Special Treatment? Flexibilities in the Politics of Regenerative Medicine’s Gatekeeping Regimes in the UK

ABSTRACT

Emerging flexibilities are apparent in gatekeeping regimes applicable to regenerative medicine products, raising issues about the extent to which and forms in which such flexibilities might promote emerging products as a sector warranting special treatment, in the context of recent policy developments in the UK and wider European Union. Concepts of ‘gatekeeping’, ‘gatekeeping regimes’ and ‘gateways’ can point to the ways in which regulatory institutions, health technology assessment organisations, and national planners and purchasers of health services together define and control entry to the medical product marketplace and the adoption of products into the public health-care system. Flexibilities in existing regimes and new gateways are a way of maintaining ‘connection’ between gatekeeping regimes and technoscientific innovation in order to steer innovation pathways. The gateways concept has affinity with that of Callon’s ‘obligatory passage points’. A wide set of recent policy documents show that the measures promoted exhibit a range of alternative gateways that are being constructed around central, legal, restrictive gatekeeping regimes. However, it would be easy to overestimate the significance of these developments as relaxations that would favour innovative producers and their products on a large scale with wide public health impacts. The concepts of gatekeeping regimes and gateways enable understanding of hybrid developments of exceptions and exemptions to dominant regimes which bridge across the arenas of market regulation, health technology assessment and health-care system planning. These arenas are being drawn closer together as a means of politically managing stakeholders’ aims in the UK, EU and other innovating biomedical health systems globally.     

The Scandinavian Suicide Phenomenon—Myth or Reality?

ABSTRACT: This paper reexamines the “Scandinavian Suicide Phenomenon,” the observation that reported suicides are typically high in Denmark and Sweden and typically low in Norway even though these three countries seem otherwise similar. It has been suggested that in Norway more suicides are reported as accidental death or as death due to unknown causes. This paper explores this possibility by means of a detailed examination of causes of death. Nine other countries are included in the comparisons to facilitate interpretation of the findings. It was found that there were significantly higher rates of accidental and unclassified deaths in Norway than in Denmark or Sweden; if it is assumed that many of these are suicide, this could account for the reported differences in suicide rates.     

Too Much Playing Games – A Response to Kretchmar

ABSTRACT

Scott Kretchmar recently put forth a new definition of what it is to play a game. Unfortunately, it must be rejected. In this paper, I will show that this new definition is far too broad by discussing an activity that is not an instance of playing a game but is wrongfully ruled as one on this new definition.     

Researcher Degrees of Freedom in the Psychology of Religion

ABSTRACT

There is a push in psychology toward more transparent practices, stemming partially as a response to the replication crisis. We argue that the psychology of religion should help lead the way toward these new, more transparent practices to ensure a robust and dynamic subfield. One of the major issues that proponents of Open Science practices hope to address is researcher degrees of freedom (RDF). We pre-registered and conducted a systematic review of the 2017 issues from three psychology of religion journals. We aimed to identify the extent to which the psychology of religion has embraced Open Science practices and the role of RDF within the subfield. We found that many of the methodologies that help to increase transparency, such as pre-registration, have yet to be adopted by those in the subfield. In light of these findings, we present recommendations for addressing the issue of transparency in the psychology of religion and outline how to move toward these new Open Science practices.