Suchergebnisse

One does not have to be a political scientist to realize that the international situation has gotten steadily worse in the last fifty years. In the first years of this century, world power was in the hands of a few European nations. The general pattern of international society was kept stable through the British policy of balancing the powers. The wide world was under the control of the four or five great nations. The natives of controlled lands might be restless but there was really nothing which they could do about their fates.It is useless and childish to refuse to see what has now happened. It is a poor consolation to say that we have avoided open war The Communists are doing very well without it, and the West is losing as effectively as if it had lost a series of battles. For Communist purposes Cold War is more effective than hot war could ever be, and if hot war is necessary they are resolutely ready for the plunge. They have the initiative everywhere and the West can only devise hurried defenses against the latest Communist objective.

The problem is the place of an intellectual in the Church. Reference to earlier Christian philosophers, like Origen, Augustin, St. Thomas, does not solve the problem, because their definition of sci is diff from ours. They recognized that theology was the norm of valid teaching even in disciplines beyond theology. When Galileo was condemned by the Church, the new sci almost literally left the Church. Today the theologian has to recognize the relevance of sci developed without his assistance, but sci is giving new importance to religion & the Church is blessing the Cath sci'ts. In America the small number of Cath's in rational scholarship is an urgent problem. The Cath pop of an average eastern US U is 50% of the whole. The Cath theologians failed to produce a satisfactory explanation of the problem. Basically sociol'al explanation is right. The root of the US Cath Church is a non-intellectual proletariat from Europe, but the inherent conservatism of the Church to which the scholar is a threat has to be taken into account. The clergy may also be disturbed by the prospect of more scholars in the Cath community. The problem of US Cath intellectualism is a missionary preoccupation of those who want to recruit Cath's for intellectual life, but they meet with little response in the Cath community itself. There is a lack of recognition of what good scholarship is. Another source of disorientation is the manner of teaching philosophy in Cath Coll's. A sociol'al phenomenon in the US Cath body is a religious influence in its outlook on scholarship & a kind of training which leads away from it. It is difficult to make practical suggestions but there must be no urging of youth to a life of scholarship with the whip of the Church's need. If the Lord wants a more dynamic scholarly group in the American Church, He will raise it up & no man can get in His way. IPSA.

Worldwide there is a variety of regulatory provisions addressing nanomaterials. The identification as nanomaterial in a regulatory context often has the consequence that specific legal rules apply. In identifying nanomaterials, and to find out whether nanomaterial-specific provisions apply, the external size of particles is globally used as a criterion. For legal certainty, its assessment for regulatory purposes should be based on measurements and methods that are robust, fit for the purpose and ready to be accepted by different stakeholders and authorities. This should help to assure the safety of nanomaterials and at the same time facilitate their international trading. Therefore, we propose a categorisation scheme which is driven by the capabilities of common characterisation techniques for particle size measurement. Categorising materials according to this scheme takes into account the particle properties that are most important for a determination of their size. The categorisation is exemplified for the specific particle number based size metric of the European Commission's recommendation on the definition of nanomaterial, but it is applicable to other metrics as well. Matching the performance profiles of the measurement techniques with the material property profiles (i) allows selecting the most appropriate size determination technique for every type of material considered, (ii) enables proper identification of nanomaterials, and (iii) has the potential to be accepted by regulators, industry and consumers alike. Having such a scheme in place would facilitate the regulatory assessment of nanomaterials in regional legislation as well as in international relations between different regulatory regions assuring the safe trade of nanomaterials.

The present series of reports, the NanoDefine Methods Manual, has been developed within the NanoDefine project 'Development of an integrated approach based on validated and standardized methods to support the implementation of the EC recommendation for a definition of nanomaterial', funded by the European Union's 7th Framework Programme, under grant agreement 604347. In 2011 the European Commission (EC) published a recommendation for a definition of the term 'nanomaterial', the EC NM Definition, as a reference to determine whether an unknown material can be considered as a 'nanomaterial' for regulatory purposes1. One challenge is the development of methods that reliably identify, characterize and quantify nanomaterials (NM) both as substances and in various products and matrices. The overall goal of NanoDefine was to support the implementation of the EC NM Definition. It can also support the implementation of any NM definition based on particle size. The project has developed an integrated approach, which allows identifying any material as a nano- or not a nanomaterial according to the EC NM Definition. NanoDefine explicitly supported the governance challenges associated with the implementation of legislation concerning nanomaterials by: - addressing the issues on availability of suitable measuring techniques, reference materials, validated methods, acceptable to all stakeholders (authorities, policy makers, commercial firms), - developing an integrated and interdisciplinary approach and a close international co-operation and networking with academia, commercial firms and standardization bodies. Thus, the NanoDefine Methods Manual provides guidance on practical implementation of the EC NM Definition throughout the nanomaterial characterization process, and on the characterization techniques employed as well as their application range and limits. It assists the user in choosing the most appropriate measurement method(s) to identify any substance or mixture for a specific purpose, according to the EC NM Definition of a nanomaterial. The NanoDefine project also explored how to assess a material against the criteria of the definition through proxy solutions, i.e. by applying measurement techniques that indirectly determine the x50. Those findings were developed through empirically based scientific work and are included in Part 1 of this Manual. As they go beyond the text of the EC NM Definition, they may be used as practical approach to indicate whether a material is a nanomaterial or not, but keeping in mind that they should not be taken as recommendation for the implementation of the EC NM Definition in a regulatory context. The NanoDefine Methods Manual consists of the following three parts:  Part 1: The NanoDefiner Framework and Tools  Part 2: Evaluation of Methods  Part 3: Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) Part 1 covers the NanoDefiner framework, general information on measurement methods and performance criteria and tools developed by NanoDefine such as a materials categorisation system, a decision support flow scheme and an e-tool. Part 2 discusses the outcome of the evaluation of the nanomaterials characterisation methods for measuring size. Part 3 presents the 23 Standard Operating Procedures developed within the NanoDefine project. The current document is part 1.

Identifying nanomaterials (NMs) according to European Union Legislation is challenging, as there is an enormous variety of materials, with different physico-chemical properties. The NanoDefiner Framework and its Decision Support Flow Scheme (DSFS) allow choosing the optimal method to measure the particle size distribution by matching the material properties and the performance of the particular measurement techniques. The DSFS leads to a reliable and economic decision whether a material is an NM or not based on scientific criteria and respecting regulatory requirements. The DSFS starts beyond regulatory requirements by identifying non-NMs by a proxy Approach based on their volume-specific surface area. In a second step, it identifies NMs. The DSFS is tested on real-world materials and is implemented in an e-tool. The DSFS is compared with a decision flowchart of the European Commission's (EC) Joint Research Centre (JRC), which rigorously follows the explicit criteria of the EC NM definition with the focus on identifying NMs, and non-NMs are identified by exclusion. The two approaches build on the same scientific basis and measurement methods, but start from opposite ends: the JRC Flowchart starts by identifying NMs, whereas the NanoDefiner Framework first identifies non-NMs.

This document is a collection of three JRC Technical Reports that together form the "NanoDefine Methods Manual", which has been developed within the NanoDefine project 'Development of an integrated approach based on validated and standardized methods to support the implementation of the EC recommendation for a definition of nanomaterial', funded by the European Union's 7th Framework Programme, under grant agreement 604347. The overall goal of the NanoDefine project was to support the implementation of the European Commission Recommendation on the definition of nanomaterial (2011/696/EU). The project has developed an integrated empirical approach, which allows identifying a material as a nano- or not a nanomaterial according to the EC Recommendation. The NanoDefine Methods Manual consists of three parts: Part 1: The NanoDefiner Framework and Tools, which covers the NanoDefiner framework, general information on measurement methods and performance criteria, and tools developed by NanoDefine such as a materials categorisation system, a decision support flow scheme and an e-tool. Part 2: Evaluation of Methods, which discusses the outcome of the evaluation of the nanomaterials characterisation methods for measuring size. Part 3: Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), which presents the 23 Standard Operating Procedures developed within the NanoDefine project. In this combined document, these three parts are included as stand-alone reports, each having its own abstract, table of contents, page, table and figure numbering, and references.