EU directive methodology faces criticism
Monday, 07 Aug 2006 08:26
The Royal Society headquarters in Edinburgh
Some of the methods used to establish facts which could crucially affect the content of future EU directives are insufficiently scientific, it has been claimed.
The Royal Society, one of Britain's most respected scientific organisations, has today called attention to methodology used in the compilation of a report by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) analysing a directive governing animal research.
The Royal Society objects to "internet searches" and "circumstantial anecdotes" being used as supporting evidence and criticises the EFSA for presenting the information as such.
"We are deeply concerned about the evidence cited in such an influential report," said Professor Ole Petersen, vice president of the Royal Society.
"Neither circumstantial evidence, nor unspecified internet searches, should ever be considered as adequate scientific evidence to inform scientific opinion."
The European Commission has been notified of the Royal Society's concerns in a letter sent today by the Society.
"In highlighting our concerns to the European Commission, we are acting on our responsibility as the national academy of science, to ensure that the process of setting scientific opinion, policy and legislation is transparent and based upon strong scientific evidence," Professor Petersen explained.