Combining competencies and competitiveness for the European life sciences

The Youth Conference on European Life Science Careers News from academia: Women in Science Award for structural biologist     

A critical assessment of the European Commission's proposals for the risk assessment and registration of chemical substances in the European Union

In May, 2003, the European Commission published detailed proposals relating to its 2001 White Paper--Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy. The White Paper described a new registration system called the REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) system, for both new and existing chemicals. Subsequently, these detailed proposals were available for an eight-week consultation period for stakeholders to voice their views and concerns. In this paper, we describe our reactions to the Commissions more-detailed proposals. These include the creation of a European Chemicals Agency to implement the REACH system in conjunction with Competent Authorities (CAs) in Member States and the Commission itself. Unfortunately, many of our concerns and suggestions, previously voiced and shared with several other key stakeholders, remain unanswered, but are as relevant as when the White Paper was published. In particular, we are concerned about the lack of a clear and coherent strategy. There is no guidance for registrants on intelligent testing to maximise the use of non-animal approaches to safety testing, based on a combination of factors for estimating exposure levels, rather than mainly on production volumes. We are also concerned about the absence of a clear programme for the development, improvement and validation of new alternative methods, in conjunction with the Commissions own unit, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods, as well as other organisations with relevant expertise and experience, including FRAME. Finally, we explain why such measures should be introduced, together with clearer guidelines for the respective roles of the Agency, the CAs and the Commission in implementing and harmonising the REACH system at the European Union and Member State levels. A series of recommendations are made, to improve the situation and to improve the risk assessment process.     

A critical assessment of the European Commission's proposals for the risk assessment and registration of chemical substances in the European Union

In May, 2003, the European Commission published detailed proposals relating to its 2001 White Paper - Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy. The White Paper described a new registration system called the REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) system, for both new and existing chemicals. Subsequently, these detailed proposals were available for an eight-week consultation period for stakeholders to voice their views and concerns. In this paper, we describe our reactions to the Commission's more-detailed proposals. These include the creation of a European Chemicals Agency to implement the REACH system in conjunction with Competent Authorities (CAs) in Member States and the Commission itself. Unfortunately, many of our concerns and suggestions, previously voiced and shared with several other key stakeholders, remain unanswered, but are as relevant as when the White Paper was published. In particular, we are concerned about the lack of a clear and coherent strategy. There is no guidance for registrants on intelligent testing to maximise the use of non-animal approaches to safety testing, based on a combination of factors for estimating exposure levels, rather than mainly on production volumes. We are also concerned about the absence of a clear programme for the development, improvement and validation of new alternative methods, in conjunction with the Commission's own unit, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods, as well as other organisations with relevant expertise and experience, including FRAME. Finally, we explain why such measures should be introduced, together with clearer guidelines for the respective roles of the Agency, the CAs and the Commission in implementing and harmonising the REACH system at the European Union and Member State levels. A series of recommendations are made, to improve the situation and to improve the risk assessment process.     

European research infrastructures for the development of nanobiotechnologies

Research infrastructures are essential for top-level academic and industrial research activities. Throughout the successive framework programmes (FPs) of the EU, actions have been gradually developed to support researchers in accessing top-level European research infrastructures located outside their own country and also to better coordinate and integrate these infrastructures Europe-wide, enabling better research services. At the same time, research infrastructures pave the way for the development of scientific and technological advances. Under the sixth Framework Programme (FP6; 2002-2006), for example, nanobiotechnologies have benefited from these European actions through three approaches: the support of multi-disciplinary pan-European infrastructures; the support of pan-European infrastructures dedicated to biology but with usage in multiple domains of biology; and the funding of integrated centers for nanobiotechnologies. The seventh Framework Programme (FP7; 2007-2013) will reinforce these actions toward research infrastructures, with particular attention to the emergence of new ones as well as to the provision of important strategic research services in fields such as nanobiotechnologies.     

The European Research Council--a new opportunity for European science

The long-awaited European Research Council (ERC), which receives money from the research budget of the European Union and will finance fundamental science for Europe's scientists, has finally been established. With a focus on excellence, calls for both young and experienced scientists and an average budget of \[euro]1 billion per year, the ERC will have the opportunity to give basic research in Europe a significant boost.     

New generic proposal for the European Neogene large testudinids (Cryptodira) and the first phylogenetic hypothesis for the medium and large representatives of the European Cenozoic record

Fossil testudinids are known in Europe since the Eocene, with several taxa of medium size (from more than 0.3 m to less than 0.7 m) recognized in the Palaeogene record, most of them being poorly known. The size of several European Neogene taxa was larger (between 1 and 2 m). These large testudinids were relatively abundant and diverse, ranging from the early Miocene to the Pleistocene. However, there is a nomenclatural gap at the generic level for the Neogene forms, as their generally used assignment to the more primitive Eocene Cheirogaster cannot be sustained. This is because relatively little material has been assigned to the described species, and also because of the absence of a detailed study comparing all of the European taxa. Here, the European Cenozoic taxa are incorporated for the first time in a data matrix, so that a hypothesis on their phylogenetic relationships is justified. This study identified the large testudinids from the Neogene of Europe as belonging to a monophyletic clade, assigned to the new genus T itanochelon . The hitherto poorly understood ‘Testudo’ bolivari, proposed nearly a century ago but lacking diagnosis, is analysed in detail. It is recognized as the best‐represented large testudinid from the European record, and is identified as the type species of T itanochelon gen. nov. Its comparison with the other Neogene species allowed a detailed study of the new genus and an analysis of its phylogenetic relationships with the other European taxa. © 2014 The Linnean Society of London     

Regulations and the European scene

The environment does not recognize national boundaries. Nor, increasingly, does trade. There is, therefore, a need to harmonize the regulation of the planned release of organisms containing recombinant DNA. This is particularly important for the geographically and economically interdependent countries in Europe. The various nations within the European Community have responded differently to proposals for planned release. An important step towards harmonization has been made with the OECD report on recombinant DNA. Yet there is still scope for a Community-wide framework of regulation.