Trust, regulatory processes and NICE decision-making: Appraising cost-effectiveness models through appraising people and systems.

This article presents an ethnographic study of regulatory decision-making regarding the cost-effectiveness of expensive medicines at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England. We explored trust as one important mechanism by which problems of complexity and uncertainty were resolved. Existing studies note the salience of trust for regulatory decisions, by which the appraisal of people becomes a proxy for appraising technologies themselves. Although such (dis)trust in manufacturers was one important influence, we describe a more intricate web of (dis)trust relations also involving various expert advisors, fellow committee members and committee Chairs. Within these complex chains of relations, we found examples of both more blind-acquiescent and more critical-investigative forms of trust as well as, at times, pronounced distrust. Difficulties in overcoming uncertainty through other means obliged trust in some contexts, although not in others. (Dis)trust was constructed through inferences involving abstract systems alongside actors’ oral and written presentations-of-self. Systemic features and ‘forced options’ to trust indicate potential insidious processes of regulatory capture

The saṃvargavidyā and its Context in Two Sāmavedic Texts

No abstrac

De late 'ontdekking' van het Sanskrit en de Oudindische cultuur in Europa

Populariserende publicati

Vedic Terms Denoting Virtues and Merits

In an other publication (BODEWITZ, 2007a) I have discussed the lists of cardinal sins and vices, their specifications in the Veda and their parallels in the Western and Christian tradition. Now I will treat their positive counterparts (the virtues and merits), which do not have such clear enumerations (and partial parallels outside the Veda). Here the meaning of a few terms used to denote virtues and merits will be discussed, and an attempt will be made to get some information on their actual contents and background

Regulating teratogenicity as a health risk

The development of scientific knowledge and regulatory policy with respect to teratogenicity is reviewed. The current debate on the definition of teratogenicity and on perceived risks, as illustrated by the Dutch Health Council report on teratogenicity, originates from the increased regulatory demands and from incoherent development of teratology as a scientific discipline.Barriers in the development of knowledge are discussed with respect to their consequences for regulatory policy. Special emphasis is given to behavioural effects, to the rise of monitoring and registration systems, and to epidemiological research. From a regulatory perspective, knowledge on the public perception of teratogenicity as a health risk is inadequate.It is concluded that the present situation is ambivalent and poses a real problem for regulatory policy. The positions vary from refining the original and very strict definition stressing severity and low risk, to stressing the need for a more comprehensive definition; in the latter case teratogenicity is seen as a top of the iceberg problem to be treated as part of the reproductive toxicity health issue