OpenLobby.EU
Explore

ASSOCIATION MEDICALE EUROPEENNE

EMA

Created by and for doctors, EMA is essentially a service organisation.

Lobbying Activity

Response to Towards a Circular, Regenerative and Competitive Bioeconomy

19 Jun 2025

The concept of the circular economy, developed also inside the European Medical Association for several years considering its very relevant health issues, is gaining popularity worldwide. There is an attempt by manufacturers and consumers to at least pay lip service to recycling and re-use of materials to reduce the burden of waste products piled high in refuse mountains all around the planet. The strategy shares attributes with current movements centered on climate change and pollution, namely, to be socially worthwhile and to have a strong pressure group, defined goals and terminology, but it currently appears to offer few practical solutions. From this broad idea of being more careful with resources and how they are managed, the circular economy we already extended to the healthcare arena with the concept of circular medicine. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9961144/ This is particularly important as hospitals are large producers of waste or unwanted products and very little is reused or recycled in a sustainable way. A coordinated approach, fostering the new bioeconomy strategy, will promote the more circular and sustainable production and consumption of biological resources for food, materials, energy and services, providing potential alternatives to fossil fuels, provided that a more comprehensive inclusion of pertinent stakeholders will be developed. Digital transformation, AI, climate change amid a comprehensive concept of environmental sustainability, competitiveness and innovation is possible and must be warranted. The adoption of a comprehensive concept of green practices is already encouraged, driving innovation and generators of new ideas, narratives, and trends with a cultural economics approach. Universities and research institutions already include courses dealing with issues related to the circular economy. Young generations need stimulation, motivation and what cant be taught from a textbook: passion, which is passed on by people with real experience. NGO, advocacies of citizens and Charities have a pivotal role. Moreover, top-down initiatives are more likely to be effective with a greater participatory component of the Citizens. But this is not all and not enough, if the goal is to promote healthier environments everywhere, and in the urban areas. The potential contribution of the medical and health professionals community is not sufficiently considered in the current initiative, considering how influential it may be by the daily practice and by structured information and educational intervention. The open data community, not-for-profit organizations and for-profit organizations in different sectors (medicine, environment, geospatial, marine, agriculture, utilities, smart cities, mobility, energy), individuals interested in environmental protection, open source software communities, standardization bodies, but also the scientific and health community should be explicitly involved also in this initiative. Healthcare systems should be more mindful of the circular economy and the need to minimize the waste produced. Management strategies and training of staff to accomplish these goals should be instituted with the help of manufacturers and suppliers. We would suggest that hospitals are encouraged only to engage with suppliers who have adopted true sustainability policies. Such a recommendation can be included in the current initiative. A brief and comprehensive approach can be read in an article, with infographics, of the European Medical Association. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/circular-medicine-paradigm-encompassing-economy-health-/?trackingId=8LWgLo6ASFOEdSx4KQ0u%2BQ%3D%3D
Read full response

Response to A European Strategy for AI in science – paving the way for a European AI research council

5 Jun 2025

Current concerns focus on the scientific and academic output dealing with AI in science, which seems to be dominated by China and the US. This would correspond to a facilitated development of procedures and tools that fit into a market that could see Europe in an increasingly subordinate position. We want to underline, not only with an idea and a feeling of European Pride, but that also staying on the same strategic line of the other Continents can prove to be a losing strategy. We need to find a way to encourage free creativity, ideals calibrated to the well-being of man and the environment, and proposals for understandable and sustainable civilization, not against AI, but despite AI. The positive contribution of tools that use various artificial intelligence approaches is clear for all to see, and the advantages in terms of speed and reliability of information and indications are now well-known. This is a global approach, which finds applications also in many areas of medicine. There is a well-established and continuously evolving practice in the analysis of genetic, clinical, and lifestyle data to create personalized treatment plans for patients. AI also helps in predicting how patients might respond to different medications or therapies, optimizing treatment outcomes. It seems quite evident that the processes that are implemented with these tools can resonate as prodigious in the management of mega-databases, as happens in the genetic and behavioral fields. Of course, it is true that there is, or should be, still room for free clinical activity and initiative, especially at the decision-making level. But what is happening is the very rapid loss of the disposition to implement clinical skills, for example in the recognition of physical signs or histological pictures or in the recognition of visible pictures with various imaging techniques, often integrated into the guidance of robotic surgical interventions. The overly ambitious vision of medicine has evolved to such a point that we can imagine it being maintained and managed without the direct intervention of native human intelligence and without the doctor's choice always being responsibly prevalent and more effectively straightforward. No global verification vs. the reputed less advanced approaches is vailable. To be clearer, there is no evidence-based approach that evaluates comparatively, and in epidemiological-preventive terms, such effects, beneficial, neutral or detrimental, on populations and even on homogeneous groups of people, sick or healthy. Progress in science and medicine has been achieved through the birth of ideas in the minds of scientists and researchers, and theories that have required challenges and verification, often in contrast with the establishment of the moment. But the new AI establishments will be less easy to counter and perhaps even more intolerant than in any obscurantist past. The creation of a European AI research council can pave the way for the development, and funding, of projects and innovation that involve the use of artificial intelligence. We outline and appreciate that this sensitivity can already be seen in the care with which in recent years all EU research calls have included an evaluation of the quality and robustness of artificial intelligence if integrated as a characterizing element of such projects. In these contexts, it happens that both the proponents and the evaluators excessively struggle to properly and formally justify the chosen approaches. Nonetheless, it is certainly an important stage, which must be pursued with ever greater competence also comparing different methods. Health and environment models are fields of clear application of strategies that, while benefiting from the management of mega-data, are essentially realities of clear and immediate value perception. Hiding the fallacious authority of data produced by complex algorithms can lead to ignoring the most important aspects of many more direct issues.
Read full response

Response to Anti-racism Strategy

30 May 2025

We witness with great concern the current drift whereby, despite the joint efforts of the European Commission, Member States and relevant stakeholders, racism and racial discrimination remain significant problems that impact people and societies. Worrying and surprising is that in the current initiative the activity of doctors in every part of the world is not even mentioned as a model, even if they are always engaged in a job of clear professional identity and egalitarian ethics. The free exchange and employability of doctors from all over the world is an enrichment for all states. It is not just a concept of humanitarian missions, but it is the deepest reality of a group of care professionals who have chosen the job of helping anybody, because they belong to human mankind. Clinical experience shared by all members of EMA, elements of discrimination are not created by the subjectivity of doctors, but rather by the rules and restrictions superimposed by state laws and by obligations of healthcare management. These interferences, as the impact of media is, are not harmless and trigger various perverse and harmful spirals for society. It is known that violence against medical personnel and facilities during armed conflict is a major violation of international law and considered a war crime. Attacking hospitals, ambulances, or medical personnel is seen as targeting civilians, because it undermines the principles of medical neutrality and impartiality. Analogous violence in the current supposed contexts of peace should be equally prevented, countered, repressed and punished by national legislation. The current analysis of the causes of such hostility and violent aggression by the population is insufficient, and above all it does not put in first place, as a factor of such situation, the erroneous belief and expectation, potentiated by the mass culture and media, that medicine must act almost exclusively in urgency, with guaranteed successful results. Disappointment and disillusion create mechanisms and reactions of revenge. The related issue is the moral injury of healthcare professionals. It stems from experiencing actions that violate physicians moral beliefs when they are unable to uphold their oaths and cannot prioritize patients' needs due to external factors and mainly institutional constraints, media pressure or system demands. In such contexts racism and discrimination may be implemented by filter institutions limiting access to healthcare facilities and medical care: these are distorting and serious factors. This issue is what is happening even in many Member States of Europe, where government policy is at the origin of the plague of a creeping racism, partly camouflaged in the folds of a falsely neutral bureaucracy. One consequence is precisely that these discriminated parts of the population direct their violent reactions to their direct interlocutors, the doctors, who in effect are victims like them. The spiral of intolerance, racism and inequity is increasingly self-sustaining and implemented. The objective of these consultation activities is to identify the specific needs related to the new strategy. Gathering feedback on how the EU can tackle racism in all its forms may support a more integrated approach, whilst building on the lessons learnt from the previous strategy. Therefore, it is our opinion that if we guarantee a safe and protected niche for the weakest and most vulnerable persons, assuring with every instrument the safety and credibility of those who work for health, we will develop an indispensable tool for the European strategy against racism and for every civilized intervention in the world. Perhaps it is necessary to return as a central idea to the sacredness of medicine, whose language excludes any discrimination against race, wealth, religion and political idea. The alternative is a return to barbarism. This document was developed by V. Costigliola, MD, President & GM Trovato, MD, Vice-President
Read full response

Response to European Critical Communication System

28 May 2025

This initiative is undermined by the lack of consideration given to the safety of operators in different and related sectors. If we take the insecurity of workers in the medical sector, doctors and other health professionals as a model, the specific scourge becomes evident: it can be briefly defined as violence against doctors and health workers by patients and their relatives, not to mention deliberate criminal-terrorist actions that occur even outside of war scenarios. Violence against doctors, physical and moral, is a growing crime and concern in Europe, with an increasing number of incidents reported in recent years, including verbal and physical abuse, as well as threats and online harassment. The current EU initiative may overcome the national and regional fragmentation of intervention centers called to deal with threats or attacks against the security of European populations sharing sensitive information and feedback. The communication networks of public authorities in charge of security and safety in Europe should allow seamless critical communication and operational mobility across the Schengen area. Currently official statistics describe the tip of the iceberg, probably because most events go unnoticed, do not follow the path of reports to the police and the judiciary, and are in fact dismissed as incidents along the way, attributable to poor quality of communication between doctors and patients and their relatives. The numbers are much higher and are seriously undermining both the trust of healthcare personnel in the patients entrusted to them and the willingness to serve and work with self-denial and promptness. Healthcare management and policymakers evidently ignore the problem, which is only partly countered by trade unions, by reports brought forward at the expense of the victims themselves and by the press, which often temporarily rides such sensational news. The proposal is that such integrated communication systems at European level should operate and immediately signal such crimes against healthcare people, whether they occur in work environments (hospitals, fire stations and civil protection), or outside, initiating timely legal and policy reaction mechanisms. The need to map the epidemiology of these criminal events is evident. Moreover, we suggest that regulations be mediated by paths analogous to war crimes procedures. Violence against medical personnel and facilities during armed conflict is a major violation of international law and considered a war crime. Attacking hospitals, ambulances, or medical personnel is seen as targeting civilians, because it undermines the principles of medical neutrality and impartiality. Such violence in the supposed contexts of peace should be equally prevented, contrasted, repressed and punished by national legislation. The perception is that only a small part of such events emerge, as would better and strongly happen if they were foreseen by a priority reporting system at European level. Our proposal is that we must contrast such crimes of peace, because they are against peace and civil coexistence. The current analysis of the causes of such hostility and violent aggression by the population is insufficient and not convincing, and above all it does not put in first place, as a factor of such a situation, the erroneous belief and expectation that medicine must act almost exclusively in urgency, with guaranteed successful results. Disappointment creates mechanisms and reactions of revenge. Moral injury of healthcare professionals stems from experiencing actions that violate their moral beliefs. It occurs when physicians are unable to uphold their oaths and cannot prioritize patients' needs due to external factors and mainly institutional constraints, media pressure or system demands. This issue is exactly what is happening even in many Member States of Europe and is at the origin of this plague. We acknowledge the contribution of Giovanni Leonardi, MD, Epidemiologist.
Read full response

Response to International Digital Strategy

21 May 2025

Threats to the universal right to health, under many aspects including respect for transparency and privacy of digital tools, must be taken into great consideration in International Digital Strategy. The contribution of independent NGOs and Charities, committed to these issues, must be requested for these and other specific problems. As per the development of drugs and medical technologies, the next step can come from an explicit and agile promotion of research in this sector. In the current context, we are witnessing attempts to consolidate a digital tyranny, that is, forms of centralized and opaque power exercised by economic or state entities that, through technological infrastructures and proprietary algorithms, profoundly influence access to information, individual behaviors and even democratic decision-making processes. This dynamic, often disguised as efficiency and innovation, risks undermining the very foundations of pluralism, transparency and competition. This threat is countered by the concept of European digital sovereignty, understood as the ability of the European Union to establish autonomous, fair and shared rules for cyberspace, protecting its values and strategic interests. It does not imply closure or protectionism, but rather the desire to guarantee an open, competitive and respectful digital ecosystem of fundamental rights, in which access to the market is not subordinated to the control of a few global players. Governance must consider the foundations not only of the European Union, but of the ethics of knowledge and economy with national and supranational experiences of Europe rapidly valorized and made synergistic: - Counteracting de facto digital monopolies: strengthening European antitrust instruments (e.g. Digital Markets Act), with effective sanctions and proactive intervention power; imposing interoperability obligations between platforms. - Promoting fair competition and the growth of innovative startups: creating simplified regulatory environments for digital SMEs; establishing European public funds for technological scalability. - Fighting tax avoidance and evasion by large global competitors: rigorously applying the OECD Minimum Tax; strengthening tax cooperation between member states. - Protecting users' freedom and security: establishing algorithmic transparency requirements; ensuring full control over personal data. - Defending democracy and information plurality by financing public and pluralist platforms; countering the abuse of dominant position in advertising and content distribution. Moreover: maintain an open, free, secure and non-fragmented Internet. respect of human rights in the digital arena: what is a right offline should be a right online. support for closing digital divides, especially on education and access to the Internet. fight against information manipulation & interference, including online disinformation and hate speech. regulation of Artificial Intelligence, using a risk-based approach, which promotes innovation, and is based on the principles of transparency and accountability. protecting and promoting the Digital Commons (e.g. open-source software & operating systems). trusted connectivity. Environmental sustainability of digital and new and emerging technologies. The EU approach to the digital transition must stay in its commitment to multilateralism and the promotion of universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and democratic principles. The EU, and the Member States, must continue developing tailored approaches to strengthen cooperation in and with the UN system, the G7, the G20, the OSCE, the OECD, the WTO, NATO, the Council of Europe and other multilateral fora, including multi-stakeholder organizations, and particularly in standardisation bodies, in which coherent and harmonized European standards play an influential role. We acknowledge the contribution of Rosario Squatrito, MD and of Massimo Mirabile, PhD, Comp.Eng.
Read full response

Response to European strategy on research and technology infrastructures

21 May 2025

Political guidelines of the European strategy on research and technology infrastructures must be pursued and favored by the stakeholders in an integrated manner. It also means attracting new talents from abroad and retaining the best and brightest minds here in Europe. To do this, it is not enough to strengthen the collaboration among research departments, higher education and business, i.e. strengthening our University Alliances. A critical point is that individual team leaders, or already integrated teams should be hosted in Europe, assessing well the achievements made abroad, the reasons for which a new milieu of infrastructure is needed and if they can establish or manage them. This is not only important in the health and pharmaceutical sector, but also in other areas of research, including simplification and sustainability of clinical approaches. It is true that the EU has been confronted with severe shortages of medical devices and medicines, with antibiotics, insulin, painkillers and other products becoming particularly difficult to obtain. But the real weakness or shortcoming is that we are facing a daily shortage of skills within clinical researchers, medical doctors and health professionals, wasted while we are searching for even greater specialization: most of them, too often, are unable to operate as stand-alone actors. Accordingly, philosophy and culture of infrastructure should be shaped for such purposes and multi-function and multi-users infrastructures should be warranted. In this sense, the European Medical Association, as an NGO founded and based on Medical Doctors in 1990, will support initiatives aimed at leading on European innovation, focused on and tailored to create conditions for researchers to thrive. This means providing the infrastructure and innovative laboratories that medical and life science researchers need to test and develop ideas through new public-private partnerships, such as joint undertakings. The forthcoming proposal of a Critical Medicines Act may reduce dependencies relating to critical medicines and ingredients, particularly for products where there are only a few supplying manufacturers or countries. But we are already on the road of looking for the shortage of any profile of health professionals, recruiting health work forces outside Europe, and not finding enough workers at home. This is not a matter of conventional infrastructure, because efforts are needed for smoothing the push and abuse of AI-based tools. These are undermining the very ability of doctors, often the youngest, to act in limited resource subsets and when faced with problems even simple, using practical manual approaches, difficult to fit into the schemes of algorithms. The real problem remains, as always, the ability to recognize ideas and talents, and the availability of tools to promote their expression and realization. In each sector it could be clear what the minimum infrastructures are needed and which are the gigantic ones that should become available to large communities of researchers. However, recent experiences are not always happy, both for the overlapping of new installations, and for the excessive concentration of mega-infrastructures. The identified main problems and needs are relevant, but excessively generically defined. The additional challenges faced by research infrastructures and technology infrastructures that European strategies should address, especially in relation to Europes main competitors, are related to the complementary need of preserving, developing ex-novo, updating and maintaining well-established infrastructure, and to the need to assure the quality of new perspective and visions also for infrastructure. The proposed set of actions here at large address these issues: nevertheless, the actions needed at EU level should be dictated and supported by clear ideas and evidence, both, as in principle currently it is for this initiative, considering the mentioned shortcomings.
Read full response

Response to Policy agenda for cities

20 May 2025

We share the vision and the general strategy focused on an ambitious policy agenda for cities, looking at issues such as housing, climate action, digitalisation, mobility, social inclusion and equality. Maintaining and/or improving the quality of life in the cities is a pre-requisite for health, civil coexistence and cohesion. Cities play a role in meeting the objectives of the European Green Deal for zero pollution, circular economy, nature and biodiversity, and climate action. However, zero pollution has a wider horizon, including affordable housing, sustainable living standards and community health, accessibility and inclusion. The New European Bauhaus principles is a welcome approach that brings innovation, ambition and creativity together. It calls on all Europeans to imagine and build a sustainable and inclusive future that is beautiful for our eyes, minds, and souls, a bridge between the world of science and technology, art and culture, concurrently addressing complex societal problems through co-creation. Citizens, experts, businesses, and institutions must work in the context of collaborative and participative work to reimagine sustainable living in Europe and beyond. From a medical perspective, we must firmly encourage planning and investment in peri-urban and urban infrastructures for public water management. This does not only concern drinking water and related services, but also other water compartments (sewers, surface water, groundwater), as there is a possibility of recognizing direct and indirect effects on health for all of them. Implementing eco-sustainable treatments of human waste currently diluted with water is of enormous importance, with biological containment (e.g. growing flower beds) being a partial alternative. Neighborhoods need to be redesigned with a view to contiguous housing for all social and age groups, without ghettoization, with attention to a "green network" of safe park areas suitable for walking or cycling, with a connection network for free-roaming animals crossing urban areas. In recent years, looking at local, national or European initiatives, we have, differently and regretfully, witnessed the promotion, advertising and realization of events, even permanent ones, not properly defined and improperly justified as incubators of creativity. This leads to abuse of public spaces (parks, squares, streets, buildings), often intended to host events with little cultural content but with significant detrimental environmental and societal impact. Credit has been given to initiatives harmful for the quality of life in cities, because effectively prevent free mobility to and from their homes of citizens residing in historic centers, ultimately favoring several types of pollution, including acoustic pollution. Such tendency often facilitates night-time activities, better defined as bad nightlife, "malamovida, a clumsy container with few rules for noise, consumption of alcohol and illicit drugs, use of fossil fueled vehicles, spreading of non-exhaust emissions such as particulates from tires and brakes, and a fallout of violence and bullying. Worst, public authorization and funding, even European funding are issued using the surreptitious motivation of artistic, creative or musical activities. The systematic plundering of cities and historic centers that also includes the promotion of wild urban nightlife induces the flight of citizens to the city suburbs. This trend must be explicitly hindered by European directives, also in the new Cities Policy Agenda, banning direct or indirect funding for initiatives that do not clearly prohibit any form of pollution, including noise. The possibility of providing a "cultural" alibi by European bodies must be clearly excluded by this agenda implying the priority of respect for the dignity, health and welfare of all the citizens. We acknowledge the valuable contribution of Fabrizio Artioli, MD, oncologist and of Giovanni Leonardi, MD, epidemiologist.
Read full response

Response to A Culture Compass for Europe

14 May 2025

A coordinated approach, encompassing digital transformation, AI, climate change amid a comprehensive concept of environmental sustainability, competitiveness and innovation is possible and must be warranted. The promotion of social inclusion and equality are complex challenges which individual Member States cannot tackle alone due to the inadequate awareness of the interconnected issues. It must be pursued inside an explicit frame that includes also health and quality of life as key cultural priorities. This initiative A Culture Compass for Europe is aimed at: giving visibility to EU action in support of Europes diverse cultures and its rich cultural heritage encompassing its history. Improving working conditions of artists and cultural professionals, which means also scientists. Unlocking the competitive potential of the cultural and creative sectors. In the meanwhile, coherence with other EUs priorities and major Commission initiatives must be guaranteed across various dimensions, including science, health and welfare so that the initiative shall improve sustainability in the cultural sectors and beyond. The adoption of a comprehensive concept of green practices is already encouraged, driving innovation and generators of new ideas, narratives, and trends with a cultural economics approach. The European Green Deal, i.e. the commitment by the European Union to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, principally by making the 27-nation bloc carbon neutral by 2050, contains a wide range of policy initiatives with the main aim of decarbonizing member states. Universities and research institutions already include courses on human relations and humanization and encourage cultural exchanges: this task should be more actively pursued and performed than they do now. Young generations need stimulation, motivation and what cant be taught from a textbook: passion, which is passed on by people with real experience. NGO, advocacies of citizens and Charities have a pivotal role. But this is not all and not enough, if the goal is promoting healthier environments also in the urban areas. In recent years, looking at local, national or European initiatives, we have witnessed the promotion, advertising and realization of events, even permanent ones, not properly defined and improperly justified as incubators of creativity. The abuse of public spaces (parks, squares, streets, buildings) is often intended to host events with little cultural content but with significant negative environmental impact. Credit has been given to low commercial and charlatan initiatives, harmful for the quality of life in cities, favoring several types of pollution, including acoustic pollution. Such tendency often facilitates night-time activities, better defined as bad nightlife, "malamovida". This is a clumsy container with few rules for noise, consumption of alcohol and illicit drugs, use of fossil fueled vehicles, spreading of non-exhaust emissions such as particulates from tires and brakes, and a fallout of violence and bullying. Environmental pollution, in full contempt of the Green Deal, includes noise pollution, dangerous for the physical and mental health of residents and visitors, too often with the benefits of public authorization and funding, issued using the surreptitious motivation of artistic, creative or musical activities. This trend must be explicitly hindered by European directives, also in our Culture Compass, with the exclusion of direct or indirect funding for initiatives that do not clearly prohibit any form of pollution, including noise. There are national regulations, but the possibility of providing a "cultural" alibi by European bodies must be clearly excluded by a Compass that confirms clearly that cultural freedom, democracy and creativity imply the priority of respect for the health and welfare of all the citizens. We acknowledge the valuable contribution of Fabrizio Artioli, MD, oncologist and of Giovanni Leonardi, MD, epidemiologis
Read full response

Response to Evaluation of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

12 May 2025

The forthcoming evaluation will assess the performance of the Centre's objectives, mandate, tasks and procedures. The gaps in the effectiveness of the ECDC response to the COVID-19 is deemed as especially due to certain limitations of its mandate, such as lack of complete and comparable data among the Member States, insufficient transparency of ECDCs scientific assessment and shortcomings in public communication. This is quite evident, but the need that databases and communication among the Member States must be implemented with specific regulations and support seems weakly considered. In our view, and while waiting for the report of the recent activities, the great shortcomings and insufficiency seem due to quite inconsistent tasks and duties of the ECDC, whose usefulness substantially strives to overlap the actions and overview of the WHO, in the area of communicable/infectious disease, without an explicit connection with the World Organization, without clear feedback and synergy. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control is an independent EU agency that has, currently, the mission to identify, assess and communicate current and emerging threats to human health from communicable diseases and related special health issues. ECDCs ambition is to protect over 500 million people from infectious diseases that are mainly caused by parasites and germs (such as viruses, bacteria and fungi): this statement is quite unrealistic and overambitious, and the shortcomings should be discussed in the report. There are relevant differences between the European EuCDC and the US CDC. This last, that was seemingly a model, at a glance can be outlined: CDC is the nation's leading science-based, data-driven, service organization that protects the public's health. CDC puts science into action to help children stay healthy so they can grow and learn; to help families, businesses, and communities fight disease and stay strong; and to protect the public's health. There are many and well-interconnected CDCs missions, priorities, role, and core values. Accordingly, the US CDC is a very robust and comprehensive health agency, replicating some of the features and merits that now are dispersed in too many even relevant similar national EU agencies. The EuCDC, in the forthcoming report, may describe the documentary support provided to the Eu Commission amid the COVID pandemics and the vaccine politics. Certainly it should have been important, but did not appear very determinant and with a demonstrated scientific influence and media impact. It is quite evident that the contribution of selected medical communities, and of NGO, was and is not even considered nor clearly included in the actions of Eu CDC. Moreover, greater recognition and support to selected scientific research bodies and volunteer associations at the international level was not adequately considered. NGOs may have played a crucial role, and it would have been equally important to highlight and empower charities, whose grassroots efforts often reach the most vulnerable. Scientific research and charitable work are pillars of sustainable development and social cohesion so that a balanced approach in policy and funding is essential to ensure inclusive progress for all also in this wide field. The expert contribution for providing comments and suggestions of Teresa Abbattista, MD, of Fabrizio Artioli, MD, of Nidal Tourkmani, MD and of Vincenzo Costigliola MD is acknowledged. https://emanet.org/board-members/.
Read full response

Response to EU Strategy on medical countermeasures

9 May 2025

Support to medical countermeasures against public health threats, such as those linked to Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN ) security, including joint procurement and stockpiling, deserves a greater focus on the issue of patents and manufacturing antibiotics, antidotes abd and the supply chain for needed raw materials. In this regard, the contribution of selected medical communities should be critical and clearly mentioned. Strengthening our cyber defense capabilities, coordinating national cyber efforts and securing our critical needs, should address a more comprehensive approach to preventing and preparing countermeasures to other new threats, in particular those linked to CBRN security, focusing also on any natural or man-made hazard or event that could affect functioning of European infrastructure. Nevertheless, again, the expertise needed is not, even briefly, specified. Direct input from those on the front lines is crucial for formulating effective and practical policies. The educational purposes of including and discussing these topics inside the curricula of health and life science of any academic and vocational courses should be clearly and strongly considered, favored and recommended since the beginning of the development of these proposals and decisions. There is a significant added value in enhancing educational exchanges and collaborations among the countries bordering the Mediterranean basin, and beyond, worldwide. These interactions can contribute to the normalization of regions currently facing severe humanitarian crises by fostering understanding and shared approaches to health challenges. The importance of improving radiological education for both medical professionals and the general public should be emphasized. The imprudent use of ionizing radiation is counteracting Europe's commitment to a greener future and is already causing unintentional harm to citizens' health. Increased awareness and proper training in radiation safety are essential. The expert contribution of Teresa Abbattista, MD, of Giovanni Leonardi, MD and of Vincenzo Costigliola MD, who provided their comments and suggestions, is gratefully acknowledged. https://emanet.org/board-members/.
Read full response

Response to Communication on the EU Stockpiling Strategy

9 May 2025

Support to Crisis preparedness, including an effective and new EU stockpiling strategy, must have an explicit mention of the public health threats, such as those linked to Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN ) security. C, B and RN incidents share similar features, requiring similar prevention, detection and response measures. The origin of these risks can be criminal, accidental (industrial catastrophes, in particular chemical or nuclear, waste treatment and transport) or natural (mainly pandemics but also be the consequence of natural hazards on CBRN material and facilities). Diverse stakeholders, such as medical scientists involved in hazard detection, health care staff involved in prehospital emergency medical care, hospital emergency medical care and laboratories, play a critical role in preventing and rapidly responding to hazards of this kind. Joint procurement and stockpiling deserve a greater focus on the issue of patents and manufacturing antibiotics, antidotes and and the supply chain for needed raw materials. In this regard, the contribution of selected medical communities should be critical and clearly included. The expertise needed is not, even briefly, specified, in this Commission Work Programme, as it should be. Direct input from those on the front lines is crucial for formulating effective and practical policies. These may include Medical doctors, Physician Assistants, Nurses, Scientific staff, Public Health staff. Each of these professional profiles is supported by one or more professional and/or scientific associations that could be consulted to obtain an agile and efficient representative view of the stockpiling requirements for the effective activity of each professional role in a range of CBRN scenarios. The educational purposes of including and discussing these topics also inside the curricula of health and life science of any academic and vocational courses should be clearly and strongly considered, favored and recommended since the beginning of the development of these proposals and decisions. This is important for assuring a greater awareness, participation and consensus from the experts, population and policymakers. There is a significant added value in enhancing educational exchanges and collaborations also among the countries bordering the Mediterranean basin, too often still at the center of social and political conflicts, and beyond, worldwide. Strengthening existing networks engaged in medical aspects of CBRN preparedness and response would support the resilience of European societies faced with these events. Also, these interactions can contribute to the normalization of regions currently facing severe humanitarian crises by fostering understanding and shared approaches to health challenges. Europe can be called to act, and such regions and states can be encouraged, or even helped as partners, to face future problems. This will reduce the need for external intervention by Europe and potentially will promote initiatives with an economic advantage of trade for Europe itself. This extra-European dimension requires a clear reference in this current proposal of communication, with its focus on humanitarian aid and civil protection, foreign affairs and security policy. The expert contribution of Teresa Abbattista, MD, of Giovanni Leonardi, MD and of Vincenzo Costigliola MD, who provided their comments and suggestions, is gratefully acknowledged. https://emanet.org/board-members/.
Read full response

Meeting with Thierry Breton (Commissioner)

30 Sept 2020 · Pharmacies