Allergenicity assessment of new or modified protein-containing food sources and ingredients

The growing world population, changing dietary habits, and increasing pressure on agricultural resources are drivers for the development of novel foods (including new protein sources as well as existing protein sources that are produced or used in an alternative way or in a different concentration). These changes, coupled with consumer inclination to adopt new dietary trends, may heighten the intake of unfamiliar proteins, or escalate consumption of specific ones, potentially amplifying the prevalence of known and undiscovered food allergies. Assessing the allergenicity of novel or modified protein-based foods encounters several challenges, including uncertainty surrounding acceptable risks and assessment criteria for determining safety. Moreover, the available methodological tools for gathering supportive data exhibit significant gaps. This paper synthesises these challenges, addressing the varied interpretations of “safe” across jurisdictions and societal attitudes towards allergenic risk. It proposes a comprehensive two-part framework for allergenicity assessment: the first part emphasises systematic consideration of knowledge and data requirements, while the second part proposes the application of a generic assessment approach, integrating a Threshold of Allergological Concern. This combined framework highlights areas that require attention to bridge knowledge and data gaps, and it delineates research priorities for its development and implementation

Challenging local realism with human choices

A Bell test is a randomized trial that compares experimental observations against the philosophical worldview of local realism 1, in which the properties of the physical world are independent of our observation of them and no signal travels faster than light. A Bell test requires spatially distributed entanglement, fast and high-efficiency detection and unpredictable measurement settings 2,3 . Although technology can satisfy the first two of these requirements 4-7, the use of physical devices to choose settings in a Bell test involves making assumptions about the physics that one aims to test. Bell himself noted this weakness in using physical setting choices and argued that human 'free will' could be used rigorously to ensure unpredictability in Bell tests 8 . Here we report a set of local-realism tests using human choices, which avoids assumptions about predictability in physics. We recruited about 100,000 human participants to play an online video game that incentivizes fast, sustained input of unpredictable selections and illustrates Bell-test methodology 9 . The participants generated 97,347,490 binary choices, which were directed via a scalable web platform to 12 laboratories on five continents, where 13 experiments tested local realism using photons 5,6, single atoms 7, atomic ensembles 10 and superconducting devices 11 . Over a 12-hour period on 30 November 2016, participants worldwide provided a sustained data flow of over 1,000 bits per second to the experiments, which used different human-generated data to choose each measurement setting. The observed correlations strongly contradict local realism and other realistic positions in bipartite and tripartite 12 scenarios. Project outcomes include closing the 'freedom-of-choice loophole' (the possibility that the setting choices are influenced by 'hidden variables' to correlate with the particle properties 13 ), the utilization of video-game methods 14 for rapid collection of human-generated randomness, and the use of networking techniques for global participation in experimental science

Challenging local realism with human choices

A Bell test is a randomized trial that compares experimental observations against the philosophical worldview of local realism. A Bell test requires spatially distributed entanglement, fast and high-efficiency detection and unpredictable measurement settings. Although technology can satisfy the first two of these requirements, the use of physical devices to choose settings in a Bell test involves making assumptions about the physics that one aims to test. Bell himself noted this weakness in using physical setting choices and argued that human `free will' could be used rigorously to ensure unpredictability in Bell tests. Here we report a set of local-realism tests using human choices, which avoids assumptions about predictability in physics. We recruited about 100,000 human participants to play an online video game that incentivizes fast, sustained input of unpredictable selections and illustrates Bell-test methodology. The participants generated 97,347,490 binary choices, which were directed via a scalable web platform to 12 laboratories on five continents, where 13 experiments tested local realism using photons, single atoms, atomic ensembles, and superconducting devices. Over a 12-hour period on 30 November 2016, participants worldwide provided a sustained data flow of over 1,000 bits per second to the experiments, which used different human-generated data to choose each measurement setting. The observed correlations strongly contradict local realism and other realistic positions in bipartite and tripartite scenarios. Project outcomes include closing the `freedom-of-choice loophole' (the possibility that the setting choices are influenced by `hidden variables' to correlate with the particle properties), the utilization of video-game methods for rapid collection of human generated randomness, and the use of networking techniques for global participation in experimental science.Comment: This version includes minor changes resulting from reviewer and editorial input. Abstract shortened to fit within arXiv limit

Validar a guerra: a construção do regime de Expertise estratégica

This article is intended to contribute to the interpretative analysis of war. For that purpose, it investigates how some apparatuses located in strategic thinking help to make modern war a social practice considered both technically feasible and, at the same time, legitimate for soldiers. In so doing, it makes use of two different but closely related theoretical fields, pragmatic sociology (finding inspiration in the work of scholars such as Luc Boltanski, Nicolas Dodier and Francis Chateauraynaud), and the sociology of scientific knowledge (based mostly on the work of Bruno Latour). On the one hand, the sociology of scientific knowledge has developed a productive questioning of the construction of scientific facts that is particularly relevant to the present research. On the other hand, pragmatic sociology generates a compatible framework able to describe collective actions. The combination of both approaches allows the description of the formation of a strategic expertise regime that supports the technical legitimacy of the use of military force. Together, the sociology of scientific knowledge and pragmatic sociology bring a particularly relevant perspective to research pertaining to war.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe