Yilcan: yield of illicit indoor cannabis plantations

De Belgische justitie merkt de jongste jaren een aanzienlijke stijging in het aantal in beslag genomen indoor cannabisplantages. De veroordeling van de daders is gebaseerd op de (grote) winsten die met de cannabisteelt en –handel gepaard gaan, maar de justiële autoriteiten hanteren hiervoor verouderde cijfers (28 g cannabis per plant en een verkoopsprijs aan de teler van € 3 per gram). Onderzoek van het Federale Wetenschapsbeleid (BELSPO) in het kader van het onderzoeksprogramma ter ondersteuning van het Belgisch beleid inzake drugs, uitgevoerd door de vakgroep Plantaardige Productie en de Vakgroep Strafrecht en Criminologie (Universiteit Gent) bracht aan het licht dat de opbrengstcijfers beter worden uitgedrukt in g per m² (i.p.v. per plant), dat een betrouwbaar, hedendaags opbrengstcijfer voor een doorsnee cannabisplantage 575 g per m² bedraagt (=48 g per plant bij een dichtheid van 12 planten per m²; en 36 g per plant bij een dichtheid van 16 planten per m²), en dat de verkoopsprijs op telersniveau best wordt opgetrokken tot € 4 per g. De onderzoekers formuleren verder een aantal aanbevelingen voor respectievelijk politie en justitie, die deze onderzoeksresultaten bij toekomstige opsporing en vervolging willen gebruiken

Feasibility study on drug consumption rooms in Belgium

People who use illicit drugs (PWUD) experience a wide range of drug-related harms. The goal of harm reduction is to reduce these adverse effects of drug use, without necessarily reducing drug use itself. By providing a safe and hygienic environment to consume pre-obtained drugs under the supervision of trained staff, drug consumption rooms (DCRs) aim to reduce both individual-level and public-level harms associated with illicit drug use. A substantial body of evidence has accumulated over the past three decades to support the effectiveness of DCRs in achieving their primary health and public order objectives, and therefore supports their role within a continuum of services for PWUD. Despite the abundance of scientific evidence supporting DCRs, there continues to be social and structural barriers to the implementation of this public health intervention in communities across the globe. Yet, the debate about implementing new DCRs remains high on the political agenda in a number of countries worldwide. To date, Belgium does not offer a DCR to its drug using population. Against this background, the Belgian Science Policy Office (BELSPO) commissioned a first-ever study to assess the feasibility of DCRs in Belgium. The objective of the current feasibility study was to identify (legal) preconditions, design and operational considerations that would allow a DCR to be added within a continuum of policy initiatives for PWUD in five Belgian cities: Ghent, Antwerp, Brussels, Charleroi and Liège. The aims were threefold: (1) provide an up-to-date overview of the effectiveness, models, and barriers of DCRs worldwide, with particular attention to DCRs in Belgium’s four neighbouring countries; (2) conduct an in-depth analysis of the legal framework within a DCR could operate in Belgium; and (3) conduct a feasibility study with local stakeholders and PWUD from each of the five cities. Based on our findings, we formulate 18 recommendations specifically tailored to the Belgian context: essential preconditions (including legal options); main considerations when implementing a DCR; the implementation process; and monitoring and evaluation

Serum miR-96-5P and miR-339-5P Are Potential Biomarkers for Multiple System Atrophy and Parkinson's Disease

Parkinson's disease (PD) and Multiple System Atrophy (MSA) are progressive neurodegenerative diseases with overlap of symptoms in early stages of disease. No reliable biomarker exists and the diagnosis is mainly based on clinical features. Several studies suggest that miRNAs are involved in PD and MSA pathogenesis. Our goal was to study two serum circulating microRNAs (miR-96-5p and miR-339-5p) as novel biomarkers for the differential diagnosis between PD and MSA. Serum samples were obtained from 51 PD patients, 52 MSA patients and 56 healthy controls (HC). We measured levels of miRNAs using quantitative PCR and compared the levels of miR-96-5p and miR-339-5p among PD, MSA and HC groups using a one-way analysis of variance. Correlations between miRNA expression and clinical data were calculated using Pearson's rho test. We used the miRTarBase to detect miRNA targets and STRING to evaluate co-expression relationship among target genes. MiR-96-5p was significantly increased in MSA patients compared with HC (Fold change (fc): 3.6; p = 0.0001) while it was decreased in PD patients compared with HC (Fold change: 4; p = 0.0002). Higher miR-96-5P levels were directly related to longer disease duration in MSA patients. We observed a significant increase of miR-339-5p in MSA patients compared with PD patients (fc: 2.5; p = 0.00013). miR-339-5p was increased in MSA patients compared with HC (fc: 2.4; p = 0.002). We identified 32 target genes of miR-96-5p and miR-339-5p, some of which are involved in neurodegenerative diseases. The study of those miRNAs could be useful to identify non-invasive biomarkers for early differential diagnosis between PD and MSA

Neurofilament light levels predict clinical progression and death in multiple system atrophy

Disease-modifying treatments are currently being trialed in multiple system atrophy (MSA). Approaches based solely on clinical measures are challenged by heterogeneity of phenotype and pathogenic complexity. Neurofilament light chain protein has been explored as a reliable biomarker in several neurodegenerative disorders but data in multiple system atrophy have been limited. Therefore, neurofilament light chain is not yet routinely used as an outcome measure in MSA. We aimed to comprehensively investigate the role and dynamics of neurofilament light chain in multiple system atrophy combined with cross-sectional and longitudinal clinical and imaging scales and for subject trial selection. In this cohort study we recruited cross-sectional and longitudinal cases in multicentre European set-up. Plasma and cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light chain concentrations were measured at baseline from 212 multiple system atrophy cases, annually for a mean period of 2 years in 44 multiple system atrophy patients in conjunction with clinical, neuropsychological and MRI brain assessments. Baseline neurofilament light chain characteristics were compared between groups. Cox regression was used to assess survival; ROC analysis to assess the ability of neurofilament light chain to distinguish between multiple system atrophy patients and healthy controls. Multivariate linear mixed effects models were used to analyse longitudinal neurofilament light chain changes and correlated with clinical and imaging parameters. Polynomial models were used to determine the differential trajectories of neurofilament light chain in multiple system atrophy. We estimated sample sizes for trials aiming to decrease NfL levels. We show that in multiple system atrophy, baseline plasma neurofilament light chain levels were better predictors of clinical progression, survival, and degree of brain atrophy than the NfL rate of change. Comparative analysis of multiple system atrophy progression over the course of disease, using plasma neurofilament light chain and clinical rating scales, indicated that neurofilament light chain levels rise as the motor symptoms progress, followed by deceleration in advanced stages. Sample size prediction suggested that significantly lower trial participant numbers would be needed to demonstrate treatment effects when incorporating plasma neurofilament light chain values into multiple system atrophy clinical trials in comparison to clinical measures alone. In conclusion, neurofilament light chain correlates with clinical disease severity, progression, and prognosis in multiple system atrophy. Combined with clinical and imaging analysis, neurofilament light chain can inform patient stratification and serve as a reliable biomarker of treatment response in future multiple system atrophy trials of putative disease-modifying agents.European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programm

Overview of the MOSAiC expedition - Atmosphere

With the Arctic rapidly changing, the needs to observe, understand, and model the changes are essential. To support these needs, an annual cycle of observations of atmospheric properties, processes, and interactions were made while drifting with the sea ice across the central Arctic during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition from October 2019 to September 2020. An international team designed and implemented the comprehensive program to document and characterize all aspects of the Arctic atmospheric system in unprecedented detail, using a variety of approaches, and across multiple scales. These measurements were coordinated with other observational teams to explore cross-cutting and coupled interactions with the Arctic Ocean, sea ice, and ecosystem through a variety of physical and biogeochemical processes. This overview outlines the breadth and complexity of the atmospheric research program, which was organized into 4 subgroups: atmospheric state, clouds and precipitation, gases and aerosols, and energy budgets. Atmospheric variability over the annual cycle revealed important influences from a persistent large-scale winter circulation pattern, leading to some storms with pressure and winds that were outside the interquartile range of past conditions suggested by long-term reanalysis. Similarly, the MOSAiC location was warmer and wetter in summer than the reanalysis climatology, in part due to its close proximity to the sea ice edge. The comprehensiveness of the observational program for characterizing and analyzing atmospheric phenomena is demonstrated via a winter case study examining air mass transitions and a summer case study examining vertical atmospheric evolution. Overall, the MOSAiC atmospheric program successfully met its objectives and was the most comprehensive atmospheric measurement program to date conducted over the Arctic sea ice. The obtained data will support a broad range of coupled-system scientific research and provide an important foundation for advancing multiscale modeling capabilities in the Arctic

Feasibility study on drug consumption rooms in Belgium - Étude de faisabilité de salles de consommation à moindre risque en Belgique

[English version below] Les usagers de drogues illicites (UDI) font l'expérience d'un vaste ensemble de dommages liés à cette consommation de drogues. Dans le monde entier, les Etats ont, depuis de nombreuses années, développé diverses options politiques en matière de drogues qui visent à réduire de tels dommages, lesdites politiques de Réduction des risques (Csete et al., 2016; Strang et al., 2012). Cette composante désigne les politiques, les programmes et les pratiques visant principalement la réduction des conséquences négatives connexes à l'usage de drogues psychoactives, légales ou illégales, sur les plans sanitaire, social et économique, sans pour autant viser la réduction de la consommation elle-même. La Réduction des Risques est basée sur un modèle de santé publique dont l'objectif premier est d'améliorer l'état de santé et de bien-être des usagers de drogues tout en réduisant les dommages pour la population et la société. Il s'agit donc d'un complément aux approches qui visent la prévention et la réduction de l'usage de drogues en général (EMCDDA, 2010). Des organisations internationales considèrent les interventions de Réduction des risques comme des good practices. Celles-ci incluent les traitements de substitution aux opiacés, les programmes d'échange et d'accès aux seringues et aux aiguilles, ou les traitements par délivrance d'héroïne contrôlée. L'une des interventions spécifiques de Réduction des Risques sont les salles de consommation à moindre risque (SMCR), que l'on définit comme des lieux reconnus légalement, offrant un environnement hygiéniquement sûr, où des individus peuvent consommer les drogues qu'ils ont obtenues préalablement, sans jugement moral, et sous la supervision d'un personnel qualifié. Bien que les SMCR peuvent varient quant à leurs procédures opérationnelles et leurs modèles de fonctionnement, leurs objectifs sont similaires. La finalité générale des SMCR est d'entrer en contact avec les populations d'UDI les plus à risque et de répondre à leurs problèmes, principalement les usagers injecteurs et ceux qui consomment en public. Pour cette population, les SMCR visent à réduire les risques de transmission d'infections, ainsi qu'à diminuer les problèmes de morbidité et de mortalité liés aux overdoses et aux autres dommages associés à l'usage de drogues en milieu non-hygiénique ou peu sûr. En plus de ces objectifs sanitaires, les SMCR visent également à réduire les nuisances liées à l'usage de drogues dans des lieux publics et de diminuer la présence de seringues et d'aiguilles usagées sur la voie publique, ainsi que d'autres problèmes d'ordre public en relation avec les scènes ouvertes de consommation de drogues. Ainsi, les SMCR visent à diminuer les conséquences négatives de l'usage de drogues illicites, tant au plan individuel que social. DRUGROOM │ 4 De tels services de Réduction des Risques sont opérationnels depuis 1986. En 2017, l'Europe compte 90 SMCR officielles dans huit pays: au Danemark, en Norvège, en Espagne, en Suisse, et dans les quatre pays voisins de la Belgique: en France, en Allemagne, au Luxembourg et aux Pays-Bas. Des preuves scientifiques substantielles ont été obtenues au cours des trente dernières années à propos de l'efficacité des SMCR. Malgré des différences opérationnelles, on a montré des effets positifs des SMCR tant pour les UDI que pour la population générale, en particulier lorsqu'elles sont intégrées dans le tissu des autres services d'assistance locale. En outre, la fréquentation et l'utilisation des SMCR ont été associées à une réduction significative des accidents par overdose et des problèmes liés à l'échange de seringues usagées, des blessures par injection, sans pour autant engendrer une augmentation du nombre d'UDI et sans affecter les taux de rechute. Les SMCR constituent aussi un point d'entrée important vers les services de soins et autres services sociaux pour usagers de drogues. Sur le plan social, la mise en place de SMCR a permis d'améliorer l'ordre public en réduisant la présence de déchets liés à l'injection sans pour autant avoir augmenté la criminalité associée à l'usage de drogues. Ainsi, les SMCR ont été évaluées comme ayant atteint leurs objectifs de santé et de sécurité publique, et trouvent donc leur place dans l'ensemble des services destinés aux UDI (Kennedy, Karamouzian, & Kerr, 2017; Potier et al., 2014). Cependant, malgré l'abondance de preuves scientifiques, la mise en place de SMCR reste un sujet très controversé, bien que ce soit à l'agenda politique d'un grand nombre de pays dans le monde (par ex. en Irlande, en Ecosse, ou aux Etats-Unis). Pourtant, à ce jour, il n'existe pas de SMCR en Belgique. La Cellule Générale de Politique Drogues a publié un document de travail en 2016 à ce sujet (CGPD, 2016). Ce document s'interroge sur la faisabilité et les conditions préalables à remplir pour la mise en place de SMCR en Belgique, avec une attention spécifique aux besoins et aux aspects organisationnels, budgétaires et légaux. Une des sept conclusions finales du document était qu'une étude de faisabilité était nécessaire si l'on voulait mettre en place de telles SMCR. C'est donc dans ce contexte que la Politique Scientifique Fédérale (BELSPO) a commandité, pour la première fois, une recherche évaluant cette faisabilité en Belgique. ----------------------------------- People who use illicit drugs (PWUD) experience a wide range of drug-related harms. Worldwide, countries have been converging on a core of drug policy options aimed at reducing these drug-related harms for many years, including harm reduction (Csete et al., 2016; Strang et al., 2012). This latter component, harm reduction, refers to policies, programmes and practices that aim primarily to reduce the adverse health, social and economic consequences of the use of legal and illegal psychoactive drugs, without necessarily reducing drug consumption. Harm reduction is grounded within a public health model, which primarily aims to improve the health and well-being of drug users alongside reducing community and societal level harms, and complements approaches that seek to prevent or reduce the overall level of drug use (EMCDDA, 2010). International bodies identify harm reduction interventions as good practices, including opioid substitution treatment, needle and syringe (exchange) programmes, and heroin-assisted treatment (EMCDDA, 2010). One specific intervention includes drug consumption rooms1 (DCRs), defined as legally sanctioned facilities offering a hygienic environment where individuals can use pre-obtained drugs in a non-judgemental environment and under supervision of trained staff. Although DCRs vary in operational procedures and design, the aims of DCRs are similar across sites. The overall rationale for DCRs is reach out to, and address the problems of, specific high-risk populations of PWUD, especially injectors and those who consume in public. For this group, DCRs aim to reduce the risk of transmission of blood-borne infections, to reduce the likelihood of morbidity and mortality resulting from overdose, and to help people who use drugs avoid other harms associated with drug consumption under unhygienic or unsafe conditions. In addition to these health-oriented goals, DCRs also aim to contribute to a reduction in drug use in public places and the presence of discarded needles and other related public order problems linked with open drug scenes. In sum, DCRs aim to reduce both individual-level and public-level harms associated with illicit drug use. These harm reduction facilities have been operating since 1986; anno 2017, Europe counted 90 official DCRs in eight countries: Denmark, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, and Belgium’s four neighbouring countries: France, Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands (EMCDDA, 2017). A substantial body of scientific evidence has accumulated over the past three decades to support the effectiveness of DCRs; although heterogeneous in design and operation, DCRs have demonstrated that they can 1 The term ‘drug consumption room’ is often used interchangeably with supervised injection facility (SIF), safe injection site (SIS), and medically supervised injection centre (MSIC). DRUGROOM │ 4 produce beneficial effects, both for PWUD and for the community, particularly when they are part of a wider continuum of local interventions. Moreover, (frequent) DCR use has been associated with reductions in overdose-related harms, syringe sharing and injection-related injuries, without increasing either the number of local PWUD or rates of relapse. DCRs also serve as important entry points to external drug treatment and other health and social services for PWUD. At the community level, the establishment of DCRs has contributed to improvements in public order through reductions in public drug use and publicly-discarded injection-related litter, and has not been associated with increases in drug-related crime. Collectively, the available evidence suggests that DCRs are effectively meeting their primary public health and order objectives and therefore supports their role within a continuum of services for PWUD (Kennedy, Karamouzian, & Kerr, 2017; Potier et al., 2014). Despite this abundance of evidence, implementation of DCRs remains highly controversial. Yet, the debate about implementing new DCRs remains high on the political agenda in a number of countries worldwide (e.g., Ireland, Scotland, United States). To date, Belgium does not offer a DCR to its drug using population. The General Drugs Policy Cell published a working paper in 2016 devoted to the topic of DCRs in Belgium (ACD, 2016). They sought to investigate the feasibility and preconditions for the implementation of DCRs in Belgium, with specific attention to needs, and organisational, budgetary and legal aspects. One of the seven final conclusions was that, if one wishes to implement a DCR, a prior feasibility study is essential. Against this background, the Belgian Science Policy Office (BELSPO) commissioned a first-ever study to assess the feasibility of DCRs in Belgium

A Spatial Decision Eye-Tracking Task in Patients with Prodromal and Mild Alzheimer’s Disease

International audienc