The Directorate-General for Health and Consumers 1999-2014: An assessment of its functional capacities

Capacity assessment has become a popular measure in the health sector to assess the ability of various stakeholders to pursue agreed activities. The European Commission (EC) is increasingly dealing with a variety of health issues to coordinate and complement national health policies. This study analyses the functional capacity of the Directorate-General for Health and Consumers (DG SANCO) between 1999 and 2004. It applies the UNDP Capacity Assessment Framework and uses a literature review, a document review of EU policy documents and expert interviews to assess the capacity of DG SANCO to fulfill its mandate for public health and health systems. Our results suggest that DG SANCO has established capacities to engage with stakeholders; to assess various health issues, to define issue-specific health policies and to collect information for evaluative purposes. In contrast, capacities tend to be less established for defining a clear strategy for the overall sector, for setting priorities and for budgeting, managing and implementing policies. We conclude that improvements to the effectiveness of DG SANTE's (the successor of DG SANCO) policies can be made within the existing mandate. A priority setting exercise may be conducted to limit the number of pursued actions to those with the greatest European added value within DG SANTE's responsibilities.

Does EU legislation allow the use of the Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach for risk assessment?

Hazard characterisation is largely based on an approach of (statistically) comparing dose groups with the controls in order to derive points of departure such as no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) or lowest-observed-adverse-effect levels (LOAELs). This approach suggests the absence of any relevant effect at the NOAEL. The NOAEL approach has been debated for decades. A recent Scientific Opinion by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded that the Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach should be preferred over the NOAEL approach for deriving human (health-based) limit or guidance values. Nonetheless, the BMD approach is used infrequently within European regulatory frameworks. The reason for this may lie in legislation or guidelines requiring the use of the NOAEL approach. In this context, various EU regulatory frameworks were examined on such demands. Interestingly, no single legislation was identified containing statutory requirements in conflict with the use of the BMD approach.