IVF, AMH testing can help predict how a woman's ovaries will respond to ovarian stimulation medications.

Age-related Fertility: While age remains the most critical factor in female fertility, AMH testing can provide additional information about a woman's reproductive potential, especially for women with irregular menstrual cycles or other fertility issues.

AMH Test Procedure

The AMH fertility test involves a simple blood draw, usually performed on any day of the menstrual cycle. The blood sample is then sent to a laboratory for analysis. Results are typically available within a few days.

Interpreting AMH Test Results

Anti Mullerian Hormone test results are typically reported in nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL). The interpretation of results may vary depending on factors such as age, menstrual cycle regularity, and the laboratory's reference range. In general:

High AMH Levels: High AMH levels may indicate a higher ovarian reserve, which can be advantageous for fertility treatment but may also be associated with conditions such as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).

Low AMH Levels: Low AMH levels may suggest a diminished ovarian reserve, which can affect a woman's ability to conceive naturally or respond to fertility treatment.

Where to Get AMH Testing in Ireland

If you're considering AMH testing Ireland, there are several options available. Many fertility clinics and reproductive health centers offer AMH testing as part of their fertility assessment services. In Dublin, reputable clinics like ReproMed Ireland provide comprehensive AMH testing services, including interpretation of results and personalized fertility consultations.

AMH testing is a valuable tool in assessing a woman's ovarian reserve and fertility potential. By measuring the level of anti-Müllerian hormone in the blood, AMH test provides valuable insights into a woman's reproductive health and can help guide fertility treatment decisions. Whether you're considering AMH blood test for fertility planning or as part of fertility treatment, consulting with a qualified healthcare provider is essential for personalized guidance and support. With AMH testing in Ireland readily available, women can take proactive steps to understand and manage their reproductive health effectively.

[waaaiz]

Pharmaceutical Packaging Market Research Report

Growth opportunities in the pharmaceutical packaging market look promising over the next six years. This is mainly due to the rising burden of chronic and non-chronic diseases and the increasing demand for pharmaceutical packaging products throughout the world.

Request for a FREE Sample Report on Pharmaceutical Packaging Market

Pharmaceutical Packaging Market Dynamics (including market size, share, trends, forecast, growth, forecast, and industry analysis)

Key Drivers

One of the crucial drivers responsible for the growth of the global pharmaceutical packaging market includes the fuelling demand for pharmaceutical packaging products by developing and developed countries due to the accelerating prevalence of chronic and non-chronic diseases. For example, in accordance with the "Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice," the persistence of diabetes is predicted to reach 10.2% by the end of 2030 from 9.3% in 2019, which will further boost the diabetic treatment products, thereby strengthening the pharmaceutical packaging industry.  Also, The European Chronic Disease Alliance stated that 9 out of 10 people die due to chronic disease in Europe, which implies that Europe is the topmost consumer of pharmaceuticals, which has further raised the pharmaceutical packaging market size. Moreover, the recent developments in the pharmaceutical packaging industry, such as child resistance packaging printing ink technology and RFID, have paved the way for enormous growth opportunities for the market.

As per the pharmaceutical packaging market report, prudent initiatives by government and regulatory bodies have contributed to the market growth. For instance, the ongoing up-gradation of standards by "United States Pharmacopeia" (USP), for the continuous development of the pharma packaging industry, aids in setting up a new benchmark, resulting in substantial growth of the pharmaceutical packaging industry.

However, augmenting costs associated with the packaging because of the stringent norms and anti-counterfeiting efforts may act as a constrain for the pharmaceutical packaging market growth.

Container Segment Drivers

Based on the container, the plastic segment is projected to dominate the market over the forecast period. The solid doses of counter medicines are sold in very high quantities in plastic bottles as they are cheaper than glass and have fewer chances of breakage or damage and are chemically inert and corrosion resistant.

Regional Drivers

Based on the regional coverage, North America is anticipated to lead the market over the forecast period. This is because the region has the most significant pharma sector throughout the world, attributed to leading pharma companies like Novartis AG, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Pfizer Inc., Merck KGaA, etc.

Pharmaceutical Packaging Market’s leading Manufacturers:

Silgan Holdings Inc.

SGD Pharma

Constantia Flexibles

ALPLA

Novartis AG

Pfizer Inc

Schott AG

CCL Industries.

ARDAGH GROUP S. A.

Merck KGaA

Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Pharmaceutical Packaging Market Segmentation:

Segmentation by Packaging Type:

Ampoule

Vial

Bottles and Jars

Dropper

Aerosol Container

Segmentation by Material:

Corrugated Board

Paper

Glass

Plastic

Metal

Rubber

Segmentation by Containers:

Glass Containers

Plastic Containers

Segmentation by Region:

North America

Asia Pacific

Europe

RoW

United States of America

Canada

China

Japan

India

Rest of APAC

United Kingdom

Germany

France

Spain

Rest of Europe

Brazil

South Africa

Saudi Arabia

UAE

Rest of the world (remaining countries of the LAMEA region)

About GMI Research

GMI Research is a market research and consulting company that offers business insights and market research reports for large and small & medium enterprises. Our detailed reports help the clients to make strategic business policies and achieve sustainable growth in the particular market domain. The company's large team of seasoned analysts and industry experts with experience from different regions such as Asia-Pacific, Europe, North America, among others, provides a one-stop solution for the client. Our market research report has in-depth analysis, which includes refined forecasts, a bird's eye view of the competitive landscape, key factors influencing the market growth, and various other market insights to aid companies in making strategic decisions. Featured in the 'Top 20 Most Promising Market Research Consultants' list of Silicon India Magazine in 2018, we at GMI Research are always looking forward to helping our clients to stay ahead of the curve.

Media Contact Company Name: GMI RESEARCH Contact Person: Sarah Nash Email: enquiry@gmiresearch.com Phone: Europe – +353 1 442 8820; US – +1 860 881 2270 Address: Dublin, Ireland Website: www.gmiresearch.com

[lisathompsonaesthetics]

Reduce Signs of Ageing With the Help of Anti-Ageing Treatments

It is a known fact that as we age, our skin starts to look dull, and the first signs of ageing become noticeable. You may notice that fine lines and wrinkles also start to appear, and this makes you look older. However, you can reverse the visible signs of ageing with the help of anti ageing treatments. These treatments are very beneficial because they help to reduce the signs of ageing and restore your youthfulness. Lisa Thompson Aesthetics is a well-known provider offering clients the best anti ageing treatment in Dublin. 

Anti ageing treatments help to minimise facial lines and wrinkles, uplift sagging skin and add volume to your face. It is worthwhile to know that these treatments are safe and provide an affordable solution for helping you recapture your youthfulness. Anti ageing treatments provide several benefits that include - 

Improving your appearance

Reducing fine lines and wrinkles

Long-lasting results

Moisturize your skin

Natural-looking results

Clients can consult us, and our experienced and expert professionals will provide you with the best anti ageing treatments that will provide quality results and maintain youthful-looking skin for a long time.

We are your ultimate destination if you are searching for an aesthetic treatment clinic in Dublin. We provide various treatments that help you to tackle your skin concerns and restore your skin to become healthy and vibrant. You can consult us for a wide range of treatments that include body sculpting, skin treatments, chemical peels, skin boosters, lip fillers and fat-dissolving injections. We have a team of experienced professionals to provide you with the best treatments. With the help of these treatments, you will get long-lasting results.

Our aesthetic treatment clinic provides you with the best treatments at a reasonable price that you can afford. At our clinic, we use cutting-edge technologies and have the best facilities. It ensures that you will get quality results as required by you. 

So, what are you waiting for? Visit our aesthetic clinic, and rest assured we will provide you with the best services whenever you visit us.

[waaaiz]

China Skincare Market Research Report

Growth Opportunities in the China Skincare Market look promising over the next six years. This is mainly due to the rising disposable income and the strong demand for both inorganic as well as organic skincare products, particularly by individuals living in urban areas. The increasing consumer awareness associated with several advantages of utilizing personal care products will drive the market growth.

Request for a FREE Sample Report on China Skincare Market

China Skincare Market Dynamics (including market size, share, trends, forecast, growth, forecast, and industry analysis)

Key Drivers

Some of the prominent factors contributing to the growth of the China skincare market include the rising disposable income and the strong demand for both inorganic as well as organic skincare products, particularly by individuals living in urban areas. China's skincare market amounted to approximately USD 27,690 million by the end of 2026. The increasing consumer awareness associated with several advantages of utilizing personal care products, followed by growing e-commerce penetration, are certain factors that are expected to drive the growth of the China skincare market. In addition to this, Chinese women are rapidly opting for Skin Care products as an important part of their life and are the leading end-users of Skin Care products. There is an upsurge in sales volume of Skin Care products in China. Natural and herbal ingredients are generally present in Chinese skincare products, as they have a long history in various sectors in China like packaged food and dietary supplements. E-commerce is the biggest distributor of skincare in China. Major international brands and domestic brands are putting efforts and resources into the online channel, with live streaming offering a popular way of attracting consumers.

Type Segment Drivers

Based on the Type, the face moisturizer is projected to lead the market in the upcoming years due to the rise in demand for moisturizing cream, which involves special ingredients that aid to protect against the lack of moisture from the skin. Additionally, the rapid increase in demand for skin brightening cream, sun protection cream, and anti-aging cream among people will further support the growth of the market in the coming years.

Concern Segment Drivers

Based on the concern, anti-aging is projected to rise at higher CAGR in the coming years due to the strong demand for anti-aging cream and treatments by individuals, particularly the urban population. These creams can renew skin elasticity, firm the skin, decrease puffiness, and restore radiance from anti-aging treatments. Additionally, the rising demand for anti-aging skincare products in the nation due to the aging fears among the young population will further fuel the market growth.

China Skincare Market’s leading Manufacturers:

L’Oréal S.A.

The Procter & Gamble Company

Estée Lauder Inc.

Shiseido Company Ltd.

Unilever

Johnson & Johnson

Beiersdorf AG

Kao Corporation

Pierre Fabre Group

Coty Inc.

China Skincare Market Segmentation:

Segmentation by Type:

Face Moisturizer

Cleansers & Toner

Body Care

Serum

Others

Segmentation by Gender:

Male

Female

Infant

Segmentation by Concern:

Skin Brightening

Anti-aging

Sun Protection

Others

Segmentation by Distribution Channel:

Online Stores

Supermarkets

Specialized Stores

Other

About GMI Research

GMI Research is a market research and consulting company that offers business insights and market research reports for large and small & medium enterprises. Our detailed reports help the clients to make strategic business policies and achieve sustainable growth in the particular market domain. The company's large team of seasoned analysts and industry experts with experience from different regions such as Asia-Pacific, Europe, North America, among others, provides a one-stop solution for the client. Our market research report has in-depth analysis, which includes refined forecasts, a bird's eye view of the competitive landscape, key factors influencing the market growth, and various other market insights to aid companies in making strategic decisions. Featured in the 'Top 20 Most Promising Market Research Consultants' list of Silicon India Magazine in 2018, we at GMI Research are always looking forward to helping our clients to stay ahead of the curve.

Media Contact Company Name: GMI RESEARCH Contact Person: Sarah Nash Email: enquiry@gmiresearch.com Phone: Europe – +353 1 442 8820; US – +1 860 881 2270 Address: Dublin, Ireland Website: www.gmiresearch.com