Suchergebnisse

Welk beeld leeft er rondom de rechter? Hoe beweegt de rechter door het maatschappelijke speelveld? En wat is de absolute kerntaak van de rechtspraak? Deze uitgave buigt zich over deze veelal onderbelichte vragen. Uitgebracht ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van Hans den Tonkelaar als rechter en bijzonder hoogleraar rechtspraak

AbstractIn this paper, we critically review three assumptions that govern the debate on the legitimacy of nudging interventions as a policy instrument: (1) nudges may violate autonomous decision-making; (2) nudges lend themselves to easy implementation in public policy; and (3) nudges are a simple and effective mean for steering individual choice in the right direction. Our analysis reveals that none of these assumptions are supported by recent studies entailing unique insights into nudging from three disciplinary outlooks: ethics, public administration and psychology. We find that nudges are less of a threat to autonomous choice than critics sometimes claim, making them ethically more legitimate than often assumed. Nonetheless, because their effectiveness is critically dependent on boundary conditions, their implementation is far from easy. The findings of this analysis thus suggest new opportunities for identifying when and for whom nudge interventions are preferable to more conventional public policy arrangements.

Background: Methods and approaches that can be used in food and nutrition research are changing at a faster pace than ever. Whereas animal methods are mostly known for their use in food safety analysis (see Part I), they also play in important role in proof-of-concept and mechanistic studies of products, as well as studying potency, efficacy, and tolerance of foods and food ingredients. Members of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Europe have formed an expert group to review possibilities, opportunities, and challenges for the potential use of alternative testing strategies in nutrition research and regulatory requirements, supporting the 3Rs principle of Replacement, Reduction, Refinement of animal research, which can ultimately be used in support of regulatory submissions for pre-market authorisation. Scope and approach: For the different areas of food for specific groups and health claims, the acceptability of nonanimal approaches is evaluated in comparison to legislative requirements in Europe. The alternative approaches considered cover emerging tools and methodologies such as organoids, organs-on-a-chip or human in vitro gastrointestinal simulators. Conclusions: In nutrition research, there has been a long tradition of following a certain experimental trajectory for grounding scientific hypotheses starting from in vitro data moving on to in vivo verification in a preferred animal model and finally proving this in a human setting. From a regulatory perspective there is no specific requirement for animal experimentation that justifies the use of the majority of animal experiments in the assessment of nutritional content and value of food products. However, animal data are mostly considered as the standard, and guidance for alternative approaches that would be accepted is lacking. It is therefore important to further build evidence and offer validation for the adequacy of already existing in vitro tools to ensure their suitability for substantiating dose levels and further planning clinical ...

Background: Methods and approaches that can be used in toxicology and safety assessment are changing at a faster pace than ever. Members of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Europe have formed an expert group to review possibilities, opportunities and challenges for the potential use of non-animal testing strategies in food safety and nutrition research, which can ultimately be used in support of regulatory submissions for pre-market authorisation. Scope and approach: For the different areas of food improvement agents, genetically modified foods and novel foods, the acceptability of non-animal strategies is evaluated in comparison to legislative requirements in Europe. Current hazard and risk assessment tools that do not require additional animal testing are reviewed and emerging tools and methodologies considered, covering advanced in vitro methods, in silico and system biology approaches and high-throughput methods for mode-of-action assessment. Conclusions: The paper highlights the great potential for research strategies to be developed that reduce or avoid the use of animal tests, with the generation of more human-relevant data from multiple sources. It also shows the discordance in current legislation: on one hand saying non-animal strategies should be used, but on the other hand not providing sufficient guidance, leading in practice to lack of use of these non-animal testing strategies. This emphasizes the need for scientific developments and acceptability to be more reflected in legislation (e.g. guidance). What are we waiting for?

Background: Methods and approaches that can be used in toxicology and safety assessment are changing at a faster pace than ever. Members of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Europe have formed an expert group to review possibilities, opportunities and challenges for the potential use of non-animal testing strategies in food safety and nutrition research, which can ultimately be used in support of regulatory submissions for pre-market authorisation. Scope and approach: For the different areas of food improvement agents, genetically modified foods and novel foods, the acceptability of non-animal strategies is evaluated in comparison to legislative requirements in Europe. Current hazard and risk assessment tools that do not require additional animal testing are reviewed and emerging tools and methodologies considered, covering advanced in vitro methods, in silico and system biology approaches and high-throughput methods for mode-of-action assessment. Conclusions: The paper highlights the great potential for research strategies to be developed that reduce or avoid the use of animal tests, with the generation of more human-relevant data from multiple sources. It also shows the discordance in current legislation: on one hand saying non-animal strategies should be used, but on the other hand not providing sufficient guidance, leading in practice to lack of use of these non-animal testing strategies. This emphasizes the need for scientific developments and acceptability to be more reflected in legislation (e.g. guidance). What are we waiting for?

Avian influenza virus (AIV) subtypes H5 and H7 can infect poultry causing low pathogenicity (LP) AI, but these LPAIVs may mutate to highly pathogenic AIV in chickens or turkeys causing high mortality, hence H5/H7 subtypes demand statutory intervention. Serological surveillance in the European Union provides evidence of H5/H7 AIV exposure in apparently healthy poultry. To identify the most sensitive screening method as the first step in an algorithm to provide evidence of H5/H7 AIV infection, the standard approach of H5/H7 antibody testing by haemagglutination inhibition (HI) was compared with an ELISA, which detects antibodies to all subtypes. Sera (n = 1055) from 74 commercial chicken flocks were tested by both methods. A Bayesian approach served to estimate diagnostic test sensitivities and specificities, without assuming any 'gold standard'. Sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA was 97% and 99.8%, and for H5/H7 HI 43% and 99.8%, respectively, although H5/H7 HI sensitivity varied considerably between infected flocks. ELISA therefore provides superior sensitivity for the screening of chicken flocks as part of an algorithm, which subsequently utilises H5/H7 HI to identify infection by these two subtypes. With the calculated sensitivity and specificity, testing nine sera per flock is sufficient to detect a flock seroprevalence of 30% with 95% probability.

The COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Action ES0601: advances in homogenization methods of climate series: an integrated approach (HOME) has executed a blind intercomparison and validation study for monthly homogenization algorithms. Time series of monthly temperature and precipitation were evaluated because of their importance for climate studies and because they represent two important types of statistics (additive and multiplicative). The algorithms were validated against a realistic benchmark dataset. The benchmark contains real inhomogeneous data as well as simulated data with inserted inhomogeneities. Random independent break-type inhomogeneities with normally distributed breakpoint sizes were added to the simulated datasets. To approximate real world conditions, breaks were introduced that occur simultaneously in multiple station series within a simulated network of station data. The simulated time series also contained outliers, missing data periods and local station trends. Further, a stochastic nonlinear global (network-wide) trend was added. ; This study has been performed with support of the European Union, through the COST Action ES0601 – Advances in Homogenisation Methods of Climate Series: an Integrated Approach (HOME), as well as the project Large Scale Climate Changes and their Environmental Relevance funded by the North Rhine-Westphalia Academy of Science. The contribution of VV was supported by the surrogate cloud project (VE 366/3), the one of RL by the Daily Stew project (VE366/5), both sponsored by the German Science Foundation (DFG). The contribution of EA was sponsored by the "Cambios en la Frecuencia, Intensidad y Duracion de eventos Extremos en la Península Ibérica", code number: CGL2007-65546-C03-02.

Frontmatter --Contents --Digging into Digital Roots. Towards a Conceptual Media and Communication History --Technologies and Connections --Networks --Media Convergence --Multimedia --Interactivity --Artificial Intelligence --Agency and Politics --Global Governance --Data(fication) --Fake News --Echo Chambers --Digital Media Activism --Users and Practices --Telepresence --Digital Loneliness --Amateurism --User-Generated Content (UGC) --Fandom --Authenticity --Authors