European Law and New Health Technologies: The Research Agenda

Maps the research agenda that underpinned the edited collection 'European Law and New Health Technologies', that this pieces introduces.

European Law and New Health Technologies ESRC End of Award Report, RES-451-26-0764

End of award report for the funded research seminar series of the same name.

European Law and New Health Technologies

Health is a matter of fundamental importance in European societies, both as a human right in itself, and as a factor in a productive workforce and therefore a healthy economy. New health technologies promise improved quality of life for patients suffering from a range of diseases, and the potential for the prevention of incidence of disease in the future. At the same time, new health technologies pose significant challenges for governments, particularly in relation to ensuring the technologies are safe, effective, and provide appropriate value for (public) money.

To guard against the possible dangers arising from new health technologies, and to maximize the benefits, all European governments regulate their development, marketing, and public financing. In addition, several international institutions operating at European level, in particular the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the European Patent Office, have become involved in the regulation of new health technologies. They have done so both through traditional 'command and control' legal measures, and through other regulatory mechanisms, including guidelines, soft law, 'steering' through redistribution of resources, and private or quasi-private regulation.

This collection analyses European law and its relationships with new health technologies. It uses interdisciplinary insights, particularly from law but also drawing on regulation theory, and science and technology studies, to shed new light on some of the key defining features of the relationships and especially the roles of risk, rights, ethics, and markets. The collection explores the way in which European law's engagement with new health technologies is to be legitimized, and discusses the implications for biological or biomedical citizenship.

‘Symposium: New Technologies, European Law and Citizens’

This special issue seeks to draw attention to the relations between new technologies and European law (encompassing EU law and the law of the Council of Europe and its institutions), and some of the implications for citizens.

Review: G. De Búrca and J. Scott (eds.), Law and New Governance in the EU and the US (Hart, 2006)

Review of edited collection.

Inorganic arsenic in rice bran and its products are an order of magnitude higher than in bulk grain

Rice is more elevated in arsenic than all other grain crops tested to date, with whole grain (brown) rice having higher arsenic levels than polished (white). It is reported here that rice bran, both commercially purchased and specifically milled for this study, have levels of inorganic arsenic, a nonthreshold, class 1 carcinogen, reaching concentrations of approximately 1 mg/kg dry weight, around 10-20 fold higher than concentrations found in bulk grain. Although pure rice bran is used as a health food supplement, perhaps of more concern is rice bran solubles, which are marketed as a superfood and as a supplement to malnourished children in international aid programs. Five rice bran solubles products were tested, sourced from the United States and Japan, and were found to have 0.61-1.9 mg/kg inorganic arsenic. Manufactures recommend approximately 20 g servings of the rice bran solubles per day, which equates to a 0.012-0.038 mg intake of inorganic arsenic. There are no maximum concentration levels (MCLs) set for arsenic or its species in food stuffs. EU and U.S. water regulations, set at 0.01 mg/L total or inorganic arsenic, respectively, are based on the assumption that 1 L of water per day is consumed, i.e., 0.01 mg of arsenic/ day. At the manufacturers recommended rice bran solubles consumption rate, inorganic arsenic intake exceeds 0.01 mg/ day, remembering that rice bran solubles are targeted at malnourished children and that actual risk is based on mg kg(-1) day(-1) intake.

Survey of arsenic and its speciation in rice products such as breakfast cereals, rice crackers and Japanese rice condiments

Rice has been demonstrated to be one of the major contributors to arsenic (As) in human diets in addition to drinking water, but little is known about rice products as an additional source of As exposure. Rice products were analyzed for total As and a subset of samples were measured for arsenic speciation using high performance liquid chromatography interfaced with inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (HPLC-ICP-MS). A wide range of rice products had total and inorganic arsenic levels that typified those found in rice grain including, crisped rice, puffed rice, rice crackers, rice noodles and a range of Japanese rice condiments as well as rice products targeted at the macrobiotic, vegan, lactose intolerant and gluten intolerance food market. Most As in rice products are inorganic As (75.2-90.1%). This study provides a wider appreciation of how inorganic arsenic derived from rice products enters the human diet. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Counter-Revolution by Ideology? Law and development's vision(s) for post-revolutionary Egypt

Law and development, as both movement and practice, has led a tumultuous life: a hurried zenith cut short by a fatal critique followed by an opportunistic resurrection. The name alone is su?cient to trigger a range of reactions, extending from the complimentary to the condemnatory. In this article I track law and development’s evolution via an examination of its role in the remodelling of Egyptian society in the post-Nasser era. While the 2011 revolution has encouraged institutions such as USAID to hasten their legal reform e?orts, I argue that these are more akin to counter-revolution by ideology than genuine revolution by law. Nevertheless, rather than relegate the movement to the annals of imperial intrigue, I conclude by proposing the use of legal pluralism to revive, and possibly ignite, law and development’s emancipatory potential.