Conflict of interest. The presence of a conflict of interest is independent of the occurrence of impropriety. Therefore, a conflict of interest can be discovered and voluntarily defused before any corruption occurs. A widely used definition is: "A conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgement or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest. "[1] Primary interest refers to the principal goals of the profession or activity, such as the protection of clients, the health of patients, the integrity of research, and the duties of public office.
Secondary interest includes not only financial gain but also such motives as the desire for professional advancement and the wish to do favours for family and friends, but conflict of interest rules usually focus on financial relationships because they are relatively more objective, fungible, and quantifiable. Related to the practice of law[edit] Organizational[edit] Types[edit] European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) – Committed since 2002 to ensuring that Europe's food is safe. EFSA Press Release: EFSA identifies risks to bees from neonicotinoids.
Press Release 16 January 2013 EFSA scientists have identified a number of risks posed to bees by three neonicotinoid insecticides[1]. The Authority was asked by the European Commission to assess the risks associated with the use of clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam as seed treatment or as granules, with particular regard to: their acute and chronic effects on bee colony survival and development; their effects on bee larvae and bee behaviour; and the risks posed by sub-lethal doses[2] of the three substances. In some cases EFSA was unable to finalise the assessments due to shortcomings in the available data. The risk assessments focused on three main routes of exposure: exposure from residues in nectar and pollen in the flowers of treated plants; exposure from dust produced during the sowing of treated seeds or application of granules; and exposure from residues in guttation fluid[3] produced by treated plants. Exposure from pollen and nectar. Notes to editors:
Pesticides against pollinators. New scientific evidence triggers EU concern Neonicotinoids are a class of insecticides that came onto the market in the mid 1990s and early 2000s. Many crops such as corn, soy, wheat or rapeseed are now treated with them. They are normally applied directly to seeds or in soil treatments, in an attempt to preserve seeds and plants from insect attacks at an early stage. As systemic pesticides, once in the seed, they enter the whole plant through its vascular system and are found in every plant tissue (leaves, flowers, pollen...); but they can also remain active in the soil for a long time (up to three years). Particularly controversial among the neonicotinoids are Thiametoxam, Imidacloprid and Clothianidin, substances patented by biotech and pesticide companies Syngenta and Bayer. The French scientific study reported the loss of honeybee foragers caused by exposure to low doses of Thiamethoxam (Syngenta).
A furious lobbying campaign It’s farmers’ fault. The battle for Member States’ vote. Snoeiharde giflobby Trouw. CEO (corporateeurope) sur Twitter. EU Ombudsman: EFSA fails on conflict of interests. Skip to main content EU Ombudsman: EFSA fails on conflict of interests May 29th 2013 The power of lobbies, Revolving doors, Food and agriculture, EFSA European Food Safety Authority mishandled a major revolving doors case with biotechnology company Syngenta Brussels/ Munich 29.5.2013 - In a May 23d ruling, the EU Ombudsman stated that EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) failed to take adequate measures to prevent conflict of interests arising from a major 'revolving doors' case in 2008.
According to the Ombudsman's conclusions, EFSA “failed to fulfil the procedural obligations emanating from the applicable rules” and did not “acknowledge its failure to observe the relevant procedural rules and to carry out a sufficiently thorough assessment of the potential conflict of interests (…).” Testbiotech brought the Renckens case to public attention in 2009 but EFSA and the EU Commission refused to take any action. “EFSA seems to not be able to solve its problems with conflict of interests. Endocrine Disruptors. Additional tools How the European Commission addresses challenges posed by endocrine disruptors. The European Commission organised a conference on "Endocrine Disruptors: Current challenges in science and policy" on 11 and 12 June 2012.
The presentations and discussions covered the effects of endocrine disruptors on human health and the environment, the risks, the identification of endocrine disruptors and policy objectives (see programme and presentations). The outcome of the conference will feed into the review of the European Commission's current strategy on endocrine disruptors. It will also provide input to the Commission's upcoming proposal for criteria for the identification of substances with endocrine disrupting properties. Press memo More photos The report on the State of the Art of the Assessment of Endocrine Disruptors has been finalised by the contractor at the end of January 2012 and is available here.
(pdf)open_letter. Scientists Critical of EU's Draft Chemical Regulation Policy Have Industry Ties. This special report by Stéphane Horel and Brian Bienkowski was originally published Sept. 23 by Environmental Health News. Seventeen scientists who have criticized plans in Europe to regulate endocrine-disrupting chemicals have past or current ties to regulated industries. An investigation by Environmental Health News reveals that of 18 toxicology journal editors who signed a controversial editorial, 17 have collaborated with the chemical, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, tobacco, pesticide or biotechnology industries. Some have received research funds from industry associations, while some have served as industry consultants or advisors.
[Read about the scientists here.] The editorial – published in 14 scientific journals from July to September – has created a firestorm in Europe among many scientists and regulators. All of the scientists who responded to questions from Environmental Health News denied they were influenced by industry. ‘Worrying’ conflicts of interest © Food Safety News.
Resourc: Van Gorcom wil wetenschappers bij EFSA uit de wind houden. Robert van Gorcom, directeur van het Rikilt, is benoemd in het bestuur van de Europese voedselveiligheidsautoriteit EFSA. Hij wil de politieke druk weghouden bij de wetenschappelijke panels van EFSA die adviseren over voedselveiligheid. Toen de European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2002 werd opgericht in het Italiaanse Parma, was er behoefte aan een onafhankelijk gezaghebbend instituut die de voedselveiligheidsrisico’s ging beoordelen. Maar al snel lagen de adviezen van de EFSA onder vuur, met name die over gmo’s, plastic weekmakers en pesticiden. EU-lidstaten willen invloed op de uitkomsten, net als de industrie-lobby en actiegroeperingen. Waarom gaat Robert van Gorcom in zo’n slangenkuil werken? ‘Mijn benoeming is in het belang van Wageningen UR en Nederland’, zegt de Rikilt-directeur.
Dat die politieke druk er is, weet Van Gorcom maar al te goed van Rikilt-onderzoekers. Van Gorcom vindt echter dat de EFSA wetenschappers het hemd van het lijf mag vragen over hun nevenfuncties. Henk tennekes on Twitter: "@simonvink de hele risico analyse van pesticiden moet op de schop en dat is mijn verdienste. EFSA heeft mijn aanbevelingen overgenomen"