欧洲变暖速度超过预期 诸平 Figure 1 Open in figure viewer PowerPoint Frequency of hot (a, b), heat stress (c, d), and cold (e, f) extremes over time. The left column shows the number of days (a) TX 99th percentile, (c) WBT 99th percentile, and (e) TN 1st percentile from 1950–2018 for region EUR. For illustration we added a linear trend and a second‐\order polynomial. The right column shows the number of days which fall within certain percentile bins for three different time periods, 1950–1972 (orange), 1973–1995 (red), and 1996–2018 (purple). The percentiles were calculated using the whole time period 1950–2018. Be aware that the bins are unequally spaced and the middle of the distribution was excluded in the figure. 据瑞士苏黎世联邦理工学院大气与气候科学研究所（ Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, Switzerland ）的一项最新研究结果显示，气候变化正在导致欧洲极端高温天气的天数增加，同时也使极端寒冷天气的天数在逐渐减少，这将给欧洲居民在未来几十年带来风险。 2019 年夏天，欧洲气温创历史新高，法国南部气温超过 46.0 ℃ 。 2019 年 7 月 17 日发表在《地球物理研究快报》 ( Geophysical Research Letters ) 上的一项新研究发现—— Ruth Lorenz , Zélie Stalhandske , Erich M. Fischer . Detection of a Climate Change Signal in Extreme Heat, Heat Stress, and Cold in Europe From Observations . Geophysical Research Letters , 2019, Volume 46, Issue 14 . DOI: 10.1029/2019GL082062 . First published:17 July 2019. 自 1950 年以来，夏季极度炎热的天数增加了两倍，夏季总体变热，而冬季极度寒冷的天数则减少了至少一半，冬季总体变暖。 新的研究发现，欧洲部分地区的变暖速度比气候模型项目的预料要更快。瑞士苏黎世联邦理工学院（ Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland ）的气候科学家、也是上述研究的主导作者露丝·洛伦茨（ Ruth Lorenz ）说：“即使在整个欧洲的区域范围内，我们也可以看到，这些趋势比我们预期的自然变化要大得多。这确实是来自气候变化的一个信号。” 高温是危险的，因为它会对人体造成压力，可能导致中暑。科学家们知道气候变化正在使欧洲变暖，但他们主要研究的是极端温度下的长期变化。这项新研究观察了观测数据，以评估用于区域预测的气候模型是否能再现观测到的趋势。 在这项新研究中，露丝·洛伦茨和她的同事使用了欧洲气象站从 1950 年到 2018 年的观测数据，然后分析了这段时间最热的 1% 的极端天气和最高的湿度，以及最冷的 1% 的天气。 露丝·洛伦茨说 : “我们进一步研究了每年最热的白天或最冷的夜晚，因此每年我们都在寻找最大值 / 最小值，以及随着时间的推移这些值是如何变化的。” 他们发现，自 1950 年以来，欧洲极端高温日的数量增加了两倍，而极端低温日的数量则根据地区的不同减少了两到三倍。极端炎热的日子平均变热了 2.30 ℃，而极端寒冷的日子平均变暖了 3.0 ℃。最热的白天和最冷的夜晚明显比相应的夏季和冬季平均气温要高。 作者说，整个欧洲的各个地区经历了截然不同的气温趋势，这使得很难将欧洲的平均气温与特定气象站的极端气温进行比较。洛伦茨说，在中欧，极端气温每十年比夏季平均气温高出 0.14 ℃，相当于整个研究期间的平均气温高出近 1.0 ℃。 据研究人员说，超过 90% 的气象站显示气候正在变暖，这一比例太高，不可能完全是自然气候变化造成的。 结果还表明，该地区变暖的速度比气候模型预测的要快。一些地区经历了比预期更高的极端情况，一些地区经历了比预期更低的极端情况。“在荷兰、比利时和法国，模型趋势比观察到的趋势低两倍左右，”荷兰皇家气象研究所 (Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute) 的气候分析学家盖尔特·扬·范·奥尔登堡 (Geert Jan van Oldenborgh) 说，“我们创造新纪录的速度比想象的要快。” 研究报告的作者说，随着气候变化的加速，欧洲的夏季和冬季只会在未来几年变得更热，影响城市和对气温上升毫无准备的人们。洛伦茨说 : “举例来说，很多人没有空调，这使得这一点非常重要。“我们期待基于模型研究的结果，但这是我们迄今为止观察到的第一次发现。”更多信息请注意浏览原文或者相关报道。 Abstract In the last two decades Europe experienced a series of high‐\impact heat extremes. We here assess observed trends in temperature extremes at ECAD stations in Europe. We demonstrate that on average across Europe the number of days with extreme heat and heat stress has more than tripled and hot extremes have warmed by 2.3°C from 1950–2018. Over Central Europe, the warming exceeds the corresponding summer mean warming by 50%. Days with extreme cold temperatures have decreased by a factor of 2–3 and warmed by more than 3°C, regionally substantially more than winter mean temperatures. Cold and hot extremes have warmed at about 94% of stations, a climate change signal that cannot be explained by internal variability. The clearest climate change signal can be detected in maximum heat stress. EURO‐\CORDEX RCMs broadly capture observed trends but the majority underestimates the warming of hot extremes and overestimates the warming of cold extremes.
2016 欧洲共识会议报告：未破裂脑动静脉畸形的治疗 2016 欧洲共识会议报告：未破裂脑动静脉畸形的治疗 General questions addressed for the management of uBAVMs Is your experience in accordance with the main message of the ARUBA Study , i.e., that unruptured AVMs have a better prognosis if not treated? All the participants affirmed that the message of the ARUBA Study cannot be generalized to all unruptured AVMs and to all the treatment modalities. The biases of that study are well known and have been described in many publications. Do you think that some unruptured AVMs have to be treated? All the participants answered positively. Some uBAVMs are difficult and dangerous to treat, but some of them can be treated with low risk. Single aspects on the risk of bleeding and the treatment of uBAVMs: Do you think that there are elements that increase the risk of bleeding in an unruptured AVM? According to the survey, the panel answered that aneurysms (95%), venous patterns (75%), and location (35%) of the uBAVMs were, in decreasing order, associated with a higher incidence of bleeding. According to a recent review of the literature, no clear risk factors for bleeding can be identified. According to some reports, size and infratentorial location are the two most common factors associated with bleeding. However, there was no general agreement on the results of these studies and the panel concluded that, at present, n o definite risk factors for bleeding have been identified. Importantly, also, no factor whose absence protects the patients from bleeding has been identified. Is eloquence a contraindication to treatment? Eloquence was considered a serious problem only for surgery, as two (9%) endovascular radiologists accounted size more relevant than eloquence. For surgery, eloquence is the main concern. In their Surgical Grading Scale, Spetzler–Martin consider eloquence as one of the main issues. Eloquence is a relevant issue also in the Supplementary Grading Scale by Lawton. Large size and deep venous drainage can affect eloquence thorough the involvement of the deep white matter. For two (9%) surgeons, eloquence is not an issue for Spetzler–Martin grade 1 or 2 malformations while it becomes a problem for those in grade 3 or higher. All the panelists agreed that a limited visual deficit can be compensated, with a small impact in terms of quality of life, to be taken into account in proposing a treatment to the patient. Eloquence was considered by all panelists a strong suggestion to choose radiosurger y rather than other treatment modalities. Is young age a contraindication to treatment? In the survey, younger age was not considered a reason to withhold treatment by all the participants and surgery was suggested by 85% of the panel. Although the panel agreed that treatment complications may overcome a future risk of bleeding, it concluded that in a young person’s life expectancy is long and in low-grade malformations the risk of bleeding for the rest of their life is far superior than the complications of treatment. Moreover,children will compensate a mild deficit more easily than adults. Literature reports that for low-grade AVMs the crossover between serious neurological complications due to treatment vs. natural history is under 5 years. It was pointed out that knowing to have an AVM is an important limitation in a patient’s quality of life and that at least one-third of patients with an uBAVMs are not asymptomatic. They can have severe headache or epilepsy. Moreover, the risk of surgical or endovascular treatment is probably lower in young patients that in older people. Radiosurgeons suggested that Gamma Knife (GK) for malformations in young patients appears to be more effective than in older people, and 96% of the panel disagreed with the option of waiting for a treatable uBAVM to bleed before suggesting treatment. Is old age (65 years) a contraindication to treatment? In patients over 65, treatment was considered contraindicated by most of the panel because the risk of treatment can outweigh the risk of bleeding. Most (84%) of the panel agreed that only a life expectancy over 20 years could be a prerequisite for treatment. However, radiosurgeons suggested that as radiosurgery is a low-risk treatment , it can be suggested also at an older age. Is small size a contraindication to treatment? Small malformations are less susceptible to the risks of treatment and have a greater chance of being cured. All three modalities of treatment can be used, but there was general agreement that a multidisciplinary discussion has to be performed prior to the treatment, with the aim of defining the best strategy to obtain a complete cure with lower risks.As a general rule, 67% of the panel agreed that in a small non-eloquent uBAVM, surgery is preferable (with or without previous embolization), 22% indicated Gamma Knife, and 11% endovascular treatment as a first option. In contrast, in a small eloquent uBAVM, radiosurgery is the best option. This recommendation is supported by published reports.In selected cases, endovascular treatment may be considered. Everyone agreed that in small non-eloquent uBAVMs a treatment has always to be suggested. Is large size a contraindication to treatment? Large-size uBAVMs were considered by 84% of the panel a reason to withhold treatment. From a surgical point of view, grade IV and V malformations are generally considered not treatable because the surgical risk is very high. Reducing the malformation size with repeated endovascular sessions did not prove to reduce the bleeding risk and, on the contrary, seemed to increase the risk of complications.In accordance with the fact that bigger malformations seem to have a higher risk of bleeding and are more likely to be symptomatic, a staged radiosurgery treatment can be suggested as investigational therapy to downgrade the malformation size. Staged radiosurgery can be followed by surgery or endovascular treatment if not completely effective. Are deep feeders a contraindication to treatment? Lawton first found that deep feeder supply was associated with a worse outcome, but in a subsequent paper , this association was less evident. Today’s surgical instruments,such as non-stick bipolar, are more effective in favoring coagulation. If there are few single deep feeders, they can be selectively embolized prior to surgery, although endovascular panelists do not consider selective embolization a low-risk procedure.Deep feeders are considered a surgical problem when they involve several lenticulo-striatal vessels, but they are not a contraindication for radiosurgery. Are deep-seated malformations a contraindication to treatment? In most of the cases they are a problem for surgery but not for radiosurgery or endovascular treatment. Is diffuseness a contraindication to treatment? Diffuseness is a problem for all of the three disciplines. Defining the diffuseness is not easy. Most of the panel agreed that MRI in conjunction with angiography can help to identify the sparseness of the nidus. Superficial pial vessel recruitment in some cases can be misinterpreted as diffuseness when evaluated only on angiographic projections and has to be distinguished from true diffuseness. Should a new randomized trial be proposed or a Registry can be better? There was an agreement that practical experience has to be translated in numbers to provide a more solid scientific basis to overcome the ARUBA impasse. In accordance with the methodologist, the panel agreed that even though another randomized trial can have disadvantages, it is very difficult to accomplish and, as happened with the ARUBA Study, can fail on the patient’s recruitment. Moreover, randomization requires a high level of uncertainty, and in many high-volume centers this may not be an option. A prospective Multicenter International Registry can be more easily conducted and will provide more reliable results on uBAVM treatment. A registry is a valuable option for assessing treatment effectiveness for a number of reasons, including the enrollment of a homogeneous inception cohort (e.g., at the time of diagnosis), the inclusion of patients from different sources, the adoption of pre-planned outcome measures, the minimization of dropouts, the standardization of baseline variables (including prognostic predictors), and the allowance for sufficient follow-up for the outcomes to me measured. At the end of the day, the panel made the following statements and general recommendations on behalf of the European Societies of Neurosurgery, Interventional Therapy and Radiosurgery: ○ Brain arteriovenous malformation (AVM) is a complex disease associated with potentially severe natural history. ○ The results of a randomized trial (ARUBA) cannot be applied equally for all unruptured brain arteriovenous malformation (uBAVM) and for all treatment modalities. ○ Considering the multiple treatment modalities available, patients with uBAVMs should be evaluated by an interdisciplinary neurovascular team consisting of neurosurgeons, neurointerventionalists,radiosurgeons, and neurologists experienced in the diagnosis and treatment of brain AVM. ○ Balancing the risk of hemorrhage and the associated restrictions of everyday activities related to untreated unruptured AVMs against the risk of treatment, there are sufficient indications to treat unruptured AVMs grade 1 and 2 (Spetzler–Martin). ○ There may be indications for treating patients with higher grades, based on a case to case consensus decision of the experienced team. ○ If treatment is indicated, the primary strategy should be defined by the multidisciplinary team prior to the beginning of the treatment and should aim at complete eradication of the uBAVM. ○ The main factors to be taken into account for the management are: - Treatment-related severe complication rate of 5% for grade 1 and 2 (Spetzler–Martin) malformations - Life expectancy justifying acceptance of the risk associated with the selected treatment modality (Severe treatment-related complications are defined as those resulting in unprecedented permanent disability (mRS 2–6) at 12 months) ○ After having considered the pros and cons of a randomized trial vs. a registry, the panel proposed a prospective European Multidisciplinary Registry. 指南目录 “腰椎间盘突出症的康复治疗”中国专家共识 2017急性深静脉血栓形成诊断和治疗指南 2017年GOLD慢性阻塞性肺疾病定义和诊断的全球策略解读 2017年最新克罗恩病治疗指南 2017年最新溃疡性结肠炎治疗指南 2017 ADA糖尿病视神经病变最新指南推荐 儿童及成人惊厥性癫痫持续状态(CSE)的治疗 中国急/慢性非特异性腰背痛诊疗专家共识 中国帕金森病的诊断标准(2016版) 中国血管性认知障碍诊疗指导规范 2016年中国偏头痛防治指南 阿尔茨海默病诊疗指南 关于肥厚型心肌病诊断和猝死防治建议 心房颤动诊疗指南 2016 ESC 和 AHA/AHA/HFSA慢性心力衰竭新指南解读
投到Journal of Mountain Science 的文章利用气温计算山区裸地地表温度的新方法（New methods for calculating bare land surface temperature over mountainous terrain） 在第一轮审稿时共收到三份审稿意见, 三份意见均较为详细，所有审稿意见加在一起有四页多，意稿人对这种简单的新方法均表现出浓厚的兴趣并给予了充分的肯定，同时提出了很多具体的建议以便作者进一步修改和完善。三位审稿人分别来位于意大利的欧洲研究院（Academia Europaea）高山研究所， 意大利那不勒斯第二大学,西班牙国家研究委员会比利牛斯生态研究所。 在这里贴出这三份审稿意见的目的是希望国内的学者能够从中学习到一些撰写审稿意见的方法, 同时, 给从事相关研究的国内学者提供一些合作交流的线索。 第一位审稿人先对文章进行了总体评价，然后针对文章各章节给出相应评价和具体意见，这样的审稿意见让作者更容易理解，在修改时也更容易操作。 Reviewer 1 Accademia Europea, Institute for Alpine Environments The manuscript is well written. However, it proposes a rather simple method compared with the major literature on the field. The method could be useful in data-poor regions. I would have suggested reject in a major journal with very high IF, but I think good works, even if made with a few data and simple approaches, deserve a publication in a good journal as JMS. General comments : The article proposes a new methodology to improve the estimation of land surface temperature (LST) over mountainous terrain, on the basis of topographic information and air temperature. The proposed method is very simple and based on few, easily available data. Performances are relatively poor, compared to other, more complex, methods. Nevertheless, the method improves significantly results, compared to an approach based only on air temperature. The method could be useful in data-poor regions. The paper is very well written and results are well supported by observations. However, there are several aspects in the methodology that can be improved. I understand that the Authors want to keep the method simple and with little data requirements (only T air observations), but several improvements are possible that could, at least, be mentioned as possible future developments in the Discussion. In particular: •Only bare soil is considered. However, as acknowledged, vegetation strongly influences LST. How vegetation can be considered in the method? •A better validation of the method could be given by remote sensing data. Why do not validate the model also against such a data? •Effect of long wave radiation and could cover. Simple methods are available to infer long wave radiation to further improve the method. I think the paper is in line with the aims and targets of JMS. To conclude, I suggest a moderate revision for the paper. Specific comments: Introduction Introduction is well written: I suggest underlining the importance of LST estimation in mountain regions for processes as permafrost. I suggest also mentioning the possibility of estimating LST by proximal sensing (thermal cameras). Site and data Here I have a major methodological observation. Did you measure LST just below the soil or at the soil surface? In the last case, how has been the instrument sheltered from the Sun? Incorrect solar sheltering and simply the fact that the instrument is made in a different material with respect to the soil, can alter observation of several K. Please explain better the experimental setup. Methodology If a temperature lapse rate of -6.5 C/100 m is always assumed, large errors in Ta estimation are possible. In fact, over long time scales this assumption is safe, but locally and at the instantaneous time scale, lapse rate could change a lot (i.e. morning thermal inversion, etc …) In the methods, the diurnal Ta excursion is used. The method performs also worse for cloudy days. This could be because the effects of incoming long wave radiation from the clouds are not take in account. Way do not consider simple parametrizations as the one of Brutsaert (1975) and following modifications for clouds? Brutsaert, W. (1975). On a Derivable Formula for Long-Wave Radiation from Clear Skies. Water Resour. Res., 11(5), 742–744. Validation Given the simplicity of the method, it works relatively well, even below pefromances of more complex methods. A better validation of the method could be given by thermal cameras observations or by MODIS (500 m resolution) LANDSAT LST (60 m resolution) observations. The latter are available for free. Why do not validate the model also against such a data Reviewer 2 Seconda Università di Napoli, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Design, Edilizia e Ambiente The paper proposes a simple method to calculate bare soil surface temperature from air temperature measurements. The topic is of interest for the readership of JMS, as soil surface temperature affects several processes occurring at soil surface, such as soil-atmosphere energy and water exchange, snow melt etc. The manuscript is clearly organized, but the English language must be improved with the help of a native speaker (for instance, there is continuously skipping from present tense to past tense, that should be homogenized throughout the manuscript). Although the proposed method could be useful for practical applications, the presentation of the results does not allow the reader to judge if the drawn conclusions are actually supported by the data. In particular, after describing the proposed mathematical relationships allowing calculation of soil temperature from air temperature, solar elevation and land slope and aspect angles, the authors make their discussion by comparing the obtained results only with the naive assumption of considering soil surface temperature equal to air temperature, and conclude that their model is closer to actual measured soil temperature. I have several concerns about this line of evaluating model performance: - I wonder if this kind of comparison is enough to draw the conclusion that equations (1) and (2) are suitable for estimating LST. The authors should provide more information about the errors of the model, e.g. at what time of the day, and in what part of the year, the discrepancies between model and measurements are maximum? - Would it be possible to introduce the effect of cloud cover to further improve the performance of the equation? - To what extent the errors still present in the modeled LST affect the estimates of water and energy exchanges at soil surface? - Although the authors state that other existing approaches for estimating soil surface temperature do not provide data at the required spatial resolution, some comparison with the performance of other models should be made. - The presented data refer to high altitude sites, and the authors, in their introduction, mention permafrost dynamics as one of the possible fields of application of the method; nonetheless, there is no mention to insulation snow effect on the relationship between air temperature and soil temperature (see Wang et al., 2016, for a recent review of existing models). Given all these issues, me recommendation is that the manuscript is not acceptable in its present form, and major revisions are needed before re-evaluating it for possible publication in JMS. References Wang W, et al., 2016 Evaluation of air–soil temperature relationships simulated by land surface models during winter across the permafrost region, The Cryosphere, 10: 1721–173 Reviewer 3 Spanish Research council, CSIC, Pyrenean Institute of Ecology Dear Editor, The manuscript deals with a research that is rather simple, but may result useful for other researchers and, hence, to be of interest for JSM. Below I indicate a short number of comments that may facilitate the lecture of the manuscript and also some questions that authors should consider before being accepted the manuscript. Comments to the Author The manuscript New methods for calculating bare land surface temperature over mountainous terrain test two equation to obtain bare land suface temperature in mountain areas. Analyses are rather simple and the results are depicted very briefly. In general, I think that this topic may be of interest for different field of research in mountain areas (ecology, erosion, etc) and hence of interest for Journal of Mountain Science. Below I indicate a number of comments that authors should address and/or clarify in a revised version: 1- In the abstract all acronyms should be introduced with the full name for better understanding. 2- Figure captions should be reworked to be self-explanatory. In its current form they do not result very informative if you do not read the full manuscript. 3- The section Validation includes the full results. I would move the first paragraph to methods, and the rest to a results section. 4- An important question is that authors are correlating two series (observed and simulated data) with a very strong seasonality, that always will lead to spuriously increase the correlation values. I think that error estimators should be provided to series with the seasonal signal removed, or alternatively present the error estimators for each month, removing in this way the seasonal cycle. 5- In relation with comment 4, I think it would be of interest to show if the equations work better or worse in different times of the year, so providing (and discussing) error estimators for each month would be of interest. 6- It would be of interest stress the RMSE as a percentage of average Temperature to have an idea which % of error are associated to both equations ( a standardized RMSE). 6- What about snowpack? Were the study sites covered by snow? How did it affect the analysis? 7- Perhaps, it would be good to discuss how these equations may work on bare rock instead of bare soils. Probably, it will be necessary to use completely different parameters as differences between air temperature and surface will be much larger.
一、欧洲对自身创新能力的反思：来自美国的压力 21世纪以来，全世界各个国家日益重视创新驱动发展重要作用。可以说，在信息通讯技术迅猛发展以及经济全球化的背景下。创新，已经成为国际竞争力的关键指标，上升到了关系国家存亡的高度。有竞争，就有竞争对手。当创新驱动发展成为不同国家的共同选择时，随之而来的问题就是，创新的水平高低如何衡量？谁是创新的领头羊？创新的预期是达到什么标准？创新预计超过哪一个地区或国家？当近距离观察欧洲创新体系的时候，笔者发现了一个有趣的现象，那就是，欧洲将美国作为创新驱动发展战略的竟比对手。 欧美之间的关系非常复杂。一方面，由于历史原因，欧美之间的合作很紧密；另一方面，尤其是进入21世纪以来，欧洲与美国竞争的色彩日益浓厚，在其创新驱动战略中尤为明显。 笔者在荷兰特文特访学期间，当与学术同行谈到创新问题时，他们会把美国当作成功的样本，并且如此表达对欧洲创新能力的忧虑：欧洲创新能力与过去比有所下降，与美国与日本比，明显下降。这种来自美国的创新压力，不仅流露在学术同行的非正式交谈中，而且写入了欧盟正式的创新驱动战略的政策文本中。在欧盟重要政策文本《欧洲 2020战略 》中，欧盟指出，和经济发展伙伴相比，欧洲结构性短板暴露无遗，经济衰退的主要原因是对研发投入不足，企业缺乏创新，未能充分运用信息通讯技术——这几个方面显然是美国的优势。甚至直接指出，老龄员工（55岁至64岁）的雇佣率只有46%，而美国和日本达到了62%。更有甚者，《欧洲创业教育》 报告以美国为参照系，以美国的经验关照自己的问题，然后制定具体的目标。 二、以美国为参照系制定创新创业教育目标 《欧洲创业教育》报告指出，要改变欧洲创业乏力的状况，必须大力开展创业教育。进而，该报告对照美国创业教育发展状况，对欧洲创业教育进行了评估，并确定了改革方向。具体如下： 1、创业教育氛围的不足与转变 《欧洲创业教育》报告首先指出欧洲创业教育面临极大的观念性与制度性障碍。报告对欧美进行了对照：在美国，创业已被大学与学术机构广为接受。大学的许多工商学院把创业作为重点科目，并且还有越来越多学院把创业作为“重点”或“专业”，许多学院提供大量的创业课程，专门的创业学系也成立了。但在欧洲，把创业作为一个学术性“学科”，尚不能完全得到认可，创业尚在努力寻找落脚之地。鲜有创业学系，教授们习惯教授经济学、商业管理这类传统学科。即使在创业领先的教师们，也不得不努力争取学校的支持，获得开展活动的经费。报告由此得出的结论是，组织文化、实践与政策都阻碍了大学里的创业精神与创业氛围。因此，欧洲大学需要从实际运作到社会角色等各个方面都进行彻底的转型。 2、大学学习方式的不足与转变 检视美国与欧洲的大学教育，《欧洲创业教育》报告认为，美国大学里的创业教育是在多学科交叉的教育过程中进行的，学校鼓励学生跨学科选课以及跨学科进行项目合作，从而使不同专业的学生——工程、科学、设计、人文和商业，都能整合专业所长，充分使用自己的专业知识。由于美国大学竭尽全力扫除有碍跨学科学习的制度性障碍，尽可能为学生创设一个富有创造性与创新性的学习过程，因此形成了以灵活的小组或以项目为支撑的学习环境。考夫曼基金会的出现，甚至打破了美国校园的界限，跨学科、跨校园的创业项目极大地激发了所有学科学生的创业性思维。比较美国的创业教育经验，报告指出，跨学科学习方式在欧洲日益得到推广，尤其是剑桥大学作出了很好的榜样，但还有必要在欧洲的各个大学推进。 3、校企合作的不足与转变 《欧洲创业教育》报告还比较了欧美之间创业教育态度与方法方面的差距。在美国，创业教育与企业实践紧密联系。教授们多有在新创企业工作的经验，与此同时，企业家大多是大学的校友，因而常常应邀走进大学课堂或者承担课程教学。美国创业课程的设计尽可能立足于经验，课程结构通常由真实案例、项目、实习以及商业计划大赛组成。案例学习也尽可能为学生就如何成为企业家提供可资借鉴的摹本——这一点对于激发学生创业非常重要。因为学生看见大量“像他们自己一样的人”成功创办了公司，那么就能去掉创业过程的神秘感，让学生的创业选择更加容易。相比之下，虽然欧洲大学普遍采用了基于项目的学习，但创业教育课程仍有采用传统的讲授法，案例学习偶有使用，但很少关注欧洲企业家。欧洲迫切需要发现欧洲的企业家并在全欧洲各级各类学校广泛进行宣传，还可以利用媒体进行广泛的报道，从而为青年人创业树立榜样。 参考文献： Karen Wilson . Entrepreneurship Education in Europe . European Foundation for Entrepreneurship Research . gjgao@tongji.edu.cn
欧洲光生物学会 - 举办夏季《光生物学》短期培训班 The Photobiology School ESP Dear Colleague, Registration is open for the 4th ESP Photobiology School, taking place in the beautiful Brixen/Bressanone in South Tyrol, Italy, from 20 to 25 June 2016. The updated programme and registration and logistic information are available at the page www.photobiology.eu/photobiology_school . The purpose of the school is to provide an introductory overview of all main aspects of photobiology, presented by experts in each area. The course is designed for PhD and Master students, as well as for scientists interested in an overview of the photobiological sciences. The School is strongly supported by ESP and this is reflected in the low registration fee. In addition, low cost accommodation will be provided. After completion of the course an attendance certificate will be provided to all the students. An optional short final test will be offered at the end of the course and an exam certificate will be provided after evaluation of the exam results. Passing the exam will entitle students to apply for the ESP supplement to the PhD degree. Please circulate this information to your colleagues and students. Best regards Francesco Ghetti ESP Treasurer
1. European summer temperatures since Roman times Luterbacher et al., 2016 ERL The spatial context is critical when assessing present-day climate anomalies, attributing them to potentialforcings and making statements regarding their frequency and severity in a long-term perspective. Recentinternational initiatives have expanded the number of high-quality proxy-records and developed newstatistical reconstruction methods. These advances allow more rigorous regional past temperaturereconstructions and, in turn, the possibility of evaluating climate models on policy-relevant, spatiotemporalscales. Here we provide a new proxy-based, annually-resolved, spatial reconstruction of theEuropean summer(June – August)temperature fields back to 755 CE based on Bayesian hierarchicalmodelling (BHM), together with estimates of the European mean temperature variation since 138 BCEbased on BHM and composite-plus-scaling (CPS). Our reconstructions compare well with independentinstrumental and proxy-based temperature estimates, but suggest a larger amplitude in summertemperature variability than previously reported. Both CPS and BHM reconstructions indicate that themean 20th century European summer temperature was not significantly differentfrom some earliercenturies, including the 1st, 2nd, 8th and 10th centuries CE. The 1st century (in BHM also the 10thcentury) may even have been slightly warmer than the 20th century, but the difference is not statisticallysignificant. Comparing each 50 yr period with the 1951 – 2000 period reveals a similar pattern. Recentsummers, however, have been unusually warm in the context of the last two millennia and there are no30 yr periods in either reconstruction that exceed the mean average European summer temperature of thelast 3 decades(1986 – 2015 CE). A comparison with an ensemble of climate model simulations suggeststhat the reconstructed European summer temperature variability over the period 850 – 2000 CE reflectschanges in both internal variability and external forcing on multi-decadal time-scales. For pan-European temperatures we find slightly better agreement between the reconstruction and the model simulationswith high-end estimates for total solar irradiance. Temperature differences between the medieval period,the recent period and the Little Ice Age are larger in the reconstructions than the simulations. This mayindicate inflated variability of the reconstructions, a lack of sensitivity and processes to changes in externalforcing on the simulated European climate and/or an underestimation of internal variability oncentennial and longer time scales.
前些日子去了一趟大英博物馆，再次参观了馆中珍藏的雅典帕特农神庙上的石雕。有关这些石雕的来路，多年来争论不断，希腊人说的是被英国人“偷”走的，英国人说当年额尔金勋爵是得到奥斯曼帝国官员同意“运走”的，但是不管是怎么来的，英国人对着这些石雕的珍视爱护是值得称赞的，所有石雕都放在一个专门的大厅里，大致按它们在帕特农神庙原来的位置陈列。虽然许多已经不再完整，但石雕的残破似乎反而突出了它们的价值，仿佛历史都积淀在白色大理石的缺口和纹理之间了。 原色的白大理石雕塑有一种特别的庄严肃穆之感，因此长期以来大部分人都以为帕特农神庙上的大理石雕塑一直都是原色的。其实不然，帕特农神庙刚刚建成时，上面的石雕涂满了各种鲜艳而对比强烈的颜色。当然经过几千年的风霜，这些颜色早已消褪殆尽，留下的反而是更美的原色。 这些大理石雕塑上原来到底涂的是什么颜色，考证起来比较困难。在过去，要研究古希腊人对颜色的运用，主要通过分析古希腊文献中对颜色的表述。研究者发现古希腊人有关颜色的词汇比较单调，只有白色、黑色和红色，其它和颜色相关的词汇往往含义模糊多变，对蓝色和绿色的描绘更为缺乏。以致于在十九世纪一些历史学家和眼科医生认为古希腊人可能有某种视觉缺陷，对蓝绿色不够敏感，甚至有人认为古希腊时期人眼还没有完全进化。这个观点到二十世纪初已不再流行，然而纳粹德国在宣传人种优越论时再次把这个观点拿出来作为证据，因为在古日耳曼语中有大量对蓝色和绿色的描述，以此推导出日耳曼人比古希腊人“进化程度更高”。这些观点一直受到许多人批评，简单地把文字中对颜色的描述与社会甚至人种的“进化”程度联系在一起是错误和片面的，因为对颜色的描述，是一种文化现象，不光反映了人们看到了什么，更代表了当时社会中颜色的文化地位。 书名：《绿色的历史》英文版(Green: The History of a Color) 作者：米歇尔•帕斯图罗(Michel Pastoureau) 英文版出版社：普林斯顿大学出版社 出版时间：2014年8月 法国学者米歇尔•帕斯图罗(Michel Pastoureau)在他的新书《绿色的历史》( Green: The History of a Color )中重申了颜色的地位与意义是由社会给予的这一观点，在他看来，之所以在古希腊文字中缺少对蓝色和绿色的描述，是因为这两种颜色在当时不受重视，属于“二等颜色”，而不是因为古希腊人眼睛有什么缺陷。 帕斯图罗是法国高教机构巴黎高等研究应用学院的历史学家，对欧洲历史上的颜色、符号和纹章等有深入的研究，《绿色的历史》是他“颜色系列”专著的第三部，在这之前他已经出版了《黑色的历史》和《蓝色的历史》，计划中还将出版有关红色和黄色的历史研究。《绿色的历史》和前两部作品一样，有着极为丰富的历史资料，把绿色在欧洲各个时期的文化意义逐一进行论述，阅读此书可以让人学到许多新的知识，也肯定会推翻了不少过时的看法。 对颜色的运用体现在社会生活的各个方面，因此帕斯图罗的研究素材也非常丰富，除了文字之外，还包括绘画、雕塑、服饰、纹章、彩绘玻璃、甚至体育活动，另一方面他还认为颜色的文化内涵离不开人们对颜色构成的理解，比如说绿色在光谱中的位置，以及绿色颜料的来源、染色和绘画中采用何种绿色颜料等等，因此颜料的制作工艺和质量将会影响当时社会对颜色的好恶观感。 现代社会中，绿色是一种备受青睐的色彩，和环境保护、身心安宁、健康卫生等联系在一起，有时候人们会通过和绿色挂钩的办法宣示自己的立场。英国保守党的党徽原来是以红蓝两色画出的一只举着火炬的手，卡梅伦10年前当选为保守党领袖之后做的一件事情就是把党徽改成了一棵树：在蓝色的树干之上，是大片用涂抹方式画出的树叶。卡梅伦希望用这个新党徽来宣示保守党的“绿色”立场，暗示在他的领导下，保守党将是一个适应新时代、关心环境生态的政党。 然而帕斯图罗的研究发现，绿色并不总是具有这些象征意义，从古希腊、古罗马到中世纪直至现代，绿色的意义曾经发生了多次改变，从被忽略到流行、从代表青春浪漫到成为魔鬼的颜色、从“二等颜色”到成为政治宠儿，经历了多次起伏，从中可以看出政治、文化、宗教和科技上的发展变迁。 与古希腊语缺乏对绿色的描述相比，在古罗马人使用的拉丁语中，出现了许多和绿色相关的词汇，不过在罗马共和国时期，绿色还是一种“野蛮人”、特别是北方日耳曼人联系在一起的颜色。绿色在服饰和其它日用品上也非常少见，帕斯图罗认为这也许和罗马人在绿色染制工艺上比较落后有关。到罗马帝国时期，色彩在日常生活中的运用日渐丰富，绿色也和紫色、粉色和蓝色一起，成为“新兴”色彩，这些被视为是“轻佻”的颜色，与“庄重”的传统色：白色、红色、黄色、黑色等形成对比。罗马皇帝尼禄(Nero)是一个例外：他特别钟爱绿色，从衣着、宫廷装饰到收集的宝石，甚至包括饮食，绿色都是其主色调。尼禄一直被后人描绘为性格乖张无常，这似乎加强了把绿色看作是一种“不稳定”颜色的看法。 帕斯图罗对古罗马战车比赛的观察十分有趣。这是一项当时很流行的观赏体育运动，每辆战车都代表一个团队出赛，每一团队都有自己的标志色，早期曾经有超过四支队伍参赛，到了帝国后期就只有两支团队：“蓝队”代表元老院和贵族，“绿队”代表平民。在赛马场上，颜色成了身份归属的象征，历代罗马皇帝大部分是“蓝队”的支持者，但也有一些例外，尼禄就是其中之一。 绿色的文化内涵在中世纪的欧洲出现了剧烈的变动。一开始绿色地位得到提高，绿色出现在了彩绘玻璃和装饰品上，在日耳曼地区尤其显著，例如被德国和法国同时认为是自己第一个皇帝的查理曼大帝，就对绿色十分钟爱。后来绿色地位曾上升到成为“高贵之爱”的象征，然而到了中世纪的后期，绿色却又和传说中的撒旦与魔鬼联系在了一起。 The Arnolfini Wedding 帕斯图罗认为，中世纪社会对“果园”(orchard)的热爱，大大提升了绿色的文化地位。“果园”一般是一个被围墙围起来的花园，但其中必须有成片的绿地和果树，中央是一个喷泉。每当春天来临，在这个充满绿色的果园内，人们既能休憩愉悦、又能冥想期待。植物和春天都和绿色产生了联系，这种联系在中世纪中期渐渐演化为把绿色看作是青春、爱情、期待的象征，代表汇集了诚恳、忠诚、典雅、慷慨、勇气等多种美德的“高贵之爱”，难怪那时候的骑士们都愿意给自己或座骑披上绿色的袍子。帕斯图罗对伦敦国家美术馆收藏的著名油画《阿诺芬尼的婚礼》( The Arnolfini Wedding )进行了分析，此画作于1434年左右，画面上一对年轻男女手牵手站在一间卧室内。这幅画展示的故事内容不详，有过多种分析，特别是画中女士左手抚着自己微隆的腹部，让人猜测她已经怀孕。帕斯图罗指出画中有两个线索：第一个是背景中床架上刻着的保佑怀孕妇女的圣玛格丽特雕像，第二个是画中女士身着的绿色长袍，在中世纪中期，年轻女性身穿绿色衣服，象征着“等待喜事的降临”，到中世纪后期就更为明确地与环孕联系在了一起。从这两个线索看，这位女士无疑已经怀孕。 正当它的文化地位日渐上升之时，在中世纪末期，绿色却出现了“性格分裂”：一方面代表了愉悦、美丽和希望，另一方面又与撒旦、魔鬼联系在了一起，在这一时期的绘画中出现的许多凶恶的怪兽，如鳄鱼、鲸鱼、喷火龙等等，大都呈现为绿色和黄色，而文艺作品中的巫婆也往往身着绿色。 帕斯图罗没有为这一现象提供解释，只是说也许与中世纪绿色染料的不稳定有关，这可能是让绿色无法成为一种“正统”颜色的原因之一。在《绿色的历史》一书中，他一直强调绿色在不同时期的文化地位往往和当时的颜料制作和染制工艺有关。在古代，最早被采用的绿色染料主要来自铜绿和孔雀石，后来人们发现可以通过混合蓝色与黄色颜料来制作绿色颜料，但是中世纪僵化的行会制度不允许同一家染坊经营多种颜色，加上许多画家对蓝黄两色混合的抗拒，让绿色难以成为一种占据主流地位的颜色。即使到了欧洲启蒙运动时期，绿色在光谱上位于蓝色和黄色之间的事实已经被发现，在颜色的“地位”上，绿色依然低于蓝色，原因之一是当时发现了普鲁士蓝和美洲靛青，这两种高效的染料让蓝色大行其道，占据了主导地位。 绿色文化地位的再次爬升，是从十九世纪后期开始的。由于都市化的发展，城市居民对绿色所代表的乡村、自然和植物的渴望越来越强，于是绿色与健康和卫生的关系慢慢地建立了起来，成为生命、活力、康复的象征。近几十年来，绿色的文化地位越来越高，它所代表的美德除了健康卫生之外，还延伸到了公民参与、社会责任和符合伦理的生活方式等，可以说在二十一世纪，绿色的文化地位终于达到了顶峰，这就难怪英国保守党也要把自己“染绿”了。 在《绿色的历史》一书中，帕斯图罗明确地把研究范围局限在欧洲。但是联想到中国历史，绿色的文化地位不也是在不断变化中吗？唐代规定七品官以下穿绿服，即所谓的“青衫”，由此可见当时绿色地位的地下，在明清时代，“绿头巾”、“绿帽子”是卖淫者的别称。汉语中还有“绿林大盗”一说，把绿色和盗贼联系在一起。当然绿色也并非一概贬义，汉语中“青春”一词本身就是以代表自然、春天的绿色来形容旺盛的生命力。 如果说什么遗憾的话，那就是在《绿色的历史》中，作者往往不会解释许多文化现象背后的原因，这当然是他治学严谨的体现，不作妄加推测，但却让读者失去了了解这位颜色文化专家一些个人见解的机会。 《绿色的历史》覆盖了欧洲从古希腊到现代的历史，对绿色的文化历史作了详尽的分析，不仅知识量大，许多故事也十分有趣。读完本书之后，不禁更加让人期待作者颜色系列中的其它作品了。 《经济观察报·书评增刊· 绿色的历史 》
- 从培根到爱因斯坦 13 世纪欧洲的罗吉尔·培根论述了实验方法，阿奎拉阐述了经验主义和乔托提出透视绘画方法到弗兰西斯·培根的《新工具》和笛卡儿的《方法论》，数学论证的逻辑方法与实验仪器的技术结合，奠基了17世纪到19世纪的西方科学发展的根基。 13 世纪到16世纪的文艺复兴，开始于意大利的十日谈、君王论和工程技术发展，经历大学建立、文化中心形成和宗教改革，从神权向君权社会转换。17世纪到19世纪的欧洲启蒙运动，建立了实证科学和教育学、政治学和经济学等，论述了中国儒家和道家、释家（高更）等文化，产生了工业革命和工艺美术运动、文官制度建立，从而，进入了现代民权社会。 中国文化复兴，则实际是启蒙运动和复兴社会的伦理传统，伟大见诸于细微而求真、务实的精神，却不是宏大而空虚、浮华的表象。 欧洲文艺复兴，开启于阿拉伯文献中发现的希腊典籍，中国文化复兴则起因于发现西方科学里的中国思想、文化和技术、艺术。培根论及中国的3大发明用了“发现”，可能是这些机械比较简单而没有太多的人工设计，也可能反映了当时普遍对机械和工具等发明的兴趣，而恰好是近代科学视大自然为机械的哲学观。 莱布尼兹、康德开启了欧洲的系统与演化思维，从机械计算、数学符号到计算机科学、微电子技术，从数理逻辑、语言哲学到形式语言、计算机程序等，发展了分析与综合哲学、工程与人工科学。 而后，实验科学与系统科学的结合，诞生了天然机器与人工机器的研究与发展，从而，将进入深海和太空发展新的能源、材料和信息技术时代。 附、培根的《新工具》 弗兰西斯·培根的“知识就是力量”，拉丁文为“scientia potentia est”。 弗兰西斯·培根（Francis Bacon, 1561-1626）。他在《新工具》（NewOrganon）第1卷第129节有一段经常被人引用的文字，最早提出了“三大发明”的说法： Again,it is well to observe the force and virtue and consequences of discoveries; andthese are to be seen nowhere more conspicuously than in those three which wereunknown to the ancients, and of which the origin, though recent, is obscure andinglorious; namely, printing, gunpowder, and the magnet. For these three havechanged the whole face and state of things throughout the world; the first inliterature, the second in warfare, the third in navigation; whence have followedinnumerable changes; insomuch that no empire, no sect, no star seems to haveexerted greater power and influence in human affairs than those mechanicaldiscoveries. 许宝騤的翻译（《新工具》，商务印书馆1984年版，第103页）： “ 复次，我们还该注意到发现的力量、效能和后果。这几点是再明显不过地表现在古代所不知、较近才发现、而起源还暧昧不彰的三种发明上，那就是印刷、火药和磁石。这三种发明已经在世界范围内把事物的全部面貌和情况都改变了；第一种是在学术方面，第二种是在战事方面，第三种是在航行方面；并由此又引起难以数计的变化来；竟至任何帝国、任何教派、任何星辰对人类事务的力量和影响都仿佛无过于这些机械性的发现了。” 以上均文献来自吴国盛的博文（ http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-2534476-887890.html ）。
科学：转基因在欧洲将难以入生根 本文链接：http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_502041670102vbns.html 附： Science：欧盟即将允许各成员国对转基因颁布禁令 精选 已有 1206 次阅读 2014-11-22 15:24 |个人分类:热点新闻|系统分类:海外观察|关键词:欧盟 转基因 禁令 【博主按】这是昨天（2014-11-21）发表在Science周刊上有关欧盟对待转基因问题的一则新闻，我进行了全文翻译。紧跟其后的是新闻后链接的一个更早些时候（2014-11-12）的新闻报道，我也做了全文翻译。任何翻译都难于保证100%传递信息，为了避免可能的歧义，我将原文附后。如果有翻译不准确或者错误的地方，请善意指出，谢谢！ 11月11日，欧洲议会议员通过了一个草案，允许各国政府禁止转基因（GM）作物在其境内种植，即使那个产品已被欧洲层面得到了授权。欧洲食品安全局已经批准了几种转基因作物，但许多消费者却一脚踢开这些食物，而且一些国家的政府试图禁止它们。各国的分歧已经削弱监管决策，为了避免这种僵局，计划给各国政府更多的权力，代价是削弱了泛欧洲市场的一致性。生物技术公司和植物科学家一如既往地警告说，这个提案设定了一个负面先例。但是转基因的反对者则赞扬了议会提案的最新版本——试图给各国政府更多的实权以便在其领土禁止转基因种植。 欧盟准备允许各国对转基因作物的禁令 欧洲议会议员昨日同意了一个草案，允许各国政府拒绝转基因（GM）作物在其领土内种植，即使那个产品已经在欧洲层面得到了授权。该计划有助于协调反转和挺转国家，解除停滞不前的审批流程，让更多的转基因作物在欧洲种植，尽管很多国家有可能借此机会来进行限制。 虽然欧洲食品安全机构（EFSA）已批准了几种转基因作物，许多欧洲消费者却一脚踢开这些食物，而且一些国家的政府试图禁止他们。在过去十年中，各国的分歧已经削弱监管决策，而且一些国家的禁令在法庭上受到了种子生产商的挑战。 为了避免未来的这种僵局，计划给各国政府以更多的权力，代价是削弱了泛欧洲市场的一致性。“作为放弃欧洲共同规则的交换，我们提供了更多的灵活性，让成员国与他们的民意更协调，这是不小的成就”，该问题的议会首席谈判代表Frédérique Ries在投票后发表了这样的声明。 转基因的反对者赞扬了议会的最新版本，昨天得到了负责环境，公共健康和食品安全（ENVI）问题的委员会批准，这比今年6月份成员国同意的文本更进了一步。提案说到“会给欧洲国家一些法律的实权来禁止在其领土的转基因种植，对生物技术产业来说，是很难在法庭上挑战这些禁令的” 欧盟绿色和平组织农业政策主任Marco Contiero在投票后发表了这样的声明。 但是，该计划让一些生物技术公司感到失望，他们认为该提案为其他的科学产业“设定了一个负面先例”。“我们现在从一个缺乏适当实施的系统变成了一个计划不运行的系统”，EuropaBio行业协会农业生物技术公司的主任Beat Späth，今天通过电子邮件向Science Insider发表了这个声明。 许多科学家也响应着业界的关注。10月30日，21名植物科学家给“欧洲的决策者”发表了一封公开信，抱怨政治阻碍了植物科学，并呼吁“立即授权”EFSA认为安全的转基因植物品种。 “我们对产品做了以科学为基础的风险评估，如果它是安全的，我们就使用它，如果它不安全，我们就不用”，瑞典于默奥大学植物科学中心的植物细胞与分子生物学教授Stefan Jansson说，他是这封信的签名者之一。“如果我们开始说为了禁止一个产品是其他理由，我们就会破坏整个系统的科学依据。” 在关键的修正案中，国会议员们提出让成员国禁止某一作物，要给出更广泛的原因，包括环境方面的理由，不需要怀疑EFSA基于科学的风险评估。“它不是让成员国用新的科学证据证明EFSA是错的”，Contiero说，但让政府作为风险管理者，限制了作物的利用，例如避免农药抗性杂草的发展，或转基因与常规或野生植物之间的杂交。 其他显着的变化，环境委员会取消了成员国让种子公司直接参与禁令过程的提案——这个想法激怒了环保团体，他们建议让成员国一次禁止一组作物，而不是一个接一个的。议会的文本还要求各成员国采取“适当的措施以避免转基因生物在其领土的其他产品和邻近成员国的边境地区意外出现”，例如，在转基因与非转基因种植区之间建立缓冲区。 欧洲议会、欧洲委员会和内阁会议已经通过谈判达成了一些联合文字版本，计划在今年年底之前达成一致。 E.U.moves closer to enabling national bans on GM crops （http://scim.ag/GMcropsinEU） Membersof the European Parliament agreed yesterday on draft rules allowing individualgovernments to refuse growing genetically modified (GM) crops on theirterritory, even if the products have been authorized on the European level. Theplan could help reconcile anti- and pro-GM countries, unlock stalled approvalprocesses, and lead to more GM crops in European fields—although many countriesare likely to take the opportunity to restrict them. Althoughthe European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has sanctioned several GM crops, manyEuropean consumers spurn these foods, and some national governments have triedoutlawing them. In the past decade, disagreement among states has crippledregulatory decisions, and some countries have seen their bans challenged incourt by seed producers. Toavoid such impasses in the future, the plan gives more power to nationalgovernments—at the expense of pan-European market congruence. In exchangefor forgoing a common European rule, we give more flexibility to member statesto be more in tune with their public opinion, and this is no small feat,said Frédérique Ries, the Parliament's lead negotiator on this matter, in astatement after the vote. GMopponents have praised the Parliament's latest version of the bill, approvedhere yesterday by the committee in charge of environmental, public health, andfood safety (ENVI) issues, for going further than the text agreed to by memberstates in June. The bill as it stands would give European countries alegally solid right to ban GM cultivation in their territory, making itdifficult for the biotech industry to challenge such bans in court,” said MarcoContiero, agriculture policy director at Greenpeace EU here in Brussels, in astatement after the vote. Butthe plan has dismayed biotech companies, which say the proposal “sets anegative precedent” for other science-based industries. “We are now moving froma system that lacks proper enforcement to a system that is designed not towork,” says Beat Späth, director for agricultural biotechnology at the industryassociation EuropaBio here, in a statement sent to ScienceInsider by e-mailtoday. Manyscientists have echoed industry's concerns. On 30 October, 21 plant scientistsissued an open letter to decision makers in Europe, complainingthat politics has stalled plant science and calling for the promptauthorization of GM plant varieties that EFSA has deemed safe. Wemake a science- based risk assessment , and if it's safe we use itand if it's unsafe, we don't, says Stefan Jansson,a professor of plant cell and molecular biology at Umeå University’s PlantScience Centre in Sweden, who was one of the signatories to the letter.If we start to say there could be other grounds ,we undermine the scientific basis of the whole system. Incrucial amendments, parliamentarians proposed letting member states ban a givencrop for a broader range of reasons, including environmental grounds, withoutputting in question EFSA's science-based risk assessment. It's not about proving EFSA wrong with fresh scientific evidence,Contiero says, but about letting governments, as risk managers, restrict theuse of given crops, for example to avoid the development of pesticide-resistantweeds, or interbreeding between GM and conventional or wild plants. Inother significant changes, the ENVI committee scrapped the member states'proposal to involve seed companies directly in the banning process—an idea thathad outraged environmental groups—and suggested letting member states bangroups of crops at once, instead of one by one. The Parliament's text alsorequires member states to take appropriate measures to avoid theunintended presence of GMOs in other products on their territory and in borderareas of neighbouring Member States, for example by creating buffer zonesbetween GM and non-GM fields. TheParliament, the European Commission, and the Council of Ministers have nowentered negotiations to settle on a joint version of the text, which they aimto agree on before the end of the year.。。。。
欧洲科学计量学-2014夏季培训班 European Summer School for Scientometrics (esss) 2014 于2014年7月6日-11日在奥地利维也纳举办，课程内容如下： Preliminary Programme July 6th: Tutorial Day 11.00-12.45 Bibliometric Crash Course Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Christian Gumpenberger , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Stefan Hornbostel , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany / Sybille Hinze , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany Abstract 12.45- 13.45 Lunch break 13.45-15.15 Navigation, Search and Analysis Features of the Web of Science Tihomir Tsenkulovski , Customer Education Specialist TR Abstract Scopus Walk-through presentation Arthur Eger , Elsevier Abstract 15.15- 15.30 Coffee break 15.30-17.00 WoS Tutorial Tihomir Tsenkulovski , Customer Education Specialist TR Scopus Walk-through presentation Arthur Eger , Elsevier Abstract 17.15- 17.45 Thomson Reuters Product Presentation The Use of InCites in Research Performance Evaluation Evangelia Lipitakis , Research Analytics Consultant, Thomson Reuters Abstract July 7th: Lectures Day: Bibliometric Concepts, Indicators and Data Sources 09.00-09.05 Welcome and Opening Remarks 09.05-09.45 Bibliometrics reviewed: History, institutionalization, and concepts Stefan Hornbostel , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany Abstract 09.45-10.30 Introduction to Bibliometric Data Sources Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria Abstract 10.30-11.00 Coffee break 11.00-12.00 Scientometric Indicators in Use: an Overview Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Sybille Hinze , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany Abstract 12.00- 12.30 The Funding Acknowledgements in the Thomson Reuters Database: Potentials and Problems of a New Bibliometric Data Source Daniel Sirtes , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany Abstract 12.30-13.30 Lunch break 13.30-14.15 Evaluation and Mapping of Research and Novel Properties of the Leiden Ranking Anthony van Raan , CWTS - Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands Abstract 14.15-15.00 Bibliometrics in action: assessing the research outcomes of universities and funding agencies Linda Butler , College of Arts and Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Australia Abstract 15.00-15.30 Coffee break 15.30-16.15 Policy Use of Bibliometric Evaluation and its Repercussions on the Scientific Community Koenraad Debackere , Katholieke Universiteit (K.U.) Leuven Abstract 16.15-17.00 Off to New Horizons: the Crucial Role of Libraries in Bibliometric Analyses Christian Gumpenberger , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria Abstract 17.15- 17.45 Elsevier Product Presentation From CRIS to Research Management – Use of Bibliometric Indicators in SciVal and Pure Jörg Hellwig , Customer Consultant Research Management, Elsevier B.V. Abstract July 8th: Seminars Day 1 - Data Handling 09.00-09.45 Data Cleaning and Processing Matthias Winterhager , Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies of Science / AG Bibliometrie, Bielefeld University, Germany Abstract 09.45-10.30 Author Identification Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Abstract 10.30-11.00 Coffee break 11.00-11.45 Journal-Level Classifications - Current State of the Art éric Archambault , Science-Metrix, Canada Abstract 11.45-12.30 Subject Normalization for Citation Analysis Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Abstract 12.30-13.30 Lunch break 13.30-15.00 Group 1 – Exercises A: Journal Impact Measures Group 2 – Exercises B: Personal Name Disambiguation, h-Index 15.00-15.30 Coffee break 15.30- 17.00 Group 1 – Exercises B: Personal Name Disambiguation, h-Index Group 2 – Exercises A : Journal Impact Measures July 9th: Seminars Day 2 - Collaboration and Networks 09.00-09.30 Introduction to structural analysis Sybille Hinze , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany 09.30-10.30 The Application of Network Analysis in Science Studies: Common Theoretical Background for Broad Applications Bart Thijs , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Dept MSI, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Abstract 10.30-11.00 Coffee break 11.00-12.00 Research Collaboration Measured by Co-Authorship Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Abstract 12.00- 12.30 Discussion 12.30-13.30 Lunch break 13.30-15.00 Afternoon sessions: structures in science and options for their visualization Group 1, Part 1 Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Bart Thijs , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Dept MSI, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Sarah Heeffer , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Group 2, Part 1 Juan Gorraiz , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Nicola De Bellis , Medical Library - University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy 15.00- 15.30 Coffee break 15.30- 17.00 Afternoon sessions: structures in science and options for their visualization Group 1, Part 2 Wolfgang Glänzel , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Bart Thijs , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Dept MSI, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Sarah Heeffer , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Group 2, Part 2 Juan Gorraiz , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Nicola De Bellis , Medical Library - University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy 17.30- 18.30 Social event Natural History Museum Vienna – “The View from the Roof” Group 1 18.00- 19.00 Social event Natural History Museum Vienna – “The View from the Roof” Group 2 July 10th: Seminars Day 3 - Focus topic: SSH 09.00-09.45 Specific requirements of SSH, adequacy of data bases etc. requirements for alternative approaches and data sources Gunnar Sivertsen , Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU), Oslo, Norway Abstract 09.45-10.30 Discipline specific publication habits and influence of bibliometrics on evaluation cultures Ulrike Felt , Head of Department and Professor of Science and Technology Studies, University of Vienna, Austria Abstract 10.30-11.00 Coffee break 11.00-11.30 Monographs in research evaluation Philip Purnell , Scientometrics Consultant, Thomson Reuters Abstract 11.30- 12.00 Differences and similarities between full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals Henk Moed , Senior Scientific Advisor, Elsevier Abstract 12.00- 12.30 Altmetrics: a new challenge for scientists, librarians and research administrators Juan Gorraiz , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Christian Gumpenberger , Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria Abstract 12.30- 13.00 Google Scholar as a research and evaluation tool Alvaro Cabezas , Grupo EC3 - Universidad de Granada EC3metrics sexenios.com , Spain Abstract 13.00-14.00 Lunch break 14.00- 15.00 Practical exercises (in two groups) Comparative reference analyses for Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities 15.00- 16.00 Practical exercises (in two groups) Comparative reference analyses for Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities 16.00- 16.30 Coffee break 16.30- 17.30 Agora: Performance Measurement in the Social Sciences and the Humanities Panelists: Ulrike Felt , Head of Department and Professor of Science and Technology Studies, University of Vienna, Austria / Gunnar Sivertsen , NIFU STEP - Norwegian Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education, Norway Moderation: Stefan Hornbostel , Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Germany 18.30- 22.00 Imperial Dinner at Kunsthistorisches Museum (Art History Museum) July 11th: Workshop Day 09.00-12.15 Workshop part 1 12.15-13.30 Lunch break 13.30-16.00 Workshop part 2
2014年7月6日-11日，奥地利， 维也纳 摘要 提交 截止日期：2013年11月15日 尽管ENOC沿用了历史上European Nonlinear Oscillations Conferences的缩写，现在的欧洲非线性动力学会议旨在涵盖非线性动力学的所有领域，包括多体动力学，以及稳定性，识别，控制和（结构）优化。 Although the brand name ENOC is still used as the historical abbreviation, the present European Nonlinear Dynamics Conferences organized by EUROMECH aim at covering the complete field of Nonlinear Dynamics, including Multibody Dynamics and coupling to Stability, Identification, Control and (Structural) Optimization. Welcome to ENOC2014 ! http://enoc2014.conf.tuwien.ac.at/index.php/welcome
【本博按】 两害相权取其轻。针对转基因这项高科技在农业的应用，我们关心的是，到底是利大，还是弊大？即应用后的风险（risk）到底有多大？法国科学家从实验角度，对转草甘膦基因玉米喂养动物的风险问题进行了探索，且时间跨两年，发现了很多问题。这样的科学实验，是严谨的，欧洲食品安全局并没有对该risk assessment进行否定，反而肯定了其做法—— EFSA’s evaluation of the Séralini et al. article is in keeping with its role to review relevant scientific literature for risk assessment on an ongoing basis to ensure that the advice it provides is up-to-date. 更重要的是，欧 盟官方不但没有否定法国学者科研报告，相反，完全接受了其建议。欧盟官方于2013年6月底发布公文、出资300万欧元支持为期两年的转基因食品饲养老鼠的实验观察，即完全接纳了塞拉利尼提出的建议。 要是法国科学家团队的实验，如中国学者说的那样，是“漏洞百出”的，欧盟官方似无必要再资助他们300欧元继续实验——那不是明摆着浪费银子吗？ 本文链接：http://zhiyanle.blog.hexun.com/88547457_d.html 国内有专家对法国科学家塞拉利尼的实验进行质疑，说什么 转基因食品致肿瘤、影响生育等被权威机构证实是虚假的。 2012年9月19日，法国凯恩大学塞拉利尼教授在《食品与化学毒物学》科学杂志上发表一篇论文，报告了用转基因玉米NK603进行大鼠两年饲喂研究，引起大鼠产生肿瘤。 国内专家在评价法国科学家的实验时，有选择地引用欧洲食品安全局的话。如，2012年11月29日，欧洲食品安全局作出最终评估认为，该研究得出的结论缺乏数据支持，相关实验的设计和方法存在严重漏洞（英文原文也没有类似的词汇，倒是有一个针对 safety assessment 的 insufficient scientific quality 词组，严重漏洞不知何来？ ），而且该研究实验没有遵守公认的科研标准。因此，不需要重新审查先前所作出的NK603玉米是安全的评估结论。 对于以上事实是否存在，直言了先生进行了分析。 事实： 请先看看欧盟机构的相关原文： STATEMENT OF EFSA。 Final review of the Séralini et al. (2012a) publication on a 2-year rodent feeding study with glyphosate formulations and GM maize NK603 as published online on 19 September 2012 in Food and Chemical Toxicology 。 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy。 EFSA Journal 2012;10(11):2986 内容：EFSA finds that the study as reported by Séralini et al. is of insufficient scientific quality for safety assessments . EFSA concludes that the currently available evidence does not impact on the ongoing re-evaluation of glyphosate and does not call for the reopening of the safety evaluations of maize NK603 and its related stacks. EFSA’s evaluation of the Séralini et al. article is in keeping with its role to review relevant scientific literature for risk assessment on an ongoing basis to ensure that the advice it provides is up-to-date. 原文说明，欧盟机构的评估说的是：在“safety assessments”（安全评估）方面和“risk assessment”（风险评估）方面、该法国学者的实验报告如何和该欧盟机构观点如何。就此，该法国学者已经做了清楚的回应：张冠李戴。即：把不属于该学者实验内容的事情、放到该学者实验头上而做评价。 譬如，该实验内容说的是：用孟山都转基因玉米做90天饲养老鼠的实验，几乎没有异常，而较长时间则出现肿瘤病变等异常；因此，90天规范不足、相关实验应该采用更长时间、譬如两年。这就是该法国学者的实验内容和报告建议，即该实验的目标和内容都不是“安全评估”方面或“风险评估”的事情，且那类事情是欧盟或成员国当局的责任、根本就不是该学者及其实验所要承担的责任。 事实： 其实，欧盟官方不但没有否定法国学者科研报告，相反，完全接受了其建议。譬如，欧盟官方于今年六月底七月初发布公文、出资300万欧元支持为期两年的转基因食品饲养老鼠的实验观察，即完全接纳了塞拉利尼提出的建议。详见： 附件： 欧盟机构关于资助为期两年的、用NK603转基因玉米饲养老鼠的实验的公告。 来源：欧盟官方网站，2013-06-29/2013-07-01。 Two-year carcinogenicity rat feeding study with maize NK603. Call title: FEED TRIALS KBBE 2013: ? Date of publication: 29 June 2013. ? Indicative budget2: EUR 3 million. ? Topics called: Environmental biotechnology. KBBE.2013.3.5-03: Two-year carcinogenicity rat feeding study with maize NK603. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/download?docId=1570107 . 显然，国内有些专家对事实做了篡改：一是把欧盟官方文献中的“安全评估”和“风险评估”的内容砍掉，从而篡改了原文的结论目标和内容；二是把欧盟机构的责任放到法国学者头上、搞责任篡改；三是故意不提欧盟官方实际上是接受了法国学者实验报告提出的建议，完全篡改了事件本来面目。 针对欧盟食品安全局对法国科学家数据偏少的指责，Gilles-Eric Séralini教授在《Food and Chemical Toxicology》杂志上发表回应：《Answers to critics: Why there is a long term toxicity due to a Rounduptolerant genetically modi?ed maize and to a Roundup herbicide》中已经明确指出： 由于社会的影响及为了全社会能对NK603转基因玉米和草甘膦除草剂的相关潜在风险有完整的科学认识 ，如果监管机构能对他们已经批准商业化种植销售的产品对环境和健康风险性评估的相关行业数据，尤其是他们在哺乳动物中进行的最长时间的对哺乳动物的毒理试验的这些相关的行业风险评估测试试验数据也公布的话， 就如我们已经对欧洲食品安全局表明的那样，我们也会公布我们的原始实验数据。 人家敢于公布原始数据，欧盟食品安全局为什么不继续要了呢？社会的什么影响呢？个中原因耐人寻味。 附件： 塞拉利尼的科研调查图片。来源：塞拉利尼网站。 该科研调查说明，用转基因食品喂养老鼠，短期无异常、而长期则发生严重病变（见下，实验报告照片）。因此，他建议，相关安全检测不能再用90天、而应该做长期譬如用两年或更长时间。这就是法国学者实验的目标和内容。而“安全评估”和“风险评估”并不是该学者实验的内容或责任；那两个评估是主管部门的工作内容和责任。 就法国学者实验报告及其建议，欧盟官方根本没有说那是“虚假”的，相反，接受了该学者实验报告建议，并已经开始资助其建议的为期两年的实验观察。 欧盟继续资助法国科学家塞拉利尼团队的批准证明 欧洲食品安全局评价法国科学家团队工作的摘要 法国科学家塞拉利尼团队对“数据不足”指责的回应。
EMBO( European Molecular Biology Organization )位于德国海德堡，是生命科学领域的杰出组织，囊括了众多一流的生物学家。该组织的主要目标是支持有才华的研究人员，促进科学信息交流，以建立一个让科学家更能施展拳脚的高水平欧洲学术研究圈。 EMBO特别注重对年轻科学家的培养，不但提供高水平的学术交流和科研机会，还提供各类技术培训。EMBO每年会举办超过80次会议并吸引到超过6000人次参加，是人数最多的欧洲科学的培训活动。同时，它还出版四个同行评审期刊：EMBO杂志（The EMBO Journal），EMBO报道（EMBO Reports），分子系统生物学（Molecular Systems Biology）和EMBO分子医学（EMBO Molecular Medicine）。此外，EMBO每年都会颁发EMBO Gold Medal，以表彰那些对欧洲科学进步有重大影响的研究人员。 历史 EMBO的建立可以追溯到1963年。当时一群杰出的欧洲生物学家聚集在意大利拉维罗（Ravello）。他们走到了一起，并由约翰·肯德鲁（John Kendrew）和康拉德沃丁顿(ConradWaddington)建议设立一个机构和实验室，以在此基础上开展分子生物学方面的合作研究。这两项提案获得通过，并于1964年7月，欧洲分子生物学组织（EMBO）得以正式诞生。会议选举佩鲁兹作为第一届欧洲分子生物学组织主席，约翰·肯德鲁为首任秘书长，140位生物学家为EMBO成员。 经过半个世纪的发展，现今，EMBO负责人为德国科隆大学的发育生物学家玛丽亚拉普丁（Maria Leptin）。而其成员数，已经壮大到了1600人（其中有57人获得了诺贝尔奖）。 EMBO与中国 虽说目前EMBO成员众多，但有据可查的是，当选外籍成员的中国科学家仅有九位：2006年入选的 杨焕明 ，2013 入选的 李家洋 和 施一公 ，2014年入选的 王晓东 ，2015年入选的 曹雪涛 和 邵峰 ，2016年入选的 高福 和 吴虹 ，以及2018年入选的 裴端卿 。 另，根据其官方数据库查询可知，入选的华裔人士也特别少（具体情况不详）。暂知的是，08年诺奖获得者，华裔教授 钱永健 也是其成员。 附1： EMBO官网： http://www.embo.org/ 成员名单查询： http://www.embo.org/members/find-a-member 附2： 历届EMBO金奖得主 EMBO Gold Medal Holders 2011 Simon Boulton , UK 2010 Jason W. Chin , UK 2009 Olivier Voinnet , FR 2008 James Briscoe , UK 2007 Jan Löwe , UK 2006 Frank Uhlmann , UK 2005 Dario Alessi , UK 2004 María Blasco , ES 2003 Anthony Hyman , DE 2002 Amanda Fisher , UK 2001 Matthew Freeman , UK 2000 Christof Niehrs , DE and Daniel St. Johnston , UK 1999 Konrad Basler , CH 1998 Adriano Aguzzi , CH 1997 Dirk Gorlich , DE 1996 Enrico Coen , UK 1995 Richard Treisman , UK 1994 Paolo Sassone-Corsi , FR 1993 Jim Smith , UK 1992 Carl-Hendrik Heldin , SE 1991 Patrick Stragler, FR 1990 Erwin Wagner , AT 1989 Hugh Pelham , UK 1988 Antonio Lanzavecchia , CH 1987 Barbara Pearse , UK 1986 John Tooze, DE （本人才疏学浅，知识有限。烦请各位专家大牛补充、赐教)
什么是“ 花大姐” ？见下图。 最新Science 报道说，在一场生物战争中，亚洲“花大姐”打败了欧洲“花大姐”。具体内容如下。 Invasive ladybirds wage 'biological war' on natives German researchers have discovered the biological keys to the success of an invasive species, wreaking havoc across Europe and the US, The Asian ladybird was originally brought in to control aphids in greenhouses. But it has escaped and is increasing uncontrollably across Europe, wiping out native species. The alien is winning, say scientists, because its body fluid contains a parasite toxic to other insects. The research is published in the Journal, Science. Sometimes called the harlequin, the Asian ladybird ( Harmonia axyridis ) can devour over two hundred aphids a day. They are seen as a natural and effective solution to the problems posed by these pests in greenhouses. Killer bugs But in recent years these imported ladybirds have escaped and rapidly established themselves across Europe and North America at the expense of native species. In Autumn, the Asian invaders can be a nuisance as they congregate in large groups searching for sheltered locations to hibernate. They can sometimes cause serious allergic reactions in humans. In this new research, scientists have shown that it is the biological system of the Asian ladybird that gives it the edge when it comes to competing with native species. The invader has an extremely powerful immune system. The body fluid of the insect contains a strong antibiotic compund called harmonine as well as antimicrobial peptides. These allow the invasive to fight off pathogens more effectively than natives. So powerful are the antibiotic elements in the ladybird, that the researchers say they may prove to be promising targets for drug development. But the most powerful aspects of the ladybird's biological armoury are tiny fungi called microsporidia . They keep them inactive in their own blood, we don't understand how they do it yet, said Dr Heiko Vogel from the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, But when the other ladybird beetles start to attack the invader's eggs and larvae, they become active and kill the native ones. Several studies in recent years have shown the harlequin conquering other ladybirds across Europe. In the UK scientists found that seven of the eight native British species have declined. Similar problems have been encountered in Belgium and Switzerland. In the UK, researchers are very keen for people to report any sightings of the harlequin. They have just launched a smartphone app that helps people record details of the ladybirds. Dr Helen Roy from the Centre for Ecology Hydrology near Wallingford, UK, said the German research was fascinating. The outlook for native species, however, remained grim. The two-spot ladybird, a historically common and widespread species in Britain is suffering the most and experiencing dramatic and rapid declines, she said. And the German scientists agree that the Asian ladybird is set to conquer most of the world. I don't see any which way to stop them now - it's too late in my opinion, said Dr Vogel. The fascinating thing is they can survive in such a wide range of temperature zones, and they are starting to pop up in South Africa and South America. When the aphids they prey upon become scarce, Asian ladybirds are known to feed on grapes and are often found in vineyards. Their powerful, defensive chemicals can affect the taste of wine if they get trapped in the production process. They go on apples and grapes and that is becoming an increasing problem because of the massive amounts of these beetles, said Dr Vogel. The tainting of the wine with a single beetle is not funny!
网址链接 1st European Conference on Natural ProductsSEPTEMBER 22, 2013 - SEPTEMBER 25, 2013, DECHEMA-HAUS, FRANKFURT AM MAIN Research and Applications The "Conference on Natural Products: Research and Applications" will bring together international experts from various communities dealing with current topics of bacterial, fungal and plant secondary metabolite research. Special emphasis will be taken to expedite interaction between applied industrial and academic topics such as natural functions of secondary metabolites, physiology and regulation, genome mining, synthetic biology and biodiversity plus exploitation, application and development. Topics Exploiting Plant Natural Products This session focusses on new strategies and methods for elucidation of pathways in plant secondary metabolism and their reconstitution in artificial systems. This includes all-embracing analyses of pathways with respect to regulation, enzymology, and evolution and the application of technologies like new sequencing approaches, genome analyses, and metabolomics combined with bioinformatic tools. - New sequencing / bioinformatic strategies for elucidating plant pathways - New analytical methods / metabolomics methods to explore flux and intermediates of plant pathways - Reconstitution (synthetic biology) of plant pathways - Enzymology of unusual plant-derived biosynthetic enzymes - Evolution of plant secondary metabolism Genome Mining and Biodiversity This topic will relate to methods to increase the probability of success in finding new biologically acitve molecules from terrestrial as well as marine fungal and microbial resources. Topics will include e.g.: 1. the advantage of chemotaxonomic and phylogenetic data to identify hitherto neglected species with great potential among taxonomic groups that are known to be creative producers of bioactive metabolites. 2. the value of innovative strategies and methods targeting the isolation and cultivation of new species that could hitherto not be explored 3. the fascinating options to employ genome mining and synthetic biology for exploitation of slow growing organisms that are difficult to culture and make their secondary metabolites available to biological screening through heterologous expression of the biosynthetic genes 4. the utility of innovative technologies to arouse silent biosynthetic genes Chemical and Biological Synthesis Within this topic all aspects of biosynthesis and synthesis of natural products will be merged. Topics will include e.g.: 1. precursor directed biosynthesis and mutasynthesis towards natural product analogues 2. novel biosynthetic enzymes and enzymatic systems for novel compounds and precursors 3. total synthesis of complex natural products 4. medicinal chemistry of natural products Natural Products - Synthesis, Derivatives and Application Over the years natural products have consistently delivered to the pipeline of drug approvals in all areas of human and animal diseases. Most recently the majority of approvals by the FDA in 2010 were natural products based. This session will focus on natural products which are advanced in the pipeline covering synthesis, pre-clinic and clinic as wells as recent approvals. Physiology and Regulation This session comprises talks concerning the molecular regulation of secondary metabolite biosynthesis in microorganisms. The physiological conditions under which gene clusters / biosynthetic pathways are activated will be addressed, as well as the regulatory genes involved. Furthermore the physiological importance of secondary metabolites for the producing organism as well as extra- and intracellular signals controlling biosynthetic processes will be discussed. Natural Functions of Secondary Metabolites to be completed Invited Keynote Speakers Mervyn Bibb, John Innes Centre, Norwich/UK Gerald F. Bills, The University of Texas, Houston, TX/USA Ian Graham, University of York/UK Craig Townsend, John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD/USA
巴斯夫停止欧洲转基因土豆的审批程序 来源：法新社、 expatica 点 com 时间： 2013 年 1 月 29 日 世界上最大的化工品公司巴斯夫公司周二表示，面对不屈不挠的抵抗，已经决定不再寻求欧盟批准它们的三种转基因马铃薯产品。 巴斯夫在一份声明中表示，“由于监管环境的不确定性和田间毁坏的威胁，继续投资已经毫无意义”，所以将“停止请求欧洲监管机构批准 Fortuna( 幸运神 ), Amadea( 挚爱者 ) 和 Modena( 深紫王 ) 土豆项目。” 一年前，这个巨头宣布，鉴于一些国家对转基因技术的担忧，将停止开发和销售针对欧洲市场的转基因新产品。 而且它还把植物科学总部搬到了美国。 设在布鲁塞尔的欧盟委员会宣布，在与欧盟成员国磋商达成协议期间，直到明年 ( 译者注 ： 2014 年 ) 指令结束，将冻结转基因粮食作物的审批程序；没过几天，巴斯夫就宣布了这一最新决定。 ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝ Good news: EBRD drops controversial Monsanto project Pippa Gallop Research coordinator *A potential cooperation between the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the agro-corporation Monsanto has thankfully not come to fruition. The case highlights the difficulties for a large development bank to reach farmers on the ground. You may remember that in November 2012 Bankwatch reported on the EBRD's plans to undertake a USD 40 million 'risk-sharing facility' with none other than the notorious Monsanto. The EBRD was exploring a project to provide financing so that medium-large farmers and distributors in Russia, Ukraine, Serbia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey could buy Monsanto's seeds and agro-chemicals in installments, without Monsanto losing money if they got into debt. Well, after a lively reaction from groups around the world, including a letter signed by 158 organisations, other individual letters, meetings with the bank, a protest in Serbia, and questions in the German and Slovene parliaments, we're glad to be able to report that the EBRD has confirmed that the project is not going ahead. So has the EBRD admitted that Monsanto is an unsuitable recipient of European public development support? Not exactly. Here's an extract from the EBRD's response to an enquiry on the status of the project: "Please be advised that, in this particular transaction, the EBRD and Monsanto were unable to find a satisfactory project structure for financing. Each institution will continue to explore other opportunities in order to provide farmers and distributors with adequate and time-appropriate financing, which we recognize to be one of the key challenges to increase agricultural productivity in the Bank’s region of operations." (Source: Email communication with the EBRD) This highlights one of the problems for such a large institution as the EBRD, that it is difficult to reach individual farmers without intermediaries, because the bank does not have the on-the-ground infrastructure or local knowledge to provide thousands of loans for a few hundred or thousand euros. This is a problem that needs to be addressed by the region's governments and farmers' unions if the EBRD is not to pick such unsavoury business partners again in the future. So, a great outcome for now, but we'll be keeping our eyes and ears open in case the EBRD makes such ill-advised moves again. ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝ BASF halts EU approval process for GM potatoes AFP, 29 January 2013 BASF, the world's biggest chemicals company, said Tuesday it has decided to no longer seek European approval of its genetically modified potato products in the face of stiff resistance. BASF said in a statement it will "discontinue the pursuit of regulatory approvals for the Fortuna, Amadea, and Modena potato projects in Europe because continued investment cannot be justified due to uncertainty in the regulatory environment and threats of field destructions." A year ago, the giant had announced it would halt the development and marketing of new genetically-modified products destined for the European market over concerns in some countries over the technology. And it also moved its plant science headquarters to the United States. BASF's latest decision comes only days after the European Commission in Brussels announced it will freeze the approval process for genetically modified food crops through the end of its mandate next year while it works towards an agreement with EU member states.
欧洲科学基金会发布“欧洲公民的个性化医学”报告 2012年12月10日，欧洲科学基金会（ESF）发布了题为“欧洲公民的个性化医学——迈向疾病诊断、治疗和预防的更精确的医学（Personalised Medicine for the European Citizen – Towards more precise medicine for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease (iPM)）”的报告。该报告是通过与各利益相关方（包括患者团体、监管机构、产业和学术界）、各个学科的专家讨论后形成的。报告识别出影响欧洲个性化医学发展和实施的核心问题，尤其试图解决的是实现个性化医学的必要条件，以及实现个性化医学面临的挑战，并提出一套综合的建议，旨在确保建立必要的框架以支持个性化医学。 与传统的“用一种方法应对任何情况（one size fits all）”的做法不同，个性化医学是一种基于个人生物学差异和环境差异的数据和信息进行分类、理解、治疗和预防疾病的新方法。该方法尝试将每个个体的生物学动态构成数据和影响个体生物学构成的环境与生活方式等因素数据相结合，获得复杂的个体表型。利用这些信息为每个公民建立模型，利用模型制定从治疗转向预防的最佳治疗方式。本质上，个性化医学代表了从反应型医学治疗向积极主动的预防医学转变。 1、实现个性化医学的必要条件及面临的挑战 1）构建新的疾病分类体系（即精确医学）及所需的海量数量 发展个性化医学，最关键的第一步是重新评估传统的疾病分类。与传统的关注于一系列症状或某一特殊器官、系统不同，个性化医学的诊断将越来越多地聚焦于从多种来源获得的信息，不仅包括基因组学和其他组学技术信息，还包括来源于环境和生活方式的数据。要构建新的疾病分类体系，应该先从欧洲人群的代表性疾病样本中收集和整合尽可能多的大量数据。目前欧洲各地已经建立了一系列的生物库（网络），以解决个性化医学面临的数据收集挑战。虽然这一切只是刚刚开始，但这项工作的重要性却不容低估。这种基础设施必须得到巩固，并扩大成为欧洲范围内可互操作的网络。为达到这个目的，有必要协调数据收集、处理协议，解决与数据共享相关的跨境问题，开发出新方法，这些方法不但要能整合大范围相关的生物数据库，同时也要能将这些数据库与环境变量、生活方式、营养等背景信息相联系。 与个性化医学相关的数据不仅可以从临床和实验室获得，还可以从社交媒体、利用新技术获取。公民和患者越来越多地利用社交媒体和新技术来分享有关他们自身健康和生活方式的数据。患者们分享的数据已经被有效地用于研究目的；这种公民主导的合作也可用于加速临床研究。这种方式获得的数据是有成本效益的，可用于监测个性化干预措施的长期结果，将临床和实验室的数据背景化（contextualise，即与环境、生活方式、营养等信息相联系）。此外，确保公民能够在自己的医疗护理中发挥积极作用是推动未来全民参与医疗的重要环节。目前面临的挑战是如何克服潜在的伦理和法律障碍，以及个人隐私保护，确保个人信息不被滥用。 2）模型与决策过程 无论数据来源如何，这些数据首先需要转换成证据以支持决策过程。在推进个性化医学的同时，需要从各个层面考虑那些支持医疗的框架和模型， 主要包括： 1）将产生新的临床试验设计需求，这些设计需要将关注焦点由以前的人群转到个体； 2）需要更强大的模型来识别最佳预防策略； 3）需要修改监管框架； 4）卫生技术评估（Health technology assessment）与医疗费用报销返还政策也需要适应个性化医学可获得证据的转变； 5）需要在整个“成本－效益”评估的大环境中处理个人利益，并考虑社会与伦理问题。个性化医学的证据基础已经建立，并由一些如大型参考数据集等资源支持，目前面临的挑战是如何把现有的知识转化成欧洲公民日常的、有形的健康利益。这种做法的长期愿景是能够访问一个含有每个公民的全面的、背景化的数据库，并利用这些信息来识别那些支持个人健康的措施。为实现这一目标，需要功能强大的信息与通信技术。 3）跨学科合作 传统的医疗保健由基于组织器官和系统为分类基础的专业展开，传统的疾病分类也是以这种方式。随着个性化医学的新疾病分类体系的发展，这些专业间的界限很可能会被迅速模糊。因此，需要对医疗保健行业的结构进行大刀阔斧的改革。这个过程的第一步必然是跨学科合作。专业知识将需要在现有的医疗专业之间共享，以确定未来的发展方向并了解如何处理从疾病分类修订中获得的见解。 跨学科合作不仅是医疗保健内部的合作，还需要与生物学家、相关技师等利益相关方合作。临床医生必须与生物学家和技师共同努力，开发必要的工具用于个性化医学。生物学家必须明白，例如，什么信息是医疗保健专业人士需要的，什么样的形式才能帮助专业人士为患者制定正确的护理方案。技师必须了解医疗专业人士和患者间的合作本质，以设计合适的工具和界面。医疗保健专业人士也必须了解公民和患者的需要，公民和患者群的部分人将为自己的医疗决定承担越来越多的责任，而其余的人将要求与医疗保健系统展开另一类型的合作。为此，需要与广泛的利益相关者协商，需要相关的基础设施来促进各个学科和专业的从业人员合作。 4）教育与培训 个性化医学所需的基础设施除了生物库和跨学科工作模式外，还需要在早期阶段制定教育与培训计划，以确保有足够数量受过合适专业训练的专业人士来支持个性化医学的未来发展。需要建立跨学科的职业结构，确保职业可持续发展。除了加强专业教育外，还需要在更广泛的人群中普及健康知识。确保整个欧洲能够获得核心技术，首先是防止不平等，而且更重要的是确保那些不断用于优化个性化医学模型的数据能从尽可能广泛的人群样本中获取。 2、建议 考虑到所有这些和其他因素，该报告针对如下四个核心主题提出一系列建议： 1）数据处理： 必须生成综合的、易于获取的、可互操作的数据库，以支持新的疾病分类体系的发展，使其不断完善和应用。 2）模型与决策过程： 修改模型与决策过程，以在各个层次聚焦于个体公民（将公民个人作为中心）。这些层次包括从干预措施的安全性和有效性评估到卫生技术评估与返还（政策），再到疾病的诊断、治疗和预防等。 3）跨学科性、参与性和转化研究： 必须重视各利益相关方的参与、跨学科合作、公私及竞争前的合作和转化研究，制定能支持个性化医学和医疗保健愿景的框架。 4）基础设施与资源： 必须提供专项资助和政府支持，以确保获得核心基础设施，包括获得核心技术和框架。 阮梅花 整理自： http://www.esf.org/index.php?id=7988 原文题名：Personalised Medicine for the European Citizen – Towards more precise medicine for the diagnosis,treatment and prevention of disease (iPM) 检索日期：2012年12月21日
今天终于见到有 《欧洲食品安全局 关于转基因玉米和除草剂毒性研究的初步审查报告 新闻稿》 中译文， (出处在这： http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_ad048dc101016t3w.html ) 2012.10.4 近日一篇论文引起公众对 NK603 转基因玉米和草甘膦除草剂的潜在毒性的关注。本局已经 裁定 ，这篇论文科学性不足，不能视为有效的风险评估。 本局的初步审查发现，该论文中的研究试验设计、报告和分析是粗略的、并不充分。为了完整理解这项研究，本局已邀请作者 Séralini et al 分享关键的额外信息。 这些缺陷意味着，本局目前尚不能认定作者的结论是科学的。鉴于其论文所述研究设计和方法的种种问题，无法根据试验中大鼠患肿瘤的现象得出任何结论。 因此，基于作者已发表的信息，本局认为不必重审此前对 NK603 玉米的安全评估结论，持续进行中的草甘膦评估也不会考虑这些“发现”。 本局评估认为，该论文违背国际公认的研究和报告准则。 本局局长 Per Bergman 说：“有些人可能会感到惊讶，欧洲食品安全局的声明聚焦于该项研究的方法而不是结果，但这恰恰是问题的核心所在。进行科学研究时，必须遵循适当的框架，有明确的目标、正确的设计和方法，这是数据准确和结论有效的坚实基础。如果不具备这些元素，很难说是可靠的、有效的研究。” 监管产品科学评估主管补充说，关注转基因作物可能的长期影响一直是、并将继续是本局重点任务，以保护动物、人类和环境。 本局今天发表的初步审查是两阶段过程的第一步，第二阶段分析报告将于2012年10月底发布，届时将深入分析研究作者提供的额外信息，以尽可能广泛地了解他们的工作，报告也将包含各会员国对论文的评估以及来自德国的草甘膦评估分析。 初步审查的主要发现 本任务小组成员来自本局的转基因作物、农药和科学评估单位。 （以下仅择要翻译，并不完整） 1、为期2年的研究中所用的大鼠预期寿命也是约2年，且是易发肿瘤的品系； 2、只有1个对照组； 3、论文未遵守国际公认的OECD标准方法建立和实施试验； 4、对于长期试验，OECD指南要求最低50只大鼠/组，但 Séralini et al 仅用了10只/组； 5、作者研究目标不明确（根据研究目标确定研究设计、样本量、统计方法等，这些都是决定结论可靠性的关键因素）； 6、没有说明大鼠食物储存细节（可能被真菌等毒素侵入，从而产生有害影响）； 7、没有详细说明摄入饲料或饮水的体积率； 8、未采用常用的统计分析方法，所用方法有效性受到质疑，肿瘤发病率数据也有问题，还缺少死亡汇总等重要数据； 9、未提供肿瘤以外的器官损伤等重要数据。 媒体查询，请联络： 欧洲食品安全局媒体关系办公室 电话：+39 0521 036 149 电子邮件： Press@efsa.europa.eu http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/121004.htm 原文全文笔者昨天凌晨己找到（来不及译成中文）： http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/121004.htm EFSA publishes initial review on GM maize and herbicide study Press Release 4 October 2012 The European Food Safety Authority has concluded that a recent paper raising concerns about the potential toxicity of genetically modified (GM) maize NK603 and of a herbicide containing glyphosate is of insufficient scientific quality to be considered as valid for risk assessment. EFSA’s initial review found that the design, reporting and analysis of the study, as outlined in the paper, are inadequate. To enable the fullest understanding of the study the Authority has invited authors Séralini et al to share key additional information. Such shortcomings mean that EFSA is presently unable to regard the authors’ conclusions as scientifically sound. The numerous issues relating to the design and methodology of the study as described in the paper mean that no conclusions can be made about the occurrence of tumours in the rats tested. Therefore, based on the information published by the authors, EFSA does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate. EFSA assessed the paper against recognised good scientific practices, such as internationally agreed study and reporting guidelines. Per Bergman, who led EFSA’s work, said: “ Some may be surprised that EFSA’s statement focuses on the methodology of this study rather than its outcomes; however, this goes to the very heart of the matter. When conducting a study it is crucial to ensure a proper framework is in place. Having clear objectives and the correct design and methodology create a solid base from which accurate data and valid conclusions can follow. Without these elements a study is unlikely to be reliable and valid.” The Director of Scientific Evaluation of Regulated Products added that the consideration of possible long-term effects of GMOs has been, and will continue to be, a key focus of EFSA’s work to protect animals, humans and the environment. EFSA’s preliminary review issued today is the first step in a two-stage process. A second analysis will be delivered by the end of October 2012. This will take into account any additional information from the study authors, who will be given an opportunity to supply study documentation and procedures to the Authority to ensure the broadest possible understanding of their work. It will also include an overview of Member State assessments of the paper and an analysis from the German authorities responsible for the assessment of glyphosate. Main findings of Initial Review The task force, whose members were drawn from the Authority’s GMO, pesticide and scientific assessment units, has outlined a list of issues about the paper that would need to be resolved before it could be viewed as well-conducted and properly-reported study. The strain of rat used in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors. The authors split the rats into 10 treatment sets but established only one control group. This meant there was no appropriate control for four sets – some 40% of the animals - all of whom were fed GM maize treated or not treated with a herbicide containing glyphosate. The paper has not complied with internationally-recognised standard methods – known as protocols - for setting up and carrying out experiments. Many of these procedures are developed by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). For a study of this type, the relevant OECD guideline specifies the need for a minimum of 50 rats per treatment group. Séralini et al used only 10 rodents per treatment set. The low number of animals used is insufficient to distinguish between the incidence of tumours due to chance rather than specific treatment effects. The authors have not stated any objectives, which are the questions a study is designed to answer. Research objectives define crucial factors such as the study design, correct sample size, and the statistical methods used to analyse data - all of which have a direct impact on the reliability of findings. No information is given about the composition of the food given to the rats, how it was stored or details of harmful substances – such as mycotoxins – that it might have contained. It is not possible to properly evaluate the exposure of the rats to the herbicide as intake is not clearly reported. The authors report only the application rate of the herbicide used to spray the plants and the concentration added to the rats’ drinking water but report no details about the volume of the feed or water consumed. The paper does not employ a commonly-used statistical analysis method nor does it state if the method was specified prior to starting the study. The validity of the method used is queried and there are questions over the reporting of tumour incidence. Important data, such as a summary of drop outs and an estimation of unbiased treatment effects have not been included in the paper. Many endpoints – what is measured in the study – have not been reported in the paper. This includes relevant information on lesions, other than tumours, that were observed. EFSA has called on the authors to report all endpoints in the name of openness and transparency. Review of the Séralini et al. (2012) publication on a 2-year rodent feeding study with glyphosate formulations and GM maize NK603 Letter to Prof. Séralini regarding EFSA’s Review of the Séralini et al. (2012) publication on a 2-year rodent feeding trial with Glyphosate Formulations and GM maize NK603 as published online on 19 September 2012 in Food and Chemical Toxicology, 4 October 2012 Notes to editors: EFSA set up a multi-disciplinary task force in response to an urgent request from the European Commission to evaluate a paper by Séralini et al to assess whether its findings could lead the Authority to reconsider its previous opinion on maize NK603. The two-year study, published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology on 19 September 2012, has suggested that consumption of the GM maize and a herbicide containing glyphosate at levels below officially-safe limits are linked to a reported increase in incidence of tumours in rats. For media enquiries please contact : EFSA Media Relations Office Tel. +39 0521 036 149 E-mail: Press@efsa.europa.eu http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/faqs/faqseralini.htm Frequently Asked Questions on initial review of Séralini et al. (2012) study What is the Séralini et al. study? What was EFSA asked to do? What does an initial review mean? What were the findings of EFSA’s initial review of the Seralini paper? Who was involved in the initial assessment of the paper from EFSA? What are the next steps? What type of information has EFSA asked for from the author’s of the study? Has EFSA asked for the raw data from the study? Does the paper as published prove that the GM maize NK603 and/or glyphosate is carcinogenic? How has EFSA evaluated the safety of GM maize NK603 in the past? How does EFSA consider results of animal feeding trials in its risk assessments? What about feeding trials of different durations? Why is Germany being asked to carry out the assessment of the reported study in relation to glyphosate? What is the Séralini et al. study? On 19 September 2012, the scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology published a paper on their website by Séralini et al. describing a 2-year feeding study in rats that investigates the health effects of genetically modified maize NK603 and of a herbicide containing the active substance glyphosate. The authors of the study conclude that GM maize NK603 and low levels of glyphosate herbicide formulations, at concentrations well below officially-set safe limits, induce severe adverse health effects, such as tumours, in rats. (Top) 2. What was EFSA asked to do? On 26 September, EFSA received an official request from the European Commission in relation to the Séralini et al. paper - European Commission Mandate (0.1 Mb) . The request contained five elements: to carry out a scientific review of the paper; to ask for any necessary clarifications from the paper’s authors; to advise whether the paper contained any scientific elements that could lead EFSA to reconsider its previous safety assessments of GM maize NK603; to take into consideration the assessment of the papers by Member States; to take into consideration the assessment of the German authorities which are responsible for the evaluation of glyphosate. EFSA published an initial review of the Séralini et al. paper on 4 October 2012. (Top) 3. What does an initial review mean? A multi-disciplinary task force set up by the Authority analysed the paper by Séralini et al. and published an initial scientific review as the first step in a two-stage process. The initial review was a preliminary analysis of the study as published online, taking into account aspects such as the study objectives, its design and the statistical methods used. The aim was to identify any potential information gaps for which clarifications are needed from the authors of the study. It was also to advise the European Commission whether the paper contained any scientific elements that could lead EFSA to reconsider its previous safety assessments of GM maize NK603. Germany is being asked to carry out the assessment of the study in relation to glyphosate because it is the Member State that has responsibility for the evaluation of this particular active substance (also known as the Rapporteur Member State). Why is Germany being asked to carry out the assessment of the reported study in relation to glyphosate? (Top) 4. What were the findings of EFSA’s initial review of the Seralini paper? EFSA has concluded that the Séralini et al. paper is of insufficient scientific quality to be considered as valid for risk assessment. EFSA’s initial review found that the design, reporting and analysis of the study, as outlined in the paper, are inadequate. The numerous issues relating to the design and methodology of the study as described in the paper mean that no conclusions can be made about the occurrence of tumours in the rats tested. To enable the fullest understanding of the study the Authority has invited the authors to share key additional information. (Top) 5. Who was involved in the initial assessment of the paper from EFSA? Under the leadership of the Director of Scientific Evaluation of Regulated Products, a group of EFSA scientists, with expertise in biostatistics, experimental design, mammalian toxicology, biotechnology, biochemistry, pesticide safety assessments and GMO safety assessments, carried out the initial review. A member from EFSA’s Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) and a member from EFSA’s Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) Panel were asked to peer review the paper prior to its publication. (Top) 6. What are the next steps? EFSA has asked the authors of the study to clarify certain issues in the paper. If received, this information will contribute to the second step of the evaluation process by EFSA, the results from which will be published in the coming weeks. As part of the second step of the evaluation, EFSA will take into account any information received from the authors, reflect upon already ongoing assessment activities from the Member States (such as Belgium, France, Germany and The Netherlands) and will consider the assessment of the German authorities responsible for the evaluation of glyphosate. Co-operation with Member States forms a key part of EFSA’s work and in particular in response to urgent requests for scientific advice. EFSA has been in close contact with Member States throughout the formulation of its initial review of the Séralini et al. paper. (Top) 8. What type of information has EFSA asked for from the author’s of the study? EFSA has focused its questions on issues arising from the methodology or design of the study . For example, clarifications have been sought on the objectives of the study, the protocol used for the feeding trials and the statistical analysis. EFSA has invited the authors to share additional information lacking in the published paper to enable the fullest understanding of the complete two-year study. (Top) 9. Has EFSA asked for the raw data from the study? No. EFSA has not requested raw data for the study as this information is not required at this stage of the review process. EFSA has requested further information about the study methodology given the gaps found in the reporting of the study’s findings. This does not include a request for the raw data from the study and is limited to the type of information one usually finds reported in scientific publications. (Top) 10. Does the paper as published prove that the GM maize NK603 and/or glyphosate is carcinogenic? No. Such conclusions cannot be drawn from the findings reported in the publication of the Séralini et al. paper. EFSA’s initial review found that the design, reporting and analysis of the study, as outlined in the paper, are inadequate. The numerous issues relating to the design and methodology of the study aas described in the paper mean that no conclusions can be made about the occurrence of tumours in the rats tested. For example, the limited number of rats used in the study is too low to distinguish between a chance effect – tumours that may have occurred naturally – and the possibility of an effect related to the consumption of GM maize NK603 and/or glyphosate. In addition, the strain of rats used in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. Overall EFSA has concluded that the Séralini et al. paper is of insufficient quality to be useful for risk assessment purposes. (Top) 11. How has EFSA evaluated the safety of GM maize NK603 in the past? In 2009, EFSA’s Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) carried out a safety evaluation of an application for the cultivation, import and processing of GM maize NK603 . EFSA’s GMO Panel concluded that maize NK603is as safe as its conventional counterpart with respect to potential direct effects on human and animal health and the environment. Regarding animal feeding studies with maize NK603, the applicant provided two such studies that were evaluated by the Panel. The first was an acute toxicity test performed using mice in which they were exposed to two proteins expressed by the GM plant. There was no indication of adverse effects from this study. The second feeding study provided by the applicant was a 90-day toxicity study in rats of maize NK603 as a whole food. The Panel concluded that there were no indications of adverse effects in rats fed with a diet containing up to 33% grain from maize NK603. Further details on the risk assessment of GM maize NK603, including animal feeding trials, can be found in the following EFSA Scientific Opinion . GM maize NK603 has also been assessed by EFSA’s GMO Panel in the context of applications for stacked events. As with all GMO applications, maize NK603 was assessed by the Panel following its guidance documents for GMO risk assessment . Each of the following aspects was evaluated: Molecular characterisation of the GM plant, taking into account the characteristics of the donor and recipient organism. Compositional, nutritional, and agronomic characteristics of the GM product, Potential toxicity and allergenicity of the GM product. Potential environmental impact following a deliberate release of the GM product and taking into account its intended uses either for import, processing or cultivation. EFSA’s GMO Panel also issued a Scientific Opinion on GM maize NK603 in 2003 that was limited to an application for import and processing only. The 2009 Scientific Opinion on GM maize NK603 was related to an application for import and processing as well as cultivation. (Top) 12. How does EFSA consider results of animal feeding trials in its risk assessments? EFSA’s guidance on GMO risk assessment sets out when animal feeding trials are needed and which animal feeding trials should be carried out. Owing to the specific nature and traits of each GMO, the type of tests needed to assess safety and the tests’ duration vary according to the results of the first phase of the risk assessment process: a comparative assessment between the GMO and its non-GM counterpart. An example of when tests are required is when EFSA estimates that the results of the comparative assessment show a potential toxic effect of the GM plant. In this case, EFSA would require that a 90-day animal feeding study be carried out in order to investigate this further prior to completing its risk assessment. Comparative approach: The current approach in assessing the safety of GMOs followed by risks assessors worldwide is to carry out comparative assessments to determine if the GM plant, such as for example GM maize, is as safe as its conventional non-GM counterpart. (Top) 13. What about feeding trials of different durations? Depending on the specific type of GMO being tested and the results of the first phase of the risk assessment process (the comparative assessment) between the GMO and its non-GM counterpart, EFSA may recommend feeding trials of different durations. For example, if this first phase of the risk assessment showed signs of the potential toxicity of the GMO, EFSA may recommend a 90-day feeding trial in rats. EFSA may also recommend a feeding trial with duration of more than 90 days, although the Authority has never required such a trial for GMO applications. A longer feeding trial might be required if the results of the comparative assessment or those of a 90-day feeding trial demonstrated the potential for adverse effects related to, for example, carcinogenicity. (Top) 14. Why is Germany being asked to carry out the assessment of the reported study in relation to glyphosate? Germany is being asked to carry out the assessment of the study in relation to glyphosate because it is the Member State that has responsibility for the evaluation of this particular active substance (also known as the Rapporteur Member State). Under EU rules, individual Member States have responsibility for carrying out initial evaluations and re-evaluations of different active substances. This information is shared with other Member States after which EFSA carries out a peer-review of the (re)evaluation. (Top) 笔者想讲的是： 1、欧洲食品安全局（EFSA）不是中国的事业或者行的“局”级单位,它最多只是相当于中国某部委下面一个“协会”（比“学会”强）。 2、这份EFSA的质疑，设置了很多让转基因毒性试验法国科学家Seralini(塞拉利尼)的研究设计必须对GMO材料提供方（加拿大一公司）保密的陷阱，这是这么多年来所有GMO公司陷死转基因安全试验持续下去的“专利权”杀手招,几乎百发百中！ 3、从这份新闻稿不点名Seralini，说明Seralini并不需要对这个EFSA提交任何报告，这是一个很关键的问题。 沈 阳 2012年10月7日 1时22分 写于北京家中
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/sunday-review/whats-a-socialist.html?ref=global-home FRANCE has elected its first Socialist president since 1988 and then given the Socialist Party and its closest allies a whopping 征服 majority in Parliament. But how Socialist is Franois Hollande 奥朗德? And what does it mean to be a Socialist these days, anyway? Not very much. Certainly nothing radical. In a sense, socialism was an ideology of the industrialized 19th century, a democratic Marxism, and it succeeded, even in (shh!) the United States. Socialism meant the emancipation解放 of the working class and its transformation into the middle class; it championed呼吁 social justice and a progressive累进制 tax system, and in that sense has largely done its job. As the industrialized working class gets smaller and smaller, socialism seems to have less and less to say. Center-right中右 parties have embraced or absorbed many of the ideas of socialism: trade unions工会, generous welfare benefits, some form of nationalized国有化 health care, even restrictions on carbon emissions. The right argues that it can manage all these programs more efficiently than the left, and some want to shrink收缩 them, but only on the fringes边际 is there talk of actually dismantling解除 the welfare state. “As an ideologically based movement, socialism is no longer vital活跃,” says Joschka Fischer, who began his career on the far left and remains a prominent spokesman for the Green Party. “Today it’s a combination of democracy, rule of law and the welfare state, and I’d say a vast majority of Europeans defend this — the British Tories托利党 can’t touch the National Health Service without being beheaded歼灭.” Even in the United States, Mr. Fischer says, “you have a sort of welfare state, even if you don’t want to admit it — you don’t allow people to die on the street.” So why the prospect of “European socialism” is so frightening to some Americans puzzles Europeans, a mystery as deep as the American obsession with abortion流产 or affection for the death penalty. Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a leader of the student revolt of May 1968, known then as “Dany the Red,” is now “Dany the Green,” co-leader of the ecologist group in the European Parliament. “The fight between private property and state property国有财产 is over,” he says, and traditional class distinctions阶级分化 are blurred模糊. “There was never a purely socialist working class,” he suggested. “Socialism and social democracy today are about a society with more solidarity, more protection of people, more egalitarianism平等主义.” In a way, he said, socialism is defined today mostly by its contrast to neo-liberalism — by more reliance on the state依赖国家 and higher taxes on the wealthy富人. Bernard-Henri Lévy was criticized three years ago for saying that the French Socialist Party was not merely dying, but “already dead,” a political alternative for those unhappy with Nicolas Sarkozy, then the president, but little more than a differently situated elite. France’s “gauche caviar” — wealthy socialists like Dominique Strauss-Kahn or Jack Lang — were hardly revolutionary革命, but merely took their neckties领结 off at lunch. TODAY Mr. Lévy has not changed his views. “There are no more socialists — if they were honest they would change the name of the party,” he told me. Socialism “evokes提起 the nightmare of the Soviet Union, whose leaders named themselves socialists.” Today, he maintains, European socialists are essentially like American Democrats — there has been no ideological left in France that matters since the effective demise灭亡 of the Communist Party, which was “the true ‘exception franaise.’” In his book “Barbarism with a Human Face衣冠禽兽,” translated into English as “Left in Dark Times: A Stand Against the New Barbarism,” Mr. Lévy wrote: “I would dream of writing in a dictionary for the year 2000: ‘Socialism, masculine noun, a cultural genre类型 born in Paris in 1848, died in Paris in 1968.’” But democratic socialism of the nonbarbaric kind has a long history in Europe, especially in France. Even today, delegates at the Socialist Party’s summer meetings address one another as “Comrade,” a gesture to the past for a party largely made up of academics and bureaucrats官员 — in other words, state functionaries公职, of whom there are many in France. The French state represents 56.6 percent of gross domestic product, one of the highest figures in the Western world. “Socialism here is very statist,” says Marc-Olivier Padis, editor of the quarterly journal Esprit. The leading figures in the Socialist government are more creatures of the French establishment — elite schools and careers — than those under Mr. Sarkozy, he explained, “a combination reproducing the profile of Hollande himself.” Mr. Sarkozy was more of an outlier外行 than Mr. Hollande, and much closer to business. Belief in the centrality of the state to run, regulate and innovate remains a core belief of French socialism, and the size of the state is hardly going to be reduced under Mr. Hollande, whose few concrete promises include hiring 60,000 more teachers over five years, raising the minimum wage (the highest in the European Union) and creating a state bank for innovation. Alain-Gérard Slama, noting that Mr. Hollande won the presidency thanks to half of centrist voters and a third of far-right voters, all of whom detested Mr. Sarkozy, wrote in the newspaper Le Figaro that “the French don’t do anything like anyone else — they’ll give themselves a Socialist president, a Socialist Assembly, a Socialist Senate, Socialist regions, while, by a clear majority, they are not Socialist.” To be honest, who is anymore? “Is socialism really more than pragmatism?” Mr. Padis wonders. Mr. Lévy pointed out that the excitement around the far-left French presidential candidate, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, got hearts racing for a while. But the rabble-rousing群氓 Mr. Mélenchon did not do as well as many hoped (or feared). This month he was trounced击败 for an Assembly seat by Marine Le Pen. “Some believed the French exception was undergoing a revival with Mélenchon,” Mr. Lévy said. He then aptly恰当 quoted Marx’s famous line about Louis Bonaparte路易 波拿巴, that “history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.” 历史总是重复，第一次是悲剧，第二次是闹剧。
欧洲学者 Robert Anton 等人在《European food and feed Law review》Vol.7, No 2 发表了题为“Traditional knowledge for the Assessment of health effects for botanicals --A framework for data collection”的文章，呼吁重视传统医药积累的临床数据，而不能以科学描述、临床检验等作为理由，忽视这些宝贵的遗产。 下面是对这篇文章的报道链接： Ignore herbal tradition-of-use data and destroy “important heritage”: Researchers European academics have warned of the likely devastation to the botanicals sector if Europe ignores tradition-of-use (TOU) data in favour of randomised clinical trials when assessing herbal food supplement health claims. http://www.nutraingredients.com/Research/Ignore-herbal-tradition-of-use-data-and-destroy-important-heritage-Researchers
第 113 条 听证的权利和决定的依据 （ 1 ）仅能够依据有关当事人有机会评论的理由或证据作出决定。 （ 2 ）欧洲专利局应当仅就递交给它的欧洲专利申请或者欧洲专利，或者专利申请人或专利权人同意的文本进行审查并作出决定。 Article 113 Right to be heard and basisof decisions (1)The decisions of the European PatentOffice may only be based on grounds or evidence on which the parties concernedhave had an opportunity to present their comments. (2)The European Patent Office shall examine,and decide upon, the European patent application or the European patent only inthe text submitted to it, or agreed, by the applicant or the proprietor of thepatent. 第 114 条 欧洲专利局自行审查 （ 1 ）欧洲专利局的程序中，应当自行审查事实，其在审查中不应当限于当事人提供的事实、证据和陈述以及所寻求的救济。 （ 2 ）欧洲专利局可以无视相关当事人未按期提供的事实或证据。 Article 114 Examination by the European Patent Office of its own motion (1)In proceedings before it, the EuropeanPatent Office shall examine the facts of its own motion; it shall not berestricted in this examination to the facts, evidence and arguments provided bythe parties and the relief sought. (2)The European Patent Office may disregardfacts or evidence which are not submitted in due time by the partiesconcerned. 第 115 条 第三人的意见 欧洲专利公开之后，任何第三人可以根据实施细则在欧洲专利局的程序中，提供与申请或专利相关的发明可专利性的意见。该第三人不应当是程序中的当事人。 Article 115 Observations by third parties In proceedings before the European Patent Office, following thepublication of the European patent application, any third party may, inaccordance with the Implementing Regulations, present observations concerningthe patentability of the invention to which the application or patent relates.That person shall not be a party to the proceedings. 第 116 条 口审 （ 1 ）如果欧洲专利局认为有必要的情况下，经欧洲专利局提议，或者应程序中任意当事人的请求进行口审。但是，如果当事人以及程序主题相同，欧洲专利局可以拒绝在同一部门的再次口审的请求。 （ 2 ）但是，仅在受理处认为必要或者受理处准备驳回专利申请的情况下，受理处才应当依申请人的请求进行口审。 （ 3 ）受理处、审查部和法律部进行的口审不应当公开进行。 （ 4 ）欧洲专利申请公开之后，如果进行审理程序的部门没有决定允许公开可能具有严重和不公平的缺陷，特别是对程序中的一方，申诉委员会和扩大的申诉委员会以及在异议部的口审，包括决定送达，应当公开进行。 Article 116 Oral proceedings (1)Oral proceedings shall take place eitherat the instance of the European Patent Office if it considers this to beexpedient or at the request of any party to the proceedings. However, theEuropean Patent Office may reject a request for further oral proceedings beforethe same department where the parties and the subject of the proceedings arethe same. (2)Nevertheless, oral proceedings shall takeplace before the Receiving Section at the request of the applicant only wherethe Receiving Section considers this to be expedient or where it intends torefuse the European patent application. (3)Oral proceedings before the ReceivingSection, the Examining Divisions and the Legal Division shall not bepublic. (4)Oral proceedings, including delivery ofthe decision, shall be public, as regards the Boards of Appeal and the EnlargedBoard of Appeal, after publication of the European patent application, and alsobefore the Opposition Divisions, in so far as the department before which theproceedings are taking place does not decide otherwise in cases where admissionof the public could have serious and unjustified disadvantages, in particularfor a party to the proceedings. 第 117 条 证据的形式和采集 （ 1 ）欧洲专利局进行的程序中，提供和获取证据的方式应当包括： （ a ）听取当事人陈述； （ b ）要求提供信息； （ c ）提供文件； （ d ）听取证人陈述； （ e ）专家意见； （ f ）调查； （ g ）书面证言。 （ 2 ）实施细则中应当规定采集证据的程序。 Article 117 Means and taking of evidence (1)In proceedings before the European PatentOffice the means of giving or obtaining evidence shall include thefollowing: (a)hearing the parties; (b)requests for information; (c)production of documents; (d)hearing witnesses; (e)opinions by experts; (f)inspection; (g)sworn statements in writing. (2)The procedure for taking such evidenceshall be laid down in the Implementing Regulations. 第 118 条 欧洲专利申请或欧洲专利的一致性 在不同指定缔约国中，欧洲专利的申请人或所有人不同，为了在欧洲专利局进行程序的目的，他们被视为共同申请人或所有人。在欧洲专利局的这些程序中，申请或专利的一致性不应受到影响；除本公约另有规定外，对于所有的指定缔约国，特别是申请或专利的文本应当一致。 Article 118 Unity of the European patent application or European patent Where the applicants for or proprietors of a European patent are notthe same in respect of different designated Contracting States, they shall beregarded as joint applicants or proprietors for the purposes of proceedingsbefore the European Patent Office. The unity of the application or patent in theseproceedings shall not be affected; in particular the text of the application orpatent shall be uniform for all designated Contracting States, unless thisConvention provides otherwise. 第 119 条 通知 根据实施细则，欧洲专利局应当主动告知决定、传票、通知和意见。特殊情况需要的话，通知可经缔约国中央工业产权局送达。 Article 119 Notification Decisions, summonses, notices and communications shall be notifiedby the European Patent Office of its own motion in accordance with theImplementing Regulations. Notification may, where exceptional circumstances sorequire, be effected through the intermediary of the central industrialproperty offices of the Contracting States. 第 120 条 期限 实施细则应当规定： （ a ）欧洲专利局的程序中需要遵守但公约中没有规定的期限； （ b ）期限计算的方式以及可以延长期限的条件； （ c ）欧洲专利局需要决定的最小期限和最大期限。 Article 120 Time limits The Implementing Regulations shall specify: (a)the time limits which are to be observedin proceedings before the European Patent Office and are not fixed by thisConvention; (b)the manner of computation of time limitsand the conditions under which time limits may be extended; (c)the minima and maxima for time limits tobe determined by the European Patent Office. 第 121 条 欧洲专利申请的继续处理 （ 1 ）如果申请人未遵守欧洲专利局规定的期限，则其可以请求继续审理欧洲专利申请； （ 2 ）只要符合实施细则中规定的要求，欧洲专利局应当准许该请求；否则，应当驳回该请求； （ 3 ）如果准许了该请求，则未遵守期限的法律后果视为未发生； （ 4 ）继续处理应当排除第 87 条第 1 款、第 108 条和第 112a 条中的期限，以及请求继续处理和恢复权利的期限；实施细则可以排除继续处理的其他期限。 Article 121 Further processing of the European patent application (1)If an applicant fails to observe a timelimit vis‑à‑vis the European Patent Office, he may request further processingof the European patent application. (2)The European Patent Office shall grantthe request, provided that the requirements laid down in the ImplementingRegulations are met. Otherwise, it shall reject the request. (3)If the request is granted, the legalconsequences of the failure to observe the time limit shall be deemed not tohave ensued. (4)Further processing shall be ruled out inrespect of the time limits in Article 87,paragraph 1 , Article 108 and Article 112a,paragraph 4 , as well as the time limits for requesting furtherprocessing or re‑establishment of rights. The Implementing Regulations may ruleout further processing for other time limits. 第 122 条 恢复权利 （ 1 ）欧洲专利的申请人或者所有人，尽管尽到注意义务任然不能遵守欧洲专利局规定的期限，如果因未遵守期限直接导致欧洲专利申请或请求被驳回，或申请被视为撤回，或欧洲专利被撤销，或丧失其他任何权利或救济方式，有权申请恢复权利； （ 2 ）只要符合第 1 款和实施细则中规定的其他任何要求，欧洲专利局应当准许该请求；否则，应当驳回该请求； （ 3 ）如果准许了该请求，则未遵守期限的法律后果视为未发生； （ 4 ）恢复权利应当排除请求恢复权利期限的权利；实施细则可以排除其他期限的恢复权利。 （ 5 ）在第 1 款所指丧失权利和欧洲专利公报公告恢复权利的期间内，指定缔约国的任何人如果善意地使用公开的欧洲专利申请或欧洲专利主题的发明，或为使用公开的欧洲专利申请或欧洲专利主题的发明做了有效和认真的准备，可以在经营过程中或为了经营的需要而无偿继续使用该发明； （ 6 ）本条款不限制缔约国准许对本公约规定期限或遵守缔约国机关规定期限恢复权利。 Article 122 Re‑establishment of rights (1)An applicant for or proprietor of aEuropean patent who, in spite of all due care required by the circumstanceshaving been taken, was unable to observe a time limit vis‑à‑vis the EuropeanPatent Office shall have his rights re‑established upon request if the non‑observanceof this time limit has the direct consequence of causing the refusal of theEuropean patent application or of a request, or the deeming of the applicationto have been withdrawn, or the revocation of the European patent, or the lossof any other right or means of redress. (2)The European Patent Office shall grantthe request, provided that the conditions of paragraph 1 andany other requirements laid down in the Implementing Regulations are met.Otherwise, it shall reject the request. (3)If the request is granted, the legalconsequences of the failure to observe the time limit shall be deemed not tohave ensued. (4)Re‑establishment of rights shall be ruledout in respect of the time limit for requesting re‑establishment of rights. TheImplementing Regulations may rule out re‑establishment for other timelimits. (5)Any person who, in a designatedContracting State, has in good faith used or made effective and seriouspreparations for using an invention which is the subject of a publishedEuropean patent application or a European patent in the period between the lossof rights referred to in paragraph 1 andpublication in the European Patent Bulletin of the mention of re‑establishmentof those rights, may without payment continue such use in the course of hisbusiness or for the needs thereof. (6)Nothing in this Article shall limit theright of a Contracting State to grant re‑establishment of rights in respect oftime limits provided for in this Convention and to be observed vis‑à‑vis theauthorities of such State. 第 123 条 修改 （ 1 ）根据实施细则，欧洲专利申请或欧洲专利可以在欧洲专利局的程序中进行修改。无论如何，应给予申请人至少一次的主动修改机会； （ 2 ）欧洲专利申请或欧洲专利不能以包含超出递交申请内容的方式修改； （ 3 ）欧洲专利不能以超过保护范围的方式修改。 Article 123 Amendments (1)The European patent application orEuropean patent may be amended in proceedings before the European PatentOffice, in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. In any event, theapplicant shall be given at least one opportunity to amend the application ofhis own volition. (2)The European patent application orEuropean patent may not be amended in such a way that it contains subject‑matterwhich extends beyond the content of the application as filed. (3)The European patent may not be amended insuch a way as to extend the protection it confers. 第 124 条 现有技术的信息 （ 1 ）欧洲专利局可以根据实施细则要求申请人提供国家和地区性专利程序所考虑的现有技术的信息，以及与该欧洲专利申请有关的发明的现有技术的信息； （ 2 ）如果申请人未根据第 1 款按时答复，则欧洲专利申请视为撤回。 Article 124 Information on prior art (1)The European Patent Office may, inaccordance with the Implementing Regulations, invite the applicant to provideinformation on prior art taken into consideration in national or regionalpatent proceedings and concerning an invention to which the European patentapplication relates. (2)If the applicant fails to reply in duetime to an invitation under paragraph 1 ,the European patent application shall be deemed to be withdrawn. 第 125 条 一般原则的参考 本公约未规定的程序性条款，欧洲专利局应考虑缔约国公认的程序法原则。 Article 125 Reference to generalprinciples In the absence of procedural provisions in this Convention, theEuropean Patent Office shall take into account the principles of procedural lawgenerally recognised in the Contracting States. 第 126 条 （删除） Article 126 （ deleted ）
第 106 条 可以申诉的决定 （ 1 ）申诉应当针对受理处、审查部、异议部和法律部的决定。申诉具有中止的效力。 （ 2 ）除决定允许单独申诉外，对于一方当事人并不终止程序的决定只能与最终决定一起申诉。 （ 3 ）实施细则可以限制异议程序中关于费用分摊决定的申诉权利。 Article 106 Decisions subject to appeal (1)An appeal shall lie from decisions of theReceiving Section, Examining Divisions, Opposition Divisions and the LegalDivision. It shall have suspensive effect. (2)A decision which does not terminateproceedings as regards one of the parties can only be appealed together with thefinal decision, unless the decision allows a separate appeal. (3)The right to file an appeal againstdecisions relating to the apportionment or fixing of costs in oppositionproceedings may be restricted in the Implementing Regulations. 第 107 条 有权申诉和参加申诉程序的人 程序中受到决定不利影响的任何当事人可以申诉。程序中其他当事人依法成为申诉程序中的当事人。 Article 107 Persons entitled to appeal and to be parties to appeal proceedings Any party to proceedings adversely affected by a decision mayappeal. Any other parties to the proceedings shall be parties to the appealproceedings as of right. 第 108 条 时限和形式 应当根据实施细则的规定，在收到决定后 2 个月内向欧洲专利局递交申诉请求。缴纳申诉费用后，申诉请求才应当视为提出。在收到决定后 4 个月内，应当根据实施细则陈述申诉理由。 Article 108 Time limit and form Notice of appeal shall be filed, in accordance with the ImplementingRegulations, at the European Patent Office within two months of notification ofthe decision. Notice of appeal shall not be deemed to have been filed until thefee for appeal has been paid. Within four months of notification of thedecision, a statement setting out the grounds of appeal shall be filed inaccordance with the Implementing Regulations. 第 109 条 前置审查 （ 1 ）如果做出决定的部门认为申诉可以受理并且具有充分的法律依据，应当纠正其决定。但程序中另一当事人反对申诉人时，不适用该规定。 （ 2 ）如果在接收到陈述理由三个月内，申诉未获批准，应立即将申诉呈送至申诉委员会，并且对其优点不加评论。 Article 109 Interlocutory revision (1)If the department whose decision iscontested considers the appeal to be admissible and well founded, it shallrectify its decision. This shall not apply where the appellant is opposed byanother party to the proceedings. (2)If the appeal is not allowed within threemonths of receipt of the statement of grounds, it shall be remitted to the Boardof Appeal without delay, and without comment as to its merit. 第 110 条 申诉的审查 如果申诉可以受理，申诉委员会应当审查申诉是否可以批准。申诉的审查应根据实施细则进行。 Article 110 Examination of appeals If the appeal is admissible, the Board of Appeal shall examinewhether the appeal is allowable. The examination of the appeal shall beconducted in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. 第 111 条 申诉的决定 （ 1 ）根据对申述可批准性的审查，申诉委员会应当作出申诉决定。申诉委员会可以依职权行使负责申诉所涉决定的部门之权利，或者将案件发回原审查部门做进一步审查。 （ 2 ）如果申诉委员会将案件发回申诉所涉决定的部门做进一步审查，该部门应当在事实相同的范围内遵从申诉委员会的决定理由；如果申诉所涉决定由受理处做出，审查部也应当遵从申诉委员会的决定理由。 Article 111 Decision in respect of appeals (1)Following the examination as to theallowability of the appeal, the Board of Appeal shall decide on the appeal. TheBoard of Appeal may either exercise any power within the competence of thedepartment which was responsible for the decision appealed or remit the case tothat department for further prosecution. (2)If the Board of Appeal remits the casefor further prosecution to the department whose decision was appealed, thatdepartment shall be bound by the ratio decidendi of the Board of Appeal, in sofar as the facts are the same. If the decision under appeal was taken by theReceiving Section, the Examining Division shall also be bound by the ratiodecidendi of the Board of Appeal. 第 112 条 扩大的申诉委员会的决定或意见 （ 1 ）为了保证法律适用的一致性，或者如果提出了至关重要的法律问题： （ a ）如果申诉委员会认为决定需要符合上述的目的，申诉委员会应在案件审查过程中自行或者基于申诉当事人一方的请求，将任何问题上呈扩大的申诉委员会。如果申诉委员会驳回了请求，应在最终决定中给出原因。 （ b ）如果两个申诉委员会对同一问题给出了不同的决定，欧洲专利局局长可以将法律问题上呈至扩大的申诉委员会。 （ 2 ）在第 1 （ a ）款的情形下，申诉程序中的当事人应当为扩大的申诉委员会程序的当事人。 （ 3 ）在第 1 （ a ）款中扩大的申诉委员会的决定应当就被讨论的申诉对申诉委员会具有约束力。 Article 112 Decision or opinion of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (1)In order to ensure uniform application ofthe law, or if a point of law of fundamental importance arises: (a)the Board of Appeal shall, duringproceedings on a case and either of its own motion or following a request froma party to the appeal, refer any question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal if itconsiders that a decision is required for the above purposes. If the Board ofAppeal rejects the request, it shall give the reasons in its finaldecision; (b)the President of the European PatentOffice may refer a point of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal where twoBoards of Appeal have given different decisions on that question. (2)In the cases referred to in paragraph 1(a) theparties to the appeal proceedings shall be parties to the proceedings beforethe Enlarged Board of Appeal. (3)The decision of the Enlarged Board ofAppeal referred to in paragraph 1(a) shallbe binding on the Board of Appeal in respect of the appeal in question. 第 112a 条 请求扩大的申诉委员会复审 （ 1 ）申诉程序中受到申诉决定不利影响的任何当事人可向扩大的申诉委员会递交复审请求。 （ 2 ）仅能够基于下述原因递交请求： （ a ）参与决定的申诉委员会成员违反了第 24 条第 1 款，或者根据第 24 条第 4 款的决定应当被排除； （ b ）申诉委员会包含未被指定为申诉委员会成员的人。 （ c ）发生了完全违反第 113 条的情形； （ d ）在申诉程序中发生了实施细则中规定的任何原则性的程序缺陷；或者 （ e ）实施细则中规定的条件下证实的犯罪行为可能已经对决定具有影响； （ 3 ）复审请求不应当具有中止的效力。 （ 4 ）根据实施细则，复审请求应当在合理的意见陈述中递交。如果基于第 2 （ a ）款至第 2 （ d ）款，复审请求应在收到申诉决定通知的两个月内提出。如果基于第 2 （ e ）款，复审请求应当自证实犯罪行为之日起两个月内递交，并且不得晚于收到申诉决定之日起 5 年。复审请求在缴纳规定的费用之后才应当被视为递交。 （ 5 ）扩大的复审委员会应当根据实施细则审查复审请求。如果请求是可接受的，则扩大的复审委员会应当不理会决定，并根据实施细则的规定重开申诉委员会的程序。 （ 6 ）在申诉委员会的决定和扩大的申诉委员会对复审请求的决定在欧洲专利公报上公告之间的时间段内，指定缔约国的任何人善意使用公开的专利申请或者欧洲专利，或者为使用公开的专利申请或者欧洲专利做了有效和认真的准备，可以在商业过程中或者因商业需要继续使用而无需付费。 Article 112a Petition for review by the Enlarged Board of Appeal (1)Any party to appeal proceedingsadversely affected by the decision of the Board of Appeal may file a petitionfor review of the decision by the Enlarged Board of Appeal. (2)The petition may only be filed on thegrounds that: (a)a member of the Board of Appeal tookpart in the decision in breach of Article 24,paragraph 1 , or despite being excluded pursuant to a decisionunder Article 24,paragraph 4 ; (b)the Board of Appeal included a personnot appointed as a member of the Boards of Appeal; (c)a fundamental violation of Article 113 occurred; (d)any other fundamental proceduraldefect defined in the Implementing Regulations occurred in the appealproceedings; or (e)a criminal act established under theconditions laid down in the Implementing Regulations may have had an impact onthe decision. (3)The petition for review shall not havesuspensive effect. (4)The petition for review shall be filedin a reasoned statement, in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. Ifbased on paragraph 2(a) to (d) ,the petition shall be filed within two months of notification of the decisionof the Board of Appeal. If based on paragraph 2(e) ,the petition shall be filed within two months of the date on which the criminalact has been established and in any event no later than five years fromnotification of the decision of the Board of Appeal. The petition shall not bedeemed to have been filed until after the prescribed fee has been paid. (5)The Enlarged Board of Appeal shallexamine the petition for review in accordance with the ImplementingRegulations. If the petition is allowable, the Enlarged Board of Appeal shallset aside the decision and shall re-open proceedings before the Boards ofAppeal in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. (6)Any person who, in a designatedContracting State, has in good faith used or made effective and seriouspreparations for using an invention which is the subject of a publishedEuropean patent application or a European patent in the period between thedecision of the Board of Appeal and publication in the European Patent Bulletinof the mention of the decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal on the petition,may without payment continue such use in the course of his business or for theneeds thereof.
2011/12冬季欧洲极寒天气的可能解释（请勿转载） 2011/12冬季发在欧洲大陆的极寒天气是2000年以来发在欧洲大陆最寒冷的极端灾害天气，持续时间长，损失惨重。我们迅速对这个问题进行了研究，并给出了一个新的理论解释，其结果已投《Geophys. Res. Lett.. 通过本文的研究可以预言在全球增暖的大背景下，这样的欧洲极寒天气还会增多。 CO2有两种作用：一引起全球增暖和NAO正位相事件的增多，但同时过强的CO2会引起大西洋storm track的增强，过强的大西洋Storm track会引起NAO从正位相转换成负位相，从而导致欧洲极寒天气的爆发。通过这样的大气内部过程的调节来部分抑制CO2引起的全球增暖，但全球增暖的趋势不会停止。 "Extreme cold events over Europe during the 2011/12 winter and their link with the regime transition of the North Atlantic Oscillation" by Luo and Yao (Submitted to Geophys. Res. Lett.) Abstract In this paper, a case study of the extreme cold European weather occurring during the 2011/12 winter is performed in order to provide a likely explanation for the outbreak of the extreme cold winter event. It is shown that the outbreak of the extreme cold European winter of 2011/12 is attributed to the regime transition of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). When the NAO transits from a positive NAO (NAO) event to an Atlantic-European blocking (ENAO-) event, the decline of the surface air temperature is enhanced over the European continent as well as the precipitation anomaly is enhanced (reduced) in the Northern (Central) Europe. Moreover, it is further found that before the NAO regime transition the Atlantic storm track can exhibit an enhanced Atlantic-European storm track in the Central Europe along the northwest-southeast direction. However, after the NAO transition begins, this storm track can be split into two branches so as to establish double storm tracks due to the ENAO- anomaly feedback. The southern storm track in the Central Europe is weakened and its spatial distribution is similar to that before the NAO transition, while the northern one is enhanced along the poleward side of the Northern Europe. Because the ENAO- event is long-lived, the persistent double storm tracks can be maintained in the European continent to produce persistent low temperatures and precipitation over Europe. Thus, the persistent double storm tracks in the European continent are crucial for the outbreak of the 2011/12 Europe extreme cold weather.
第 90 条 递交时审查和形式审查 （ 1 ）欧洲专利局应根据实施细则审查申请是否符合确定申请日的条件。 （ 2 ）如果根据第 1 款的审查不能确定申请日，则该申请不应当作为欧洲专利申请处理。 （ 3 ）如果欧洲专利申请确定了申请日，则欧洲专利局应当根据实施细则审查该申请是否符合第 14 条、第 78 条和第 81 条的要求，可行的话，还审查是否符合第 88 条第 1 款，第 133 条第 2 款以及实施细则规定的其他要求。 （ 4 ）欧洲专利局根据第 1 款或第 3 款进行审查时，如果发现了可以改正的缺陷，应当给予申请人改正缺陷的机会； （ 5 ）如果没有改正根据第 3 款审查时发现的缺陷，除本公约另行规定的不同法律后果外，应当驳回该欧洲专利申请。如果缺陷涉及优先权，则该欧洲专利申请应当丧失优先权。 Article 90 Examination on filing and examination as to formal requirements (1)The European Patent Office shall examine,in accordance with the Implementing Regulations, whether the applicationsatisfies the requirements for the accordance of a date of filing. (2)If a date of filing cannot be accordedfollowing the examination under paragraph 1 ,the application shall not be dealt with as a European patent application. (3)If the European patent application hasbeen accorded a date of filing, the European Patent Office shall examine, inaccordance with the Implementing Regulations, whether the requirements in Articles 14 , 78 and 81 ,and, where applicable, Article 88,paragraph 1 , and Article 133,paragraph 2 , as well as any other requirement laid down in theImplementing Regulations, have been satisfied. (4)Where the European Patent Office incarrying out the examination under paragraphs 1 or 3 notesthat there are deficiencies which may be corrected, it shall give the applicantan opportunity to correct them. (5)If any deficiency noted in the examinationunder paragraph 3 isnot corrected, the European patent application shall be refused unless adifferent legal consequence is provided for by this Convention. Where thedeficiency concerns the right of priority, this right shall be lost for theapplication. 第 91 条 （删除） Article 91 (deleted) 第 92 条 作出欧洲专利检索报告 欧洲专利局应当根据实施细则的规定，在权利要求书的基础上并充分考虑说明书和附图，作出并公布欧洲专利申请的欧洲检索报告。 Article 92 Drawing up of the European search report The European Patent Office shall, in accordance with theImplementing Regulations, draw up and publish a European search report inrespect of the European patent application on the basis of the claims, with dueregard to the description and any drawings. 第 93 条 欧洲专利申请的公开 （ 1 ）欧洲专利局应当在符合下述条件的情况下尽快公开欧洲专利申请： （ a ）申请日（有优先权的，优先权日）起满 18 个月；或 （ b ）根据申请人的请求，在上述期限届满前。 （ 2 ）当授权决定在第 1 （ a ）款所指期限届满前生效时，欧洲专利申请应与欧洲专利的说明书同时公开。 Article 93 Publication of the European patent application (1)The European Patent Office shall publishthe European patent application as soon as possible (a)after the expiry of a period of eighteenmonths from the date of filing or, if priority has been claimed, from the dateof priority, or (b)at the request of the applicant, beforethe expiry of that period. (2)The European patent application shall bepublished at the same time as the specification of the European patent when thedecision to grant the patent becomes effective before the expiry of the periodreferred to in paragraph 1(a) . 第 94 条 欧洲专利申请的审查 （ 1 ）欧洲专利局应当根据实施细则的规定，基于请求审查欧洲专利申请或者欧洲专利申请有关的发明是否符合本公约的规定；请求在缴纳审查费后才应当视为递交； （ 2 ）如果未按期递交实质审查请求，申请应当被视为撤回； （ 3 ）如果审查发现申请或与申请有关的发明不符合本公约的规定，审查部在必要时应当要求申请人陈述意见，并根据第 123 条第 1 款修改申请。 （ 4 ）如果申请人未按期答复审查部的意见，申请应当被视为撤回。 Article 94 Examination of the European patent application (1)The European Patent Office shall, inaccordance with the Implementing Regulations, examine on request whether theEuropean patent application and the invention to which it relates meet therequirements of this Convention. The request shall not be deemed to be fileduntil the examination fee has been paid. (2)If no request for examination has beenmade in due time, the application shall be deemed to be withdrawn. (3)If the examination reveals that theapplication or the invention to which it relates does not meet the requirementsof this Convention, the Examining Division shall invite the applicant, as oftenas necessary, to file his observations and, subject to Article 123,paragraph 1 , to amend the application. (4)If the applicant fails to reply in duetime to any communication from the Examining Division, the application shall bedeemed to be withdrawn. 第 95 条（删除） Article 95 (deleted) 第 96 条（删除） Article 96 (deleted) 第 97 条 授权或驳回 （ 1 ）如果审查部认为欧洲专利申请以及欧洲专利申请有关的发明符合本公约的规定，且满足了实施细则中规定的条件，则应当决定授予欧洲专利。 （ 2 ）如果审查部认为欧洲专利申请以及与欧洲专利申请有关的发明不符合本公约的规定，除本公约另行规定的不同法律后果外，应当驳回该申请。 （ 3 ）授予欧洲专利的决定在欧洲专利公报上公告之日起生效。 Article 97 Grant or refusal (1)If the Examining Division is of theopinion that the European patent application and the invention to which itrelates meet the requirements of this Convention, it shall decide to grant aEuropean patent, provided that the conditions laid down in the ImplementingRegulations are fulfilled. (2)If the Examining Division is of theopinion that the European patent application or the invention to which itrelates does not meet the requirements of this Convention, it shall refuse theapplication unless this Convention provides for a different legalconsequence. (3)The decision to grant a European patentshall take effect on the date on which the mention of the grant is published inthe European Patent Bulletin. 第 98 条 欧洲专利说明书的出版 欧洲专利局应当在欧洲专利公报公告授权欧洲专利后尽快出版欧洲专利说明书。 Article 98 Publication of the specification of the European patent The European Patent Office shall publish the specification of theEuropean patent as soon as possible after the mention of the grant of theEuropean patent has been published in the European Patent Bulletin.
本文链接： http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4b7683ce0102e0bf.html 农业部恐慌欧洲质疑，竟公开诬陷商务部 (2012-03-12 10:38:34) 转载 ▼ 标签： 杂谈 吕永岩按语：在转基因问题上屡屡造假，帮助美国孟山都等生物公司戕害中国人民的农业部，面对中国商务部对欧洲质疑转基因实事求是的披露，一时间慌了手脚，竟使用卑鄙的造谣诬陷手段，妄图把水搅浑。然而假的假是假的。农业部无论怎样为转基因辩解，也无法掩盖已经在全世界敲响的转基因丧钟。中国共产党、中国军队和中国人民迟早有一天要跟农业部勾结孟山都等推广转基因的罪行算总账！ 农业部在转基因上诬陷商务部，中国人民坚决站在商务部一边。支持并高度赞赏商务部为维护中国粮食和食品安全做出的贡献。 附：欧洲质疑转基因安全令农业部恐慌,官网造谣细节被公开! 作者： 直言了 核心提示：2012年3月10，农业部下属的中国农科院生物所官方网站发表了否认转基因危害的文章：《欧洲研究机构质疑转基因作物安全性的所谓事件真相》，文章采用掩人耳目的欺骗性造谣方式，对中国商务部如实报道欧洲质疑转基因安全性事件进行肆意歪曲，并对反转基因的正义呼声进行恶劣攻击，声称这是一场虚假报道、是闹剧！不过贼喊作贼的农业部其掘劣的造谣伎俩很快被懂行的人士识破，其造谣细节被一一公开!这真是：机关算尽太聪明，反误了卿卿性命！ 商业部门讲真话，农业部门搞造谣。 本文同时发至不良信息举报中心、新闻管理署、商业部、监察部。 直言了，2012-03-09 | 2012-03-11 11:23:46 。 http://zhiyanle.blog.hexun.com/73606810_d.html 。 中国商业部发表了中国驻欧盟使团的新闻布告《欧洲研究机构质疑转基因作物的安全性》（2012-03-09 00:28），全文如下： 欧洲研究机构质疑转基因作物的安全性 。 2012-03-09 00:28 文章来源：欧盟经商处。 连接：http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/i/jyjl/m/201203/20120308005013.html 。 内容::据《欧洲动态》近期报道，总部位于慕尼黑的德国研究机构Testbiotech称，有证据表明转基因玉米MON810产生的毒素，可以通过污染土壤、水或动物饲料对人类健康产生危害。与该研究机构观点相似，法国卡昂大学2月17日发表的研究也显示，有杀虫剂基因的玉米和其他类似转基因作物，对人类健康构成潜在的风险。尽管这些结果不是结论性的并且主要基于对高浓度毒素的研究，但德、法研究人员认为，该结果令人惊讶，而这些风险在以往对转基因作物的评估中被忽略。研究人员称，研究仍需进一步评估，现在就转基因作物对人类健康影响做出结论为时尚早。（王凯园）（首发子站：驻欧盟使团经商参处子站） 报道首发：欧洲研究机构质疑转基因作物的安全性。 首发日期：2012-03-09 00:28 文章来源：欧盟经商处 。 首发连接：http://eu.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/jmxw/201203/20120308005013.html 。 商业部和中国驻欧盟使团的那篇报道完全属实，讲的是真话。然而，那种消息是不利于转基因既得利益集团的推销和金钱利益的。于是，为维护既得利益，转基因既得利益集团的枪手之一即农业部农科院生技所林敏那里又发表他的舆论伙伴方舟子式的造谣诽谤，用他们编造的谎言、 在农业部门官方网媒上发文对中国商业部和外交机构的实事求是的报道搞恶毒攻击。 下面简单说来。 林敏机构造谣说：要想揭开事件的真相，首先要看看那个总部位于慕尼黑的德国研究机构Testbiotech是个什么样的机构。登录德国Testbiotech的官方网站一查，原来是一个非 府组织，更令笔者吃惊的是，该机构不是什么研究机构，根本没有直接对转基因玉米MON810进行什么研究，而只是于2012年2月17日在其网站上援引了法国卡昂大学的相关研究结果而已。（摘录完）。 事实：林敏机构那说法是自欺欺人和自打耳光。 孟山都公司和杜邦先锋良种等转基因公司都是非官方机构， 林敏机构和农业部门官员为什么那么崇拜它们呢？林敏机构那说法，不是自打耳光吗？ 顺便问问林敏：您跟方舟子一道出现在社会舞台，为推销转基因的商业利益而散布了许多谣言和虚假信息。如此， 方舟子是‘官方科研机构’吗 ？他不过是个身份造假、靠抄袭剽窃和造谣诽谤过日子的无业人员。既然您和您的机构那么看不起“非官方机构”，那您跟方舟子混做一团，算是什么事呢？您的言论不是自欺欺人和自打耳光吗？ 再有，所说该科研项目是 德法两国科研机构分工协作搞的、科研报告经过同行评议，而并非是林敏机构造谣所说的“德国机构援引法国机构” 。相关原文： Genetically engineered maize: New indication of health risks Bt protein toxic to human cells 17 February 2012, Caen/ Munich 。 连接：http://www.testbiotech.de/en/node/620 。 The research was supported by GEKKO foundation (Germany). CRIIGEN Association (France) and Testbiotech (Germany) were involved in planning the experiments and the discussion of results. Findings were published after peer review process. 该类科研结果 已有许多主要媒体报道，而且，美国卫生部还转发过 ，见： A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health Jo?l Spiroux de Vend?mois,1 Fran?ois Roullier,1 Dominique Cellier,1,2 and Gilles-Eric Séralini1,3 1. CRIIGEN, 40 rue Monceau, 75008 Paris, France 2. University of Rouen LITIS EA 4108, 76821 Mont-Saint-Aignan, France 3. University of Caen, Institute of Biology, Risk Pole CNRS, EA 2608, 14032 Caen, France C onflict of Interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. Received July 23, 2009; Accepted November 17, 2009. 连接：http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2793308/。 对比事实看， 很清楚，林敏机构搞了十分低劣的造谣和撒谎 。 林敏机构还说：欧洲权威机构对转基因玉米MON810的安全性是否进行了评估？笔者查询欧盟食品安全局官方网站，有了重要发现。实际上，转基因玉米MON810的安全性已经通过了欧盟食品安全局（EFSA (European Food Safety Authority)和法国食品安全局AFSAA/ANSES (French Food Safety Authority)的安全性评估，……欧洲食品安全管理局转基因生物安全专家组评估报告的原文链接http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/1149.htm 。 事实： 林敏机构所谓的欧盟评估是2009年07月的，已过时作废，即欧盟已做了替换，见： EU: Scientific Opinion。 on the annual Post-Market Environmental Monitoring(PMEM) report from Monsanto Europe S.A. on the cultivation of genetically modified maize MON810 in 2009 。 EFSA Journal 2011;9(10 ):2376 . doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2376 。 Adopted: 07 September 2011 。 Published: 25 October 2011 。 Last updated: 13 January 2012. This version replaces the previous one/s. 连接：http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/efsajournal/pub/2376.htm 。 内容：From the data submitted by the applicant in its 2009 MON810 report, the EFSA GMO Panel did not identify adverse effects on the environment, human and animal health due to maize MON810 cultivation during the 2009 growing season. The outcomes of the 2009 MON810 report do not invalidate the previous risk assessment conclusions on maize MON810. However, the EFSA GMO Panel notes a number of shortcomings in the methodology for CSM and GS. Hence, this scientific opinion gives specific recommendations for improvement of the strategy, methodology and reporting for the post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of maize MON810. The applicant should take into account the guidance on Post-Market Environmental Monitoring of genetically modified plants as outlined in the recent scientific opinion of the EFSA GMO Panel. The recommendations of the EFSA GMO Panel in this opinion supplement the previous recommendations on PMEM of maize MON810 in the 2009 scientific opinion for the renewal of the authorisation for continued marketing of maize MON810. 欧盟这科学评估报告说的很清楚： 此2011年底完成和2012年发表的评估替换2009年的评估；2009年评估是基于孟山都公司而做的 ；风险方面的结论不变（即该转基因作物有危害风险，因而必须采取风险管理措施）；但是，评估看到其报告方法缺陷，要求孟山都就销售后的环境保护方面做出完整申请，以便欧盟对MON810做出授权到期后的重新审核。 其实，欧美媒体早有报道说明， 欧盟该评估机构的一些人员原本是孟山都公司的人员、有严重利益冲突，其评估是基于孟山都公司报告而不是基于独立科学研究机构的，因而极缺可靠可信度。这种公信力损害，也是欧盟总部不得不只做授权、而把是否批准转基因作物商业化种植上市的决定权放给各成员国自己掌握的主要缘故之一。当然，欧盟这评估替换，也是治理利益冲突和尊重独立科研的结果。 这份替换评估， 还有欧盟国家关于严格限制甚至禁止转基因饲料喂养的蜜蜂之蜂蜜进入食品市场的规定、以及要求孟山都公司就转基因作物花粉传播造成生态污染和生态破坏的问题提出防治报告，等等，也是迫使巴斯夫和孟山都于今年年初先后宣布撤出欧盟转基因食品作物市场、标志着转基因食品作物在欧盟国的终结（欧美媒体之评价）的主要缘故之一。 如此结果不奇怪：孟山都公司要想拿自己的转基因作物打入欧盟食品市场，就得按要求拿出危害风险分析及如何防治的报告，否则就别想了。可是，该公司拿不出那个报告：BT转基因作物开始商业化之际，美国官方就明确说明那东西含有毒素毒害，所以法规规定种植该类作物 必须采取“避难所”措施 ；在美国，已有官方报告说明转基因作物农业区 出现了水系空气的规模污染，转基因食品作物可伤害动物内脏，而且，转基因作物商业化带来“超级害虫”和“超级杂草”已经成为威胁美国国土安全的重大问题、国会已经召开过听政会、要求主管部门和相关企业拿出治理方案，至今未果。 如此， 孟山都等根本拿不出报告，不撤也得撤了。 事实证明，林敏机构是为金钱利益而 故意用过时作废的东西搞散布虚假信息和搞造谣诽谤活动。 林敏机构造谣说：笔者首先感到疑虑的是，为什么这样大的事情在欧洲的主流媒体没有任何报道，太不正常了。（摘录完）。 事实：如前说，美国卫生部转发过相关科研报告，该故事早已遍布欧美媒体。就最近事态而言，在谷歌做查询， 有60,000多个媒体发表或转载了相关新闻报道 ： 把自己不懂的东西叫“伪科学”、把自己不知道的事情出现叫“骗局”，然后对别人搞无端指控和恶毒攻击，那是靠抄袭剽窃和造谣诽谤吃饭的无业方舟子及其团伙的行为模式。农业官员林敏跟造假吃饭无业人员方舟子一道，肩并肩地出现在社会舞台，为推销转基因编造散布了许多谎言。 如今，林敏机构再操方舟子行为模式， 对商业部和外交部门的实事求是的报道搞造谣诽谤活动，那一点不奇怪 。令人感到纳闷和难以接受的是，林敏是有公职公权的官员，居然为金钱利益而跟靠剽窃吃饭的无业人员方舟子混作一团、多年多次地对搞撒谎欺骗和欺上瞒下、如今甚至公权私用、在官媒平台用虚假信息对中国官方机构实事求是报道搞造谣诽谤；对如此官员公开的严重违法乱纪行为，居然无人过问、也没个依法惩治。 最后，这里感谢中国商业部和外交部做实事求是报道的官员：中国社会，转基因神话假话满天了多年， 至今利益关系媒体还在封杀关于转基因食品作物的危害风险的消息。 在这种情况下，你们能发出实事求是的新闻报道，帮助中国民众社会和决策机构了解事实真相，说明你们心中有人民安危和国家利益，说明你们是公权公用为民众服务的。就此实事求是的工作作风而言，那些搞转基因神话假话的官员及其机构和媒体的为利坑民和为钱骗人的品质之恶劣，那是根本无法相比的。 附：中国商业部和外交部门的实事求是的报道： 附：欧美媒体一篇相关报道的原文。 Study Questions Safety Of GM Corn As France Seeks EU Ban. Written by: EurActiv, February 25, 2012. http://www.eurasiareview.com/25022012-study-questions-safety-of-gm-corn-as-france-seeks-eu-ban/ (EurActiv) — Insecticides present in one of Europe’s most controversial genetically modified crops, MON810 maize, may be harmful to humans, French and German researchers say in a new study that could pour fuel over calls asking to limit such plants in the EU. The study comes as France’s environment and agricultural ministers this week urged the European Commission to seek an EU-wide ban on the cultivation of MON810, EurActiv.fr reported. The maize is outlawed in Austria, Germany, Greece, Hungary and Luxembourg, while France is threatening to re-impose its own ban that was struck down in court if the EU does not act. Christoph Then, who heads the Testbiotech research firm in Munich, said there is evidence that MON810 produces a toxin that can be harmful to humans through soil, water or animal feed contamination. The Testbiotech’s study, in conjunction with research done at the University of Caen, shows that insecticides present in genetically engineered maize and similar crops pose a potential risk to humans. The study was released on 17 February. Although the results are not conclusive and are based on review of high concentrations of toxins, the German-French team of researchers said the finding was a “surprising outcome and this risk was somehow overlooked” in past assessments of biotech crops. “We don’t know yet the final impact for the human consumer is, it’s too early to say that,” Then said in a telephone interview. “We are very cautious about saying we have proof that the consumer risk is high, that it needs more assessments.” Monsanto last month announced it would scrap plans to sell the maize in France despite a French court ruling in November that overturned a 2008 government ban on the sale of MON810. ‘Safe as its conventional counterpart’ The US-based seed and herbicide company has long maintained that MON810 and other genetically modified crops are safe and more environmentally friendly because they produce higher yields, require fewer pesticides and need less water than conventional seeds. The European Food Safety Authority in 2009 issued an assessment showing that “maize MON810 is as safe as its conventional counterpart with respect to potential effects on human and animal health” and is unlikely to have “any adverse effect on the environment.” A 2004 study by the Parma, Italy-based EU agency reached similar conclusions. However, the accuracy of EFSA reports on GM crops have been criticised by MEPs, national governments and researchers – including Then’s Testbiotech – for allegedly relying too heavily on industry-based information and research. Acknowledging that there are divergent views on GM safety, Then called for additional independent research on the use of the Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt, toxin that is used in GM crops like MON810 to strengthen their resistance to insects. 另附农业部官网造谣文章： 欧洲研究机构质疑转基因作物安全性的所谓事件真相 文章链接：http://bri.caas.net.cn/news/in_01.aspx?id=809
蒋高明 1月24日，欧盟再次传来对国内转基因农业官员和转基因鼓吹手大年不利的消息。据路透社24日的消息，美国孟山都公司发表声明，停止它在法国的转基因玉米MON-810的销售。这 是继巴斯夫转基因退出欧洲之后又一转基因爆炸性消息。这个消息表明转基因毒粮在欧洲的死刑已经开始执行。 转基因欧盟沦陷了，孟山都等生物技术公司只有移师中国，趁中国人昏睡之际，大打一场“里应外合”的转基因“偷袭战”。关于这点，军旅作家吕永岩先生分析到： “来自转基因毒粮的王道乐土只剩中国首当其冲，这也正是孟山都早就规划和公关好了的。中国在转基因毒粮大跃进方面表现出好为人师的态度，尤其是要充当文化科技都比中国 发达的欧洲的老师。欧洲先生认为危险的转基因，中国学生却认为安全得很，比原生态还安全。这些对莎士比亚戏剧看一遍不行，看十遍不行，得看一百篇才行的“高智商”的人 ，现在终于可以在转基因毒粮推广上给欧洲人当一把先生了。可惜的是，这个先生名头的代价实在太大了，这个代价不是用金钱所能估量的，他要付出的是十三亿人去充当转基因 毒粮实验的小老鼠，是中国相对人口少得可怜的土地，是中华民族的繁衍生存。美国杜邦的顾问已经当上了中国农业部的副部长，中国转基因毒粮产业化大跃进又增添了一员大将 ，中国和中国人的命运将会怎样？人们有理由胆战心惊”。 http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4b7683ce0102dyke.html 而在此前不久，农业部有关部门搞的转基因“百问”和“明白纸”宣传虚假信息：“欧盟对转基因的态度曾一度比较消极，但近年来趋向积极，一方面加紧研究，一方面放宽转基因食品进 口，2010年还批准了转基因马铃薯商业化种植”；在欧盟“获得授权的转基因玉米有23种、油菜3种、土豆1种、大豆3种、甜菜1种。除了极少数是作饲料或工业用途，绝大部分都 是用于食品”，等等。看到下面的消息，这些转基因代言人如何面对呢？是否再搞一个“千问”或“明白书”来？ 实际上，只有你们将有关信心让公众知道了，就用不着这样急急火火地对老百姓搞什么转基因科普了？ 孟山都公司彻底投降了么？ 直言了，2012-01-24 | 2012-01-25 07:51:13 http://zhiyanle.blog.hexun.com/72369369_d.html 路透社（Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:48pm GMT）报道，美国孟山都公司刚发了声明，停止它在法国的转基因玉米MON-810的销售，尽管法国最高法院前阵子判决说禁止该销售不符合 欧盟法规。声明说，今年停止、以后也不做该销售。详见： Monsanto says won't sell GMO maize in France in 2012 Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:48pm GMT http://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL5E8CO3J920120124 PARIS Jan 24 (Reuters) - U.S. biotech firm Monsanto said on Tuesday it does not plan to sell its genetically modified maize MON810 in France this year, nor after, even though the country's highest court overturned a 3-year ban in November.（摘录完）。 前几天，巴斯夫公司宣布停止它在欧盟国家的转基因作物业务。报道说，如此，在欧盟国家，那就只剩下孟山都MON-810一种转基因作物还有商业化种植，而该品种处在重审未 决的状态，即：目前，实际上欧盟国家已经没有转基因食品作物商业化种植销售了，或者说，那等于是欧盟对转基因关门了。 现在， 孟山都宣布停止它在法国的MON-810转基因玉米销售，那就是说，在欧盟，那仅有的一个品种的商业化种植上市也进入“荡然无存”的局面了，即进一步确证欧盟已经没 有商业化转基因食品作物种植上市 、用不着再说“实际上”或“等于是”了。 该消息带有转基因技术及其食品作物全球市场走向的标志性或象征性的意义，引起欧美主要新闻媒体的关注和报道，甚至科技科普报刊都予以及时特别关注。 去年，在联合国/CODEX年度会议上，美国官方代表团首次表示不反对食品标签标记转基因成分，改变了美国坚持了20来年的立场 。当时，一些报刊媒体就有述评说，转基因食 品作物市场走向将发生全球性的重大转折变化。如此，继巴斯夫公司撤掉它在欧盟国家的转基因作物业务后，孟山都公司又宣布停止它在法国的转基因玉米销售，是否说明那个全 球性的重大转折变化已经开始了呢？ 本人要说：且慢！不要急着下那个结论。理由：还有中国呢！中国还在继续搞“转基因大跃进”呢！而那是一个具有13亿人口吃饭者的食品消费特大国。 早在2004年， 美国做第一次转基因商业化种植上市反思反省的时候，包括学界商界的绝大多数人都认识到，转基因食品作物是“垃圾技术”，其危害风险远大于微观效益（企 业赚钱）。因此，在耶鲁大学相关座谈会有文说：如今全球化了，在西方成为“垃圾技术”的转基因技术及产品能否变成“黄金技术”，不取决于它的发源发祥地之美国和西欧， 而取决于中国等亚洲国家的食品消费 。 从那以后至今，几乎所有的西方转基因食品作物开发公司都把“点石成金”的梦想和主要力量放到了中国市场。 而在中国呢，农业部门和中科院等部门，已有高官担任那些公 司的顾问、还有官方媒体的加盟，形成了官商学媒“四位一体”的既得利益集团，为那些公司在中国的转基因产品销售、不但是不遗余力且是不择手段、甚至连营私舞弊都是公开 的了 。 中国为全球转基因食品作物能否“点石成金”而提供的贡献，不仅是它的庞大市场，而且还有它的国土生态安全、还有它的13亿人口充当全球转基因实验的老鼠。如此，那些 转基因公司撤离欧洲，就可以把省下的资本用于中国市场了。在中国，那些外国转基因公司的顾问已经被任命为中国农业副部长级官员而为他们的中国市场利益服务，还有农业官 员和中科院官员为他们充当“带路党”，还有官方媒体为他们做鼓吹宣传和封杀反对转基因技术泛滥的声音的服务；而他们的非法销售等行为被披露了，还有官员为他们撑腰和有 官媒为他们辩护，……。 面对能搞“点石成金”、能把西方的“垃圾技术”变成“黄金技术”的中国市场，那些转基因公司把撤离欧洲的资本拿到中国市场赚取巨额利润，且一个中国市场就可顶两个 甚至数个欧盟市场消费规模，更还有中国官员给他们当顾问和给他们带路撑腰的那些全球都找不到的“良好”市场环境，何乐而不为呢？如此看，说转基因食品作物的全球性重大 转折变化已经开始，不是过早了吗？ 远在中国的父老乡亲们，你们已经充当全球转基因实验老鼠多年了。直到你们不再有实验价值，那个转基因食品作物的全球性重大转折才可称为是实质到来。然而，那个时候 ，你们还是原本意义的中国人吗？ 参考阅读: 欧盟对转基因关门了。2012-01-18 21:47。 http://zhiyanle.blog.hexun.com/72313916_d.html 。 转基因后院起火，孟山都表现异常。2011-12-03 14:20。 http://zhiyanle.blog.hexun.com/70920759_d.html 。
中国国务院副总理李克强目前正在欧洲访问。与中国国家主席胡锦涛即将展开的美国之行相比，李克强的欧洲之行显然没有引起媒体过多的关注。然而，李克强抵达德国之前在《南德意志报》发表的文章中提出，中国将以更加开放的姿态面向世界，以更加虚心的态度借鉴和吸收人类文明成果、研究和学习各国发展的有益经验，却值得人们关注。 中国在急剧的内外转型期，如何准确定位与欧洲的关系，使这一关系不但有利于中国的外部环境建设，同时也有利于中国内部的转型，将是一个超越外交战略的、多领域、多学科的深层问题。这一大问题下还有许多子问题；将这些子问题研究透了，中国不但外交上将迎来一个柳暗花明的时期，而且在内部转型上也将进入一个思路畅通的新阶段。 “欧洲智慧”值得东亚借鉴 上周，笔者在梳理2010年中国外交时认为，2010年中国外交的重要亮点，是取得了对欧关系的重大突破；中欧关系是中美关系之外另一根重要的全球性平衡杠杆。在美中欧三足鼎立格局中，若中欧关系稳定了，那么中美关系再有大浪，其对中国的损害也将相对有限。同时，中欧由于不存在国家定位层面的战略冲突，因此更易在探索大国共荣模式上先行一步。 这一观点可有表层和深层两种理解法。就表层而言，这自然是外交战略的平衡之术。这对未来一段时间的中国外交，尤其是中国面临中美关系以及周边众多挑战的情况下，一定程度上自然是有用的。但外交平衡之术不能玩过了头，不然就又会陷入十七到十九世纪欧洲“大国平衡” （Balance of Power）的窠臼之中。且不说今天的欧洲早已步出“大国平衡”的陈旧逻辑，仅就二十一世纪国际格局特点而言，“大国平衡”显然已不再是人类处理国际关系应该追寻的唯一方式。 但在深层上，当代欧洲处理国际关系的一些深层智慧和经验，却值得东亚地区所参考。欧洲虽然历史没有东亚悠久，但其历史上的冲突密集和剧烈程度却超过东亚。二战后，以法德和解与欧盟发展为核心的欧洲经验和智慧，其核心一言以蔽之就是：一、消弭冲突和对手的最好办法往往不是冲突、战争或遏制，而且恰恰是联合与融合；二、联合与融合并非以双方是朋友为前提，恰恰因为有矛盾才需要融合，而矛盾在融合过程中自然得到消弭。 从这个意义上说，“欧洲经验”因其特殊历史和文化背景属于欧洲，但“欧洲经验”背后的“欧洲智慧”却属于包括东亚在内的全人类；她为人类处理亘古以来因生存空间、生存环境和生存资源而产生的冲突，提供了一个崭新的模式，实际上意味着人类文明水准的一个新台阶。与“欧洲智慧”截然相反的另一个例子，就是千年恩怨无法摆脱的以巴冲突。 二十一世纪上半叶的东亚，面临中美两个全球大国博弈的地区化，以及地区间包括中日、中印、朝鲜半岛、南中国海冲突为载体的势力纷争，究竟能否从“欧洲智慧”中得到一点启示和借鉴，显然是这个地区人们在未来几十年里面临的一个挑战。 在二十一世纪的东亚乃至全球格局演变中，中国显然是一个极其关键的角色。中国的人们在这其中有什么样的认知水准和处理艺术，将在很大程度上影响未来几十年的地区和国际格局。 研究欧洲工业化和城市化历程 欧洲对中国的深层内涵，绝不仅之于上述的“大国平衡”和“欧洲智慧”。事实上，今天中国转型期遇到的许多问题，在欧洲早年发展的历程中，都可以看到影子。因此，仔细研究欧洲早年现代化、工业化、城市化的历程以及市场经济的各种模式，对今天的中国，已经成为一个重要而迫切的问题。 今天的中国，外部崛起迅速，内部转型艰难。这一对反差，前者成为中国发展的亢奋点，后者则成为中国发展的疑难症；两者若同时呈现，则极易出现凸显前者而回避后者的情况。中国近年外交崛起迅速，固然与经济实力逐渐雄厚有关，但在民间和舆论界也逐渐滋长一种情绪，以为以中国的外汇储备和购买力就可以拯救世界。此次中国购买西班牙债券，其所谓的战略含义被一些舆论无限上升，一如两年前中国拯救美国的翻版。这种情绪自大且危险，但其实折射了没有见过世面的“土财主”心态。 今天的中国，最需要直面的问题，是内部转型的艰难及其背后的众多困惑。欧洲作为人类工业化和现代化最早的发源地，其发展历程尤其是对一系列规律性问题的解决之道，对今天的中国有着许多启示意义。 今天的中国正在经历三大转型：一、从农业国向工业国的转型；二、从计划经济向市场经济的转型；三、从封闭的集权社会向多元、开放的公民社会的转型。前两大转型主要是工业和经济领域的转型，第三大转型则主要是社会领域的转型。三大转型各有特点，在今天的中国都尚不彻底，但却环环相扣，彼此不可分割。在这些方面，欧洲早年的历程，都有值得研究的地方。 欧洲经验对转型中国的意义，主要体现在几个领域：一、如何消弭工业化和城市化带来的负面效应？二、如何解决转型期激烈的社会内部矛盾？三、如何在市场经济中构建合理的政府与市场的关系？四、如何构建合理、和谐的经济和社会发展模式？ 准确界定政府与市场关系 改革开放三十二年后，中国开始进入工业化二、三十年后的一个必然阶段，那就是城市化进程的展开及其带来的众多问题。从人类历史上看，这实际上是农业国向工业国过渡的必由之路。今天中国各地层出不穷的拆迁暴力、农民工诉求、三农问题、工人维权、城市贫富不均、治安恶化、房价飞涨等，大致上都属于这一范畴。 这些问题在十九世纪中期到下半叶的欧洲都曾出现过，有些激烈程度还远远超过今天的中国。欧洲在十九世纪中期进入工业化的黄金时代，二、三十年后出现城市化进程及其负面效应。恰好那个时期，也是欧洲工人运动（包括共产主义工人运动）风起云涌的时代。两者相叠，令十九世纪下半叶的欧洲充满动荡，以俾斯麦为代表的欧洲统治者既要应对外部崛起，又要应对内部矛盾。虽然欧洲在外部崛起上走上了负面道路，值得今天的中国警示；但在化解内部矛盾方面，欧洲还是积累了不少值得今天中国参考的经验。 今天的中国在市场经济转型方面遇到的最大的问题，就是如何处理政府与市场的关系。传统的计划经济和美国式的自由市场经济，都无法提供足资参考和探索的元素；唯有欧洲尤其是德国的“社会市场经济”，既强调市场的独立，又兼顾政府的监管和干预，即所谓“So wenig Staat wie moeglich, so viel Staat wie noetig”（可能时，国家尽量少干预；必要时，国家尽量多干预）。 今天的中国，刚性维稳，上下紧绷。但从经济-社会-政治的延动关系来看，只要建构了一个合理的经济模式，社会自然和谐，政治也就自然稳定。其间，欧洲从十九世纪下半叶后整整一百年的历程，值得今天的中国好好研究。 凡此种种，显然都不再是“打欧洲牌”来得那么简单。今天的中国，需要多一点沉稳、谦虚和扎实，来好好研究欧洲，使之对今天的中国转型有一点借鉴。 作者为香港凤凰卫视评论员 原文见 http://www.zaobao.com/special/forum/pages8/forum_zp110108.shtml
cite from http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2011/11/30/big-european-bank-failure-averted-what-central-banks-did-not-tell-us/ Central Bank Intervention Raises Questions Did a big European bank come close to failing last night?European banks, especially French banks, rely heavily on funding in the wholesale money markets.Given the actions of the world’s largest central banks last night, it raises the question of whether a major bank was having difficulty funding its immediate liquidity needs. The Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, European Central Bank, the Bank of Japan, the Swiss National Bank, and the Bank of Canada in a coordinated action moved to provide liquidity to the global financial system. In a separate move, the Chinese Central Bank cut bank reserve requirements.The People’s Bank of China cut reserve–requirement ratio by 0.5%, the first cut in nearly three years. The problem was not at U.S. banks as is evidenced by the following excerpt from a statement by the Federal Reserve. U.S. financial institutions currently do not face difficulty obtaining liquidity in short-term funding markets. However, were conditions to deteriorate, the Federal Reserve has a range of tools available to provide an effective liquidity backstop for such institutions and is prepared to use these tools as needed to support financial stability and to promote the extension of credit to U.S. households and businesses. These are the type of actions that were being taken during the financial crisis in 2008.Now most knowledgeable experts agree that not rescuing Lehman Brothers was a mistake.The authorities are not about to make the same mistake again.The only explanation for the massive action is that central banks were concerned about a pending failure that is not publically known.The readers may want to make their own judgment from the following excerpts from a statement by the Federal Reserve. These central banks have agreed to lower the pricing on the existing temporary U.S. dollar liquidity swap arrangements by 50 basis points so that the new rate will be the U.S. dollar overnight index swap (OIS) rate plus 50 basis points. This pricing will be applied to all operations conducted from December 5, 2011. The authorization of these swap arrangements has been extended to February 1, 2013. In addition, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the European Central Bank, and the Swiss National Bank will continue to offer three-month tenders until further notice. As a contingency measure, these central banks have also agreed to establish temporary bilateral liquidity swap arrangements so that liquidity can be provided in each jurisdiction in any of their currencies should market conditions so warrant. At present, there is no need to offer liquidity in non-domestic currencies other than the U.S. dollar, but the central banks judge it prudent to make the necessary arrangements so that liquidity support operations could be put into place quickly should the need arise. These swap lines are authorized through February 1, 2013. For a short-term trade, investors may consider buying on dips banks, and broad ETFs .Tickers of interest include, SPY, DIA, QQQ, XLF, EWG, EWU, EWI, BCS, UBS , CS, DB, MS, BAC, C, and JPM. About Me: I am an engineer and nuclear physicist by background, have founded two Inc. 500 fastest growing companies and have been involved in over 50 entrepreneurial ventures. I am the chief investment officer at The Arora Report which publishes four newsletters to help investors profit from change. Disclosure: My hedge fund and I, as well as subscribers to ZYX Buy Change Alert , may be following this plan and have long positions in the stocks mentioned.
这个夏天出国大多是去欧洲，欧元真是强势得让人很痛啊。不过因为经济不好，而且为了吸引外国游客，酒店餐馆的价钱反倒跌了不少哦，吃得不错！ 除了前面贴过的马耳他（那是纯粹的旅游），还去了阿姆斯特丹，都柏林，海德堡。走马观花而已，那可都是值得更多时间停留的地方啊。 在阿姆斯特丹印象深刻的是那些足球迷的投入，有真正的群众体育基础。而荷兰的天空里那灰色云彩的透明质地，让人更能理解 佛兰德绘画的灵透，和 梵高作品里色彩的变化。 都柏林则是一个异常年轻的欧洲城市，夜晚的酒吧街上驻唱的传统民歌手给人的感觉竟然和美国南部的乡村音乐或者Bluegrass有共通的地方。 海德堡的哲人小道走起来还有点费力，而用来解渴的莱茵河域出产的白葡萄酒要比别处的雷司令纯厚很多很多。 在Neckar河上坐了游船再走去海德堡城堡晚餐，同行的同行（HANG)在小巷里一路高歌。那是一首1925年的老歌：我的心丢失在海德堡。。。 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5GteaSVUE0feature=related Es war an einem Abend, Als ich kaum 20 Jahr'. Da küßt' ich rote Lippen Und gold'nes, blondes Haar. Die Nacht war blau und selig, Der Neckar silberklar, Da wußte ich, da wußte ich, Woran, woran ich war: 阿姆斯特丹运河畔 阿姆斯特丹水上人家的花园 街头广场足球迷的JAM Session 海牙沙滩那灰色的天空 走在哲人小道上 海德堡街头露天酒吧 去Mannheim的Tramline上的一个小镇车站 车站对面的自助花店。 都柏林的酒吧街 驻唱民歌手 老牌理发师，都柏林
Proceedings of the 7th European Nonlinear Dynamics Conference (ENOC 2011) Eds: D. Bernardini, G. Rega and F. Romeo http://w3.uniroma1.it/dsg/enoc2011/proceedings/proceedings.htm
Modern European history, 1871-2000: a documentary reader P151：漫画 The seed of peace , not dragon's teeth 下部的那句德语。 谢谢！ google book 上 p150 和 p152 都是可以看到的，偏偏 p151 不能看到。
研究表明气候变化不会冰冻欧洲 科学家们一直担心，随着气候变化情况恶化，来自北极地区的冰冷海水可能把欧洲冰冻，即欧洲局部地区温度下降、海港封冻。但最新一期英国《自然》杂志刊登研究报告说，这种预测有疏漏。 领导这项研究的美国迈阿密大学研究人员丽莎·比尔说，欧洲冰冻的预测忽视了另外一股洋流——“厄加勒斯暖流”的影响。这股暖流源自非洲南端印度洋与大西洋交汇处。实地观测和计算机模拟的综合结果显示，随着气候变化，“厄加勒斯暖流”对于欧洲气候的影响不断增强，它会把温暖的海水从印度洋带入大西洋。 西欧沿海地区的温度比北半球许多同纬度地区要高，原因是“北大西洋暖流”每年从赤道带来大量温暖的海水。但联合国政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）等机构曾预测，气候变化会使北极地区的冰大量融化，大量冰冷的海水流入大西洋，减弱“北大西洋暖流”的效果，导致欧洲和北美部分地区温度大幅下降。 丽莎·比尔认为，自己的研究表明包括IPCC等权威机构在内的气候变化预测都有存在缺陷的可能。她说，对非洲等地区海域的观测数据现在仍然偏少，应该进一步加强对“厄加勒斯暖流”等的监测，以更加详细的数据来为气候变化决策提供参考。（来源：新华网 黄堃） On the role of the Agulhas system in ocean circulation and climate renchunxiao 添加于 2011-5-1 10:01:38 20次阅读 | 0次推荐 | 0个评论 The Atlantic Ocean receives warm, saline water from the Indo-Pacific Ocean through Agulhas leakage around the southern tip of Africa. Recent findings suggest that Agulhas leakage is a crucial component of the climate system and that ongoing increases in leakage under anthropogenic warming could strengthen the Atlantic overturning circulation at a time when warming and accelerated meltwater input in the North Atlantic is predicted to weaken it. Yet in comparison with processes in the North Atlantic, the overall Agulhas system is largely overlooked as a potential climate trigger or feedback mechanism. Detailed modelling experiments—backed by palaeoceanographic and sustained modern observations—are required to establish firmly the role of the Agulhas system in a warming climate. 作 者： Lisa M. Beal; Wilhelmus P. M. De Ruijter; Arne Biastoch; Rainer Zahn; SCOR/WCRP/IAPSO Working Group 136 期刊名称： Nature 期卷页： 2011-04-27 第472卷 第7344期 429~436页 学科领域： 地球科学 大气科学 添加人是否为作者: 否 原文链接： http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v472/n7344/full/nature09983.html DOI： doi:10.1038/nature09983 ISBN： 0028-0836 关键词： Climate science
中国高职高专教育网 首页 海外拾贝 http://www.tech.net.cn/web/articleview.aspx?id=20110413091331847cata_id=N041 博洛尼亚进程中的欧洲硕士生教育改革 刘亚敏 胡甲刚 摘要：硕士生教育是欧洲博洛尼亚进程的一项重要改革任务。10年来，在博洛尼亚框架下，各缔约国大力推进硕士生教育改革，取得了重大进展。多数国家完成了学位法律制度的修订和完善，学位授予标准更加明确，学位类型向纵横两方面发展，招生选拔制度逐步确立，国际化程度大大提高，校企合作不断加强。 关键词：博洛尼亚进程；硕士生教育；改革 1999年 6月19日 ，欧洲 29个国家的教育部长在意大利博洛尼亚举行会议，共同签署了《欧洲教育部长联合宣言》（即《博洛尼亚宣言》），正式启动了旨在推进欧洲高等教育一体化、提高欧洲高等教育国际竞争力的“博洛尼亚进程”（Bologna Process）,并提出了在2010年建成欧洲高等教育区（EHEA, European Higher Education Area）的目标。在博洛尼亚进程所要构筑的易读、可比、兼容、透明的三级学位体系中，硕士生教育位居本科生教育和博士生教育之间，承上启下、目标多元、类型多样，具有特殊重要的地位，是建设欧洲高等教育区至关重要的一环。因此，10年来各缔约国都非常重视“博洛尼亚硕士”（Bologna Master）生教育的改革，积极推动具有欧洲维度（European Dimensions）的硕士生教育的发展，至今欧洲硕士生教育改革已取得重大进展，面貌为之一新。 一、学位立法进展顺利 在博洛尼亚进程启动之前，欧洲各国教育传统殊异，高等教育体系千差万别，学位制度自成一体，互不相同。除了英国的学士、硕士和博士三级学位体系结构相对清晰外，其他欧洲主要国家学位制度五花八门。如德国实行的是两级学位制度，没有学士层次，第一级学位是硕士，分为理工科硕士（ Diplom）和人文社会科学硕士（Magister），第二级学位是博士（Doktor）；意大利的学位制度长期是单层结构，只授予一种称为Laurea的学位，直到20世纪 80年代以后才引入了“研究博士”；法国的学位和文凭名目繁多，层级结构非常复杂，包括大学普通学习文凭、学士学位、硕士学位，高等职业学习文凭、深入学习文凭、博士学位（分为国家博士、第三阶段博士、大学博士）、工程师文凭等；瑞典的学位有两个层次，第一层授予学士和硕士学位（两者的区别主要在于课程和毕业论文的难度），第二层分为两级，即Licentiate（副博士学位）和Ph.D（博士学位）。为了履行“博洛尼亚宣言”的国际义务，各缔约国政府按照建立学士、硕士和博士三级层次分明、相互衔接的新型学位体系的要求，加快对本国学位法律制度的修订和完善。例如，2002年8月，德国政府对《高等学校总纲法》进行了修改，正式确认学士和硕士生课程作为高等学校的常规学位课程，学士/硕士生体系得以确立。学士学位和硕士学位独立存在，获学士学位的学习时间为3-4年，硕士学位为1-2年。同一学校连读的学士和硕士课程规定的学习时间总共不得超过5年。学生毕业获得学位的同时均能获得一份欧洲文凭补充说明书，内容包括有关学位课程和所获得的职业资格的详细说明。 由于各国立法体制不同，而且在博洛尼亚进程中，有不少国家先后申请加入，从而导致各国学位立法的进展不一。到 2005年博洛尼亚进程过半时，45个缔约国（1999-2005年先后有16个国家获准加入博洛尼亚进程）中有32个国家（超过70%）完成了本国学位法律制度的调整。到2009年，波兰、葡萄牙、马耳他、罗马尼亚、塞浦路斯、马其顿等国也都完成了对本国学位法律制度的“博洛尼亚”改造。至今，希腊、西班牙、安道尔、波黑、摩尔多瓦、乌克兰、阿塞拜疆等少数国家的相关学位法律制度还在制定之中。因此，从总体情况来看，基于“博洛尼亚宣言”的欧洲学位立法取得了重大进展，硕士学位作为高等教育三级结构的中间环节获得了法律的认可和保障。不过，立法是一回事，法律的实施又是另一回事，新旧学位体系的彻底转换并不是短时间内就能实现的。作为一个外部植入而非内生的新型学位体系，三级学位制度的实施面临不少阻力和现实问题，因此，“博洛尼亚硕士”的推进依然任重而道远。 二、学位标准日益明确 《博洛尼亚宣言》提出了在欧洲高等教育体系中建立硕士学位层级的倡议，但对于“博洛尼亚硕士”的内涵和学位标准并没有一致认识。随着博洛尼亚进程的实施和推进，这一问题迫切需要得到解决。 2003年 3月，欧洲各国教育代表齐聚赫尔辛基，对“博洛尼亚硕士”进行了专题研讨。会议强调了硕士生教育的价值，提出了硕士学位的基本标准，主要包括：（1）硕士学位是高等教育第二层级的文凭，进入硕士生阶段学习通常要求完成学士阶段的学业；（2）获得硕士学位的学生必须达到这一层次应具备的知识和能力要求，即能够综合运用知识，处理复杂问题，形成判断，能够向专家和非专业听众报告研究的结论，并能够独立、自主地进行更深入的学习和研究；（3）学士和硕士生教育在学习年限、教学内容、培养质量和学习结果上各不相同；（4）硕士学位通常需要90-120个学分，最少不能低于60个学分，学习年限和教学内容可以保持一定弹性；（5）为了增强各国硕士学位的透明度，在给学生颁发硕士学位时要同时颁发一个文凭补充说明书。 在半年后的柏林会议上，各缔约国教育部长代表各国政府承诺在 2005年前进一步完善学士和硕士生教育，并重申在赫尔辛基会议上达成的关于硕士学位质量标准的共识。会后发布的《柏林公报》指出：“为满足个人、学术和劳动力市场的需要，第一和第二层级的学位应该有不同的定位和多样化的培养目标。第一层级的学位（即学士）是第二层级的学位（即硕士）入口，第二层级的学位是博士学位的入口。”“入口”意味着“候选人能否具备获得接受下一级高等教育的资格”，也就是说，要向进入硕士生阶段学习，必须首先获得学士学位或与之等值的文凭。 赫尔辛基和柏林会议后，质量创新联合专家组（ Joint Quality Initiative informal group）于2004年制定了三级学位层次的质量标准，这就是为人所熟知的“都柏林标准”（Dublin Descriptors），其中对硕士生阶段是这样描述的：“获得硕士学位的学生应达到以下标准：具有比本科阶段更强的知识论证能力，通常在研究方面能够提出新观点或新想法；具备在专业相关领域运用知识、解决问题的能力；具有综合各方面的知识、处理复杂问题、形成判断的能力，并能够承担社会和伦理责任；能够清楚地向专家和非专业听众讲述自己 获得的知识和得出的结论；具有自主学习的能力，能够继续独立进行学习和研究。” 在 2005年的卑尔根会议上，各国教育部长提出要对每一学位层级应达到的学习成效和能力要素进行清晰界定。至此，“博洛尼亚硕士”浮出水面，形神兼备。从形式要素来看，一般需90—120个学分（ECTS，欧洲学分转换与累积系统），最低不能少于60个学分；学习年限为全日制一年至两年，或与之等值的时间；是进入欧洲劳动力市场的一种通行证。从实质要素来看，“都伯林标准”条分缕析，一目了然。 三、学位类型纵横发展 经过几年的改革发展，“博洛尼亚硕士”可分为三种主要类型：第一种是职业硕士（硕士生课程具有很强的职业定向），既可以是全日制、非全日制，也可以是远距离教学或混合模式，常见的职业硕士包括医学硕士、牙医硕士、兽医硕士、药剂硕士、建筑硕士、护理硕士、工商管理硕士、工程师硕士等。第二种是学术型硕士，强调创新和知识转化，属于前博士生教育阶段。第三种是课程型硕士，主要是为在职学习者提供个性化的课程菜单。随着博洛尼亚进程步步深入，双轨制分类培养（即研究型大学培养学术型硕士，应用科学技术大学培养职业硕士）渐渐出现了合流的趋势。一方面，许多研究型大学在学术型硕士生培养中引入职业课程；另一方面，一些应用科学技术大学开始对职业硕士生进行高层次的研究和教学训练。他们认为，在建设欧洲研究区（ ERA，European Research Area）的大背景下，研究型硕士不仅要有研究能力，而且要具有一定的职业技能，职业硕士也需要培养和提高创新意识与研究能力。 除了以上 3种常见的分类外，在某些国家还存在特殊的硕士学位类型，包括“联合硕士”、“连读硕士”、“终身学习硕士”、“前硕士学位”与“后硕士学位”等。 “联合硕士”（ Joint Master），是指两所或两所以上的高校通过参与联合学位计划而开展的紧密型合作培养所授予的硕士学位。这种合作可以是一国内部高校之间合作，也可以是高校之间的跨国合作。联合硕士学位大体具有六个特征：（1）具体的合作项目是由若干所高校共同开发和参与的；（2）参与联合学位项目高校的硕士生要到合作方高校学习部分相关学位课程；（3）到合作方高校学习的期限要足够长，至少在一个学期以上；（4）在合作方高校学习的课程及通过的考试能够得到各参与高校完全和自动的认可；（5）每所高校的教授可到合作高校参与项目的课程制定、课程教学和招生考试；（6）在完成合作项目的全部培养方案后，学生可获得由参与项目合作的高校授予的国家硕士学位，或者获得由合作高校联合颁发的学位（事实上通常是一个非官方的“证书”或“文凭”）。 “连读硕士”（ Consecutive or Continuation Master），是指在同一学科专业，学士和硕士生阶段连在一起攻读并获得硕士学位的方式。本硕连读的主流模式是“3+2”模式（有13个国家采用），也有“3+1”模式（只存在于英国）、“4+1”模式（3个国家采用）和“4+2”模式（5个国家采用）。 “终身学习硕士”（ Lifelong Master），是指在工作之余，自由选择课程，以非全日制方式完成硕士生学业而获得的硕士学位。在倡导终身学习理念的欧洲，越来越多的学生开始采用部分时间制学习方式。为了满足在职人员攻读硕士学位、实现职业持续发展的要求，一些大学开发出了短期的硕士生教育项目，供在职人员集中学习;也有一些大学将现有的硕士生教育项目分解为几个小单元，方便在职人员分散学习。 “前硕士学位”（ Pre-master）与“后硕士学位”(Post-master),是指在某些国家的硕士学位层级上，还存在一些与通常意义上的硕士学位并列、但略低或略高的学位类型。一项对欧洲19个国家高等学校的调查表明，约50%的高校在博洛尼亚第二层级提供的学位不仅仅只有硕士学位一种。例如，比利时瓦隆尼亚地区的法律规定，在完成普通硕士生教育的基础上设立为期一年的“附加硕士”，以职业训练为中心，提供一种更高水平的硕士学位。这种硕士项目在一定程度上超出了博洛尼亚框架，由大学自主设立和管理，并不以进入博士生阶段学习为目的。在波兰和瑞士，也出现了新型高级硕士学位。当然，“后硕士学位”并不是唯一的变种。在苏格兰的有些大学，文科硕士与理科学士文凭等值。在意大利，初级硕士学位也是一种第一层级的文凭。这些都属于“前硕士学位”。 四、选拔制度逐步确立 由于欧洲不少国家在传统上没有明确的学士和硕士生阶段划分，因此，在博洛尼亚进程实施的最初几年，多数学生仍然认为，他们会象过去那样在结束某一学科学士学业后，不需要特别的入学选拔程序，可直接进入同一学科硕士生阶段学习，而且他们通常会在同一个国家，还可能是同一所大学完成从学士到硕士生的全部学业。不少家长和雇主也对这种学士—硕士的无缝对接模式持认可态度。但这与博洛尼亚进程所倡导的高等教育的弹性和流动性相悖，那种非连续性（完成学士学业多年后再攻读硕士）的、跨学科、跨院系，甚至跨国学习才是博洛尼亚进程最希望达到的。随着越来越多的学生渴望接受更高一级的教育，在硕士生阶段的“入口”设定选拔标准、建立选拔程序就势在必行了，特别是在那些硕士生招生有限额的国家。据 2005年进行的一项调查，在29个欧洲国家中，有16个国家（超过半数）在学士和硕士生之间设有入学选拔程序。至今，已有超过2/3的国家建立了硕士生入学选拔方式，特别是那些知名度高的大学，需要从大量的合格申请者选拔部分学生攻读硕士学位。 当然，不少国家的硕士生入学选拔方式在实践暴露出了不少问题，影响招生的公平性，不利于学生的校级流动。如在奥地利，硕士生入学选拔程序很繁琐，要对每一个学生的本科综合表现进行检查、考核。不过由于本校学生的履历一目了然，他们就比校外的申请者更有优势。在这种状况下，本校的本科生会提前为硕士生入学做好准备，他们比校外申请者在考核中的表现自然就更好。在荷兰，本校的硕士生被视为“门生”，其他大学的学生和他们进行入学竞争并不是非常公平的。那些毕业于实科大学、拥有其他学科背景的学生还必须学习 30个学分的前硕士生课程。在波兰，公立和私立大学泾渭分明。从私立大学到公立大学，从学士到硕士生，存在很多困难。大学为本校学生开辟一条通路，而要求其他大学的申请者补习相关课程，这种入学考核文化中潜藏的歧视常常导致学生诉诸于法律。 五、国际化程度大大提高 推动学生的跨国流动，加强研究生教育的国际交流与联合培养，增强欧洲对世界其他国家学生的吸引力，是博洛尼亚进程的内在要求。随着欧洲学分转换与累积系统的建立，以及“伊拉斯谟计划”、“联合硕士学位项目”、“亚洲链接项目”等的实施和推进，欧洲硕士生教育的国际化程度大大提高，硕士生教育的跨国流动蔚然成风。以“伊拉斯谟计划”为例，在过去的十年间，“伊拉斯谟计划”对 200万学生的跨国流动学习提供了资助，并将在接下来的3年内继续资助100万的学生。在《2007年伦敦博洛尼亚进程评估报告》中，“联合学位的设立和认可”在所有12项评估指标中得分为4.6（满分为5），排名第一，这说明“联合学位”取得的成绩最为显著。调查表明，有32个国家和地区的法律允许和支持设立联合学位和开发联合项目。各国和各地区的高等教育机构纷纷设立了联合培养项目，而且已经与其他成员进行了卓有成效的合作，并颁发国家认可的联合学位。虽然其他16个国家和地区还没有明确关于联合学位的法律，但都无一例外都对联合学位持积极支持态度。 为了吸引欧洲以外的硕士生生源，在欧洲非英语国家，越来越多的大学开始提供用英语教学的课程，以便弥补本国语言的劣势，这在北欧更为常见。在 2003-04学年进行的一次网上调查显示，在爱尔兰和英国以外，有1889个硕士生教育项目采用英语教学，属于北欧的高等学校就占了22%。一项更为全面的调查表明，从2002年到2007年，采用英语教学的教育项目增长了3倍，其中80%为硕士生教育项目。在比利时、德国、瑞典和荷兰，采用英语教学的硕士生项目超过90%。 在当前的欧洲留学生教育市场中，英国仍占据显著优势。英国高等教育统计机构的数据显示， 2007-2008年英国高等学校中非欧洲国家的全日制研究生近25万人，占英国全日制研究生总数的41.75%。其他欧洲国家也加快了追赶英国领先地位的步伐。在德国驻北京机构的帮助下，中国学生已成为德国留学生中最大的群体。法国在中国设立了5个招生办事处，在印度设立了9个，以便吸纳更多的亚洲学生赴法留学。 2010年 3月，在欧洲各国教育部部长会议上发表的《关于欧洲高等教育区的布达佩斯—维也纳宣言》中，对高等教育的国际化给予了很高评价，并自豪地宣称：“博洛尼亚进程，以及作为结果的欧洲高等教育区为高等教育的区域合作和跨国合作提供了空前的范例，也因此在世界其他地区引起了极大的关注，并且让欧洲高等教育在全球高等教育格局中拥有更加显著的地位。” 六、校企合作不断加强 硕士生教育具有多种功能，它为学生提供高层次的知识，进行研究训练，砥砺创新，促进知识转换，提高个人能力和素质，为博士教育输送人才，促进个人的职业发展等。作为培养高层次、高技能劳动力主要渠道的硕士生教育，应不断加强与企业的对话与合作，推进校企联合培养，进一步明确硕士的职业定向，提高硕士毕业生的职业能力。 欧洲大学联合会在 2004年的联合硕士学位项目中，就明确要求高等学校要主动听取用人单位对硕士生培养的意见和建议，邀请用人单位参与课程的设置。在西班牙和爱尔兰，私营企业在大学的课程设置中发挥重要作用。德国的应用科学技术大学也经常根据就业市场分析和工作岗位数对招生和课程进行调整。在波兰和瑞典，用人单位原来对大学的课程内容和教学没什么发言权，但现在这种状况已经有所改变。大学与用人单位之间的对话与交流将使用人单位在大学的课程发展、质量保证和校务治理中发挥更大作用。没有一所大学拒 绝用人单位的参与，但是，这种交流与合作机制及其分享文化的建立和培育还尚待时日。 校企合作已引起了欧洲各国教育部长的高度关注，在 2007年的伦敦会议上，他们一致呼吁，高等学校必须加强与用人单位的对话和联系。目前，许多大学都在加强与用人单位的沟通上采取了措施：高度关注地区、国家和欧洲劳动力市场的变化；吸纳社会机构参与大学治理；用人单位和职业部门参与硕士生阶段的课程设置；开展创业教育；制订就业安置计划；开展就业指导；进行校友跟踪调查；强调学生人际和跨文化交流能力的培养等。一份关于法国、德国、荷兰、挪威和英国等5国大学生就业调查报告表明，用人单位非常看重学生的“软”能力，包括沟通能力、外语交流能力、项目管理能力和创新能力。博洛尼亚所倡导的“以学生为中心”的学习理念有利于这些能力的培养，各国政府对此也非常支持。英格兰高等教育拨款委员会与用人单位合作，对30个学生“软能力”培养项目进行资助。 在 2009年发布的关于博洛尼亚进程未来十年优先发展计划的《鲁汶公报》中，各国教育部长进一步强调：“随着劳动力市场越来越依赖高级技能和复合型能力，高等教育应培养学生整个职业生涯所需的先进知识、技能和能力。提高就业能力可以使个人在不断变化的劳动力市场上充分把握机会。通过政府、高等教育机构、社会力量和学生之间的密切合作，我们致力于提高劳动力现有的学历和能力水平。这将使高等教育机构可以更好地满足用人单位需求，用人单位也可以更好地理解教育的发展方向。高等教育机构应与各国政府、相关部门、用人单位一起完善相关制度，增加入学机会，为在校学生和毕业生提供更好的就业指导服务。我们倡导学习与就业安置相结合，也鼓励在职学习。”可以预见，大学与用人单位对话平台的搭建，合作机制的建立，都将使校企合作更加普遍、深入。 经过十年的改革发展，“博洛尼亚硕士”已经在欧洲三级学位体系中站稳了脚跟，并在多方面取得了重大进展，但同时也在实施和推进过程中暴露出了一些问题，需要进一步解决和完善。虽然 2010年大限已至，但博洛尼亚进程不是终结，而是新的开始，“博洛尼亚硕士”也将在新的历史时期开启自己新的征程。 （刘亚敏，武汉大学教育科学学院、研究生教育研究中心副教授，湖北武汉 430072；胡甲刚，武汉大学研究生院办公室、研究生教育研究中心副主任，湖北武汉 430072 ） 参考文献 Howard Davies. Survey of Master Degrees in Europe. 2009 by the European University Association. http://www.eua.be/publications/ . 2010-05-31. “Realising the European Higher Education Area” Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education in Berlin on 19 September, 2003. http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/documents/MDC/Berlin_Communique1.pdf . 2010-10-08. Draft 1 working document on JQI meeting in Dublin on 18 October, 2004Shared ‘Dublin’ descriptors for Short Cycle, First Cycle, Second Cycle and Third Cycle Awards. http://www.uni-due.de/imperia/md/content/bologna/dublin_descriptors.pdf . 2010-10-08 The Bologna Process 2020—The European Higher Education Area in the new decade Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education. Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve, 28-29 April, 2009. http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/Leuven_Louvain-la-Neuve_Communiqué_April_2009.pdf. 2010-10-08 . Budapest-Vienna Declaration on the European Higher Education Area. March 12, 2010. http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/2010_conference/documents/Budapest-Vienna_Declaration.pdf . 2010-10-08. 刘宝存,李 婧.博洛尼亚进程:历程、进展与未来 .大学·研究与评价,2009(05). 刘亚敏,胡甲刚.联合硕士学位:欧洲高等教育的实践探索 .中国高等教育,2008(15/16). 杨天平,金如意.博洛尼亚进程述论 .华东师范大学学报:教育科学版,2009(01). 马晓洁,李盛兵.博洛尼亚进程中的芬兰高等教育政策调整 .比较教育研究,2008(1). 蒋培红,张朝然.德国高校的学位制度改革述评 .学位与研究生教育,2007(05). 本文系武汉大学2008-09人文社科自主科研项目“世界一流研究型大学成长机制研究”的成果之一 。
欧洲可持续能源研究生院 (European Graduate School on Sustainable Energy) 欧洲催化联合会 (European Federation of Catalysis Societies (EFCATS)) 生物质转化 - 国际研究和教育伙伴组织 (Partnerships for International Research and Education (PIRE - Biomass Conversion)) 荷兰皇家化学会 (Royal Netherlands Chemical Society (KNCV-Section Catalysis)) 荷兰催化研究院 (Netherlands Institute for Catalysis Research (NIOK)) DST-NRF 卓越催化研究中心 (DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Catalysis (C*Change)) 等机构联合组织的“Energy and Materials from the Sun”暑期培训班，将于 6 月 20-23 日在荷兰 Rolduc Abbey 举行。 Early Bird 注册 4 月 15 日截止。 欢迎同行参加。 网站链接： http://www.europeansummerschool.eu/ 2011 年 4 月 7 日于天南大联合楼。
全脑缺血可出现于心脏停止这样的紧急情况，氢气通过抗氧化作用对脑局部缺血有治疗效果，去年有欧洲学者报道呼吸停止引起的脑损伤与此有关，主要是氧气不足的问题，全脑缺血不仅是缺氧而且是缺血。全脑缺血的模型比较常用的是四动脉模型，具体就是预先把锥动脉阻断，次日进行颈总动脉阻断在恢复血流，也就是说并非是完全持续阻断，这类似与心脏停止跳动后的复苏情况。 来自南京军区总医院麻醉科的研究表明，氢气生理盐水能治疗这类疾病，也就是说氢气对那些因自缢、心脏停止的复苏患者有治疗价值。研究观察了神经组织染色、细胞凋亡染色、炎症因子和氧化损伤等指标，确认这种效果，特别重要的是，即使在缺血再灌注后 6 小时给氢气，这种效果仍存在。这一点非常重要，因为说明即使延迟治疗仍有可能有效果。 本文将发表在外科研究杂志。 Journal of Surgical Research , In Press, Uncorrected Proof , Available online 2 March 2011 The Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Saline on the Brain of Rats with Transient Ischemia.pdf Qing Ji, Kangli Hui, Lidong Zhang, Xuejun Sun, Weiyan Li, Manlin Duan Background Due to its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, hydrogen gas (H2) has protective effects on a variety of organs from damage induced by ischemia/reperfusion (I/R). In this study, we tested the protective effect of hydrogen-rich saline on the brain in a global cerebral I/R model. Materials and Methods We used a four-vessel occlusion model of global cerebral ischemia (15 min) and reperfusion, with rats. The rats were divided into four groups (n = 96: sham, I/R plus physiologic saline injected intraperitoneally, I/R plus hydrogen-rich saline injected intraperitoneally at the beginning of reperfusion, and I/R plus hydrogen-rich saline injected intraperitoneally 6 h after reperfusion began. One group of rats was sacrificed after 24 h of reperfusion. Malondialdehyde (MDA) was measured to quantify the oxidative stress. Capspase-3 was measured to indicate the status of apoptosis. Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) were measured to monitor the inflammation. Another group of rats was sacrificed after 72 h of reperfusion to measure the histologic damages in hippocampus by hematoxylin and eosin staining and Nissl staining. Results Compared with rats with I/R only, hydrogen-rich saline treatment significantly improved the amount of surviving cells. NF-κB, TNF-α, IL-6, MDA, and caspase-3 were all increased significantly by I/R injury. Hydrogen-rich saline reduced all these markers. Conclusions Our data demonstrate that intraperitoneal injection of hydrogen-rich saline has strong protective effect on the transient global cerebral ischemia-reperfusion rats.
重发通知：欧洲科学计量学夏季学院招生， 2 月 27 日报名截止！ 武夷山 欧洲科学计量学夏季学院 2010 年首次在柏林举办，大受欢迎，说明全世界对科学计量学方法和模型感兴趣者越来越多。今年的第二届夏季学院将于 9 月在维也纳举行。 这个夏季学院是收费项目。该项目的组织者对中国比较友好，他们听从了本所战略研究中心周萍研究员的建议，愿意为中国学员保留两个名额。否则，注册开始后，估计名额很快就会报满。 我国任何单位若愿意派人去学习，请于 2 月 27 日之前与周萍研究员联系 zhoup@istic.ac.cn 。 欧洲科学计量学夏季学院的网址是 http://www.scientometrics-school.eu/ 。 下面是初步的课程（或报告）安排，有很多科学计量学牛人会授课或发言。 preliminary programme Two conference-like introductory days addressing a broader audience are followed by three days with seminars, individual hands-on sessions and teamwork in small groups. Preliminary Programme Overview September 11th Pre-Programme: „Bibliometrics in a Nutshell“ Crash Course for Newbies Conference September 12th Conference day 1: Introduction to Scientometrics: Theoretical and Practical Aspects September 13th Conference day 2 Procedures and Indicators Seminars September 14th Seminars day 1 - Journal Impact Measures - h-index and Related Measures September 15th Seminars day 2 - Cooperation, Co-authorship, Social Networks - Mapping Science September 16th Seminars day 3 Workshop: Research Evaluation in Practice Preliminary Programme Conference September 12th 2011: Introduction to Scientometrics: Theoretical and Practical Aspects 09.00-09.10 Welcome and Opening Remarks Juan Gorraiz, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria 09.10-10.00 History and Institutionalization of Scientometrics Wolfgang Glnzel （牛人，普赖斯奖得主） , Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Stefan Hornbostel, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany 10.00-10.45 New developments in bibliometric methods for evaluation and mapping of scientific research Anthony van Raan （牛人） , CWTS - Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands 10.45-11.00 Coffee break 11.00-11.45 Special Topic: Bibliometrics in the History and Philosophy of Science Werner Marx, Central Information Service, Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research, Stuttgart, Germany 11.45-12.30 What Does Bibliometrics Need? Coverage Requirements Henk Moed （牛人） , Senior Scientific Advisor, Elsevier 12.30-13.30 Lunch break 13.30-14.15 Practical Aspects of Scientometrics Koenraad Debackere, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium 14.15-15.00 Bibliometrics, Research Evaluation and National Science Policy: What Works and What Goes Wrong? Jonathan Adams （代表着牛机构的准牛人） , Director of Research Evaluation, Thomson Reuters 15.00-15.15 Coffee break 15.15-16.25 Introduction to Scopus Elsevier Product Presentation Presenter tbd September 13th 2011: Procedures and indicators 09.00-10.30 Metrics for Research Evaluation: Indicators, Methods and Mathematical Foundations Wolfgang Glnzel, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Sybille Hinze, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany 10.30-10.45 Coffee break 10.45-11.30 Network Analyses Edgar Schiebel 11.30-12.15 Mapping Science Bart Thijs 12.15-13.15 Lunch break 13.15-14.00 Advanced Methods for Data Disambiguation Matthias Winterhager 14.00-14.45 Introduction to Bibliometric Data Sources Wolfgang Glnzel, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria 14.45-15.00 Coffee break 15.00-16.30 Introduction to WoS Thomson Reuters Product Presentation Presenter tbd Preliminary Programme Seminars September 11th 2011: Pre-Programme 14:00-16:00 „Bibliometrics in a Nutshell“ - Crash Course for Newbies Wolfgang Glnzel, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Christian Gumpenberger, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Stefan Hornbostel, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany / Sybille Hinze, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany September 14th 2011: Introduction of Bibliometric Indicators 09.00-10.30 Journal Impact Measures Wolfgang Glnzel, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria 10.30-10.45C offee break 10.45-12.15h -index and related measures Stefan Hornbostel, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany / Sybille Hinze, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany 12.15-14.00 Lunch break 14.00-16.00 Hands-on Session September 15th 2011: Focus Topics 09.00-12.00 Paralell Sessions 1: Cooperation, Co-authorship, Social Networks András Schubert （牛人） , Institute for Research Organisation, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungary (to be confirmed) 12.00-13.00 Lunch break 13.00-16.00 Paralell Sessions 2: Mapping Science (on the basis of Bibexcel Software) Olle Persson （牛人） , Sociology Department, Ume universitet, Sweden September 16th 2011: Workshop 09.00-12.00 Research Evaluation in Practice 1 Wolfgang Glnzel, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Stefan Hornbostel, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany / Sybille Hinze, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany 12.00-13.00 Lunch break 13.00-16.00 Research Evaluation in Practice 2 Wolfgang Glnzel, Centre for RD Monitoring (ECOOM), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium / Juan Gorraiz, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Austria / Stefan Hornbostel, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany / Sybille Hinze, iFQ - Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualittssicherung, Germany 以下是注册费信息： esss Conference only 12.09. 13.09. 2011 (2 days) EUR 125,00 (incl. Coffee- and Lunch breaks) esss European Summer School for Scientometrics 12.09. - 16.09. 2011 (5 days) EUR 500,00 (incl. Conference, Seminars, Hands-on sessions, Coffee- and Lunch breaks, Training Materials) esss reduced fee for students 12.09. - 16.09. 2011(5 days) EUR 300,00 (incl. Conference, Seminars, Hands-on sessions, Coffee- and Lunch breaks, Training Materials) upload of student ID or similar document for verification mandatory during registration process!
Fermat's Room ---2008年 葡萄牙 奇幻电影节(Fantasporto)国际幻想电影奖最佳影片、 欧洲 最佳影片银奖。2008年 西班牙 奇幻电影奖(Málaga International Week of Fantastic Cinema)观众奖、青年评审奖。 据说这是非常优雅的用数学方法杀人的影片。 四位互不认识的数学家收到一位神秘主人的邀请去参加一个聚会——为解决一道最了不起的谜题。然而结果他们发现自己所来到的这个房间会逐渐被压缩，除非他们能在限定的时间内解决每道题目并找到他们四人之间的联系... 而要谋杀他们的又是谁呢? 在线视频： http://ikan.pptv.com/p/10114855/#1 请看Wiki上对此影片的一段介绍: Fermat's Room Fermat's Room ( Spanish : La habitación de Fermat ) is a 2007 Spanish thriller film directed by Luis Piedrahita and Rodrigo Sopea . Three mathematicians and one inventor are invited to a house under the premise of solving a great enigma, and told to use pseudonyms based on famous historical mathematicians. At the house, they are trapped in a room. They must solve puzzles given by the host, who calls himself "Fermat," in order to escape the slowly closing walls of the room. The film opens with a small set of background pieces on the characters. One, a young mathematician, is shown discussing sums of prime numbers with some women, and it is revealed that he is scheduled to present a proof of Goldbach's conjecture . A friend approaches him letting him know that his office was broken into and his work destroyed, delaying any possibility of presenting it publicly. Another, an older mathematician, is shown playing chess with a friend who urges him to quit mathematics, citing many of the brilliant mathematicians eventually go insane. Lastly, a middle aged man is shown to receive a letter from an anonymous source using the name Fermat . The letter states that Fermat is organizing a meeting of brilliant intellectuals, and to attend, the recipient of the letter must solve a certain "enigma," which is to determine how the following numbers are ordered: 5, 4, 2, 9, 8, 6, 7, 3, 1. The man is shown to struggle until the deadline, when an offhand comment from a coworker leads him to realize that the sequence of numbers are in alphabetical order (in Spanish: cinco, cuatro, dos, nueve, ocho, seis, siete, tres, uno). Upon completion of the puzzle, a second letter is received with instructions to show up at a given time and place, alone, without a cell phone, to work on the greatest enigma. All the recipients receive pseudonyms. The young mathematician is Galois , the older mathematician is Hilbert , and the middle aged man is Pascal . We are then introduced to a fourth character, known as Oliva. Hilbert's car breaks down on the way to the meeting, and Galois stops to give him a ride to the meeting when he realizes Hilbert is going to the same place he is. Hilbert admits that he is familiar with Galois since he saw him in a mathematics magazine as a brilliant mind who had proved Goldbach's conjecture. When they are all at the meeting place, at a river, a car on the other side flashes its lights, and they use a row boat named Pythagoras to reach it. Inside is a PDA with GPS directions that they follow to an abandoned warehouse in the middle of nowhere. Upon entering and searching, they find a room resembling what Hilbert describes as a room that intellectuals would meet in. After a short waiting period, a man enters and introduces himself as Fermat. They begin to talk and discuss things, but eventually Fermat receives a phone call about his daughter, whom he claims is in a coma at a nearby hospital. Fermat leaves, but forgets his coat. Pascal chases after him, but Fermat has already driven off. Fermat's wallet drops out of a pocket in the confusion. Pascal picks up the open wallet, and notices a picture of a girl. He returns to the room. Upon Pascal's return, the PDA emits a sound and displays the following enigma, along with a deadline of one minute for its solution: A candy merchant receives 3 opaque boxes. One box contains mint candies, another contains anise candies, and the last box contains a mixture of mint and anise . The boxes are labeled Mint, Anise, and Mixed. All of the boxes are labeled incorrectly. What is the minimum number of candies the merchant will have to sample to correctly label each box? Hilbert, Oliva, and Galois work on the problem, exceeding the one-minute deadline but eventually solving it. Meanwhile, Pascal notices that the room had begun to shrink when the deadline was reached. He notices an inventory sales order on a piano for 4 industrial strength presses. The group then realizes that the presses are set to compress the room when time on the enigmas is exceeded. As the occupants of the room continue to work on more and more enigmas, details about their pasts begin to emerge. Pascal accidentally hit the girl in the photo he found with a car. Pascal believes that Fermat wants to kill him for this transgression, and that the others are collateral damage. Meanwhile, Fermat is shown at a gas station, and then at a hospital. He is shown upset when it turns out that the hospital didn't call him. The nurses suggest that he go home, but he realizes he left his keys in his jacket, and must return to the warehouse. More details emerge about the characters' pasts. Oliva and Galois used to date, but broke up when Galois began to suspect she was having an affair. Oliva admits that she met a man online while playing chess, and she eventually met him and would go on boat trips out to international waters, to do things illegal in their country. She then reveals to the group that this man is Hilbert. The group then tries to use the furniture in the room to stop the moving walls, but the furniture shatters. At this point, Pascal makes the suggestion that the person who set all of this up could not have been Fermat, since he acted strangely, and they all assumed he was the host. They also realize that he could not have faked a phone call to himself. Pascal theorizes that since all this was a revenge plot, the person wanting revenge would want to see it happen. As there were no visible cameras or viewpoints, he suggests that the person trying to kill them is in the room. First, suspicion is thrown upon Galois for his anger at Oliva and Hilbert, but then Pascal realizes it couldn't have been him since Hilbert was the only one not with the group when Fermat received his phone call. Hilbert admits that he is the one responsible for their current predicament, and that he did it because he spent his entire career working on Goldbach's conjecture, and Galois solved it at such a young age. Galois admits that he faked the proof to impress Oliva, and that when the pressure and spotlight became too great, he sabotaged his own work. Hilbert states he'd been driven even harder by Galois, and that he'd actually solved the conjecture, and hands a folder with his work to Galois. Galois comments that the mathematics contained within is "brilliant". They try to call Fermat from Hilbert's cell phone, but Hilbert placed a chemical to kill Fermat, who dies en route back to gathering. Hilbert says they should continue working on his enigmas, but Galois becomes angry, and attacks him, knocking Hilbert unconscious. Pascal then realizes that all of the pseudonym characters died at the ages of the people they are named after, except for Hilbert. A furious search for Hilbert's escape route begins, and they find it behind the chalkboard. Pascal, Oliva, and Galois escape with the folder containing Hilbert's solution to Goldbach's conjecture, leaving behind an unconscious Hilbert. They make their way back to their cars. While crossing the river, Galois comments that he doesn't want to release Hilbert's solution under Hilbert's name, because then he would have won, but releasing it under his own name would be unethical but solve his problems. Pascal throws the solution into the river, remarking that the world is still the same without the proof.
高等量子力学课程的主讲教师贺鹏斌博士游学欧洲未归 ， 受其之托，本学期我又讲授了一遍高量。不知道哪个环节出了问题，湖南大学物理学科研究生高量课程只有 32 个课时。如何利用这点课时努力教学生一些东西，颇费心思。 一，可用一个方程概括 Sakurai 《 Modern Quantum Mechanics 》之妙 我书柜中有几种量子力学著作，挑哪一部作为这次高量教材呢 ? 网上调研一下，不难发现美欧大学物理系研究生高量课程教师中，推荐使用 Sakurai 《 Modern Quantum Mechanics 》的比例，超过 80% 。我手上正好有这本书的样书，系中科院研究生院高量课程教师丁亦兵教授赠送所得。丁老师是此书在国内影印出版的推荐人，估计给很多人赠送、推荐过这本书。我获赠此书后即建议鹏斌老师作为授课使用。但我一直心有不安的是，几年来都没有能通读这部著作。何不利用这个机会讲授一遍，深读一次 ? 到现在为止，我用这本教材上了七次课，每次四课时，尽管只讲完了前四章 ( 全书共七章 )， 居然觉得此书甚妙，恍惚间 fan 了 Sakurai 一把。 该书从理想化的Stern-Gerlach实验开篇，并不出奇；但是随着阅读和备课的深入，相见恨晚之感居然愈发强烈起来。 这本书的妙处在于抓住了量子力学的灵魂，而且把这个灵魂描叙得灵动飘逸。 作为现代物理的量子力学和经典力学存在本质上的不同。在状态描述方面，概率幅是量子力学的灵魂；而概率幅的变化不过是平移、转动、演化等算符作用或者规范变换后的结果。而这些算符的构成法则只有一个——对称性。而关于对称性在现代物理学中地位， 杨振宁先生有一句名言如下： 对称性支配相互作用 (Symmetry dictates interaction) 。 用 Dyson 的话说 ， This idea is Yang's greatest contribution to physics 。Sakurai这部著作，把杨先生这句话写实了、写活了! 焉能能说 不妙 ? 如果用一个方程表达 Sakurai 《 Modern Quantum Mechanics 》的妙处，不二之选只能是： 其中 S 为平移、演化、转动、宇称、格点平移、时间反演等对称算符和规范变换因子。 注意 S 幺正而非厄密，所以它不是位置或者角动量之类的算符 。 二，欣赏源于思想上的共振 在高量课程中，过分沿用 Dirac 的正则量子化做法有待商榷。在这一点上，我和 Sakurai 的思想暗合。 Sakurai 有一处评述我特别喜欢 “ We have deliberately avoided exploiting Dirac's analogy in obtaining the canonical commutation relations. Our approach to the commutation relations is based solely on (1) the properties of translations and (2) the identification of the generator of translation with the momentum operator … ” (p.51) 。不能说 Sakurai 比 Dirac 更高明 ! 量子力学一直在蓬蓬勃勃发展之中，用演进后的量子力学来讲授量子力学 还是按历史发展来讲授量子力学 ? 二者各有优劣，不过 我倾向于前者。 欣赏作者至始至终只用了态变化而非空间 ( 逆向 ) 变化的观点，即所谓“主动的”观点而非“被动的”观点。但是对个别极易混淆之处，也会要言不繁清楚点出。例如对 Heisenberg picture 中空间的基是否随时间演化，他写道：“ A common misconception is that as time goes on, all kets move in the Schrodinger picture and are stationary in the Heisenberg picture. This is not the case, … ” (p.87) ；而在讨论时间反演时，仅仅讨论态的变化是不够的， Sakurai 也是特别指出，具体表象 ( 空间的基 ) 的变化必须当心 (p.271-280) 在内容选取方面，教科书中有两个常见的毛病。之一是作者对所选内容并无深刻研究，内容凌乱不堪；其二就是对作者研究领域范围内的内容取材过多，或是不惜大篇幅讨论一些体会较深却意义不大的问题。在 Sakurai 的书中，看不到这两方面的缺陷 。 三 ， 瑕不掩瑜 Dirac的 经典巨著《The Principles of Quantum Mechanics 》一个极难超越之处在于 ，他 对量子力学的发展的指导和预言 ， 没有一条错误或者过时。 Sakurai 1982 年突然去世后，手稿经过了段三复先生的不断编辑和修订。而在我用的是 2005 年重印的修订版中，还是 有些明显过时的话 。例如，里面有这么一句话“ The quantum-theoretical treatment of a bouncing ball may appear to have little to do with the real world. ” (p.109) ， 有点过了。 2002 年有一个很出名的地球场中慢中子“皮球”实验，就是宏观世界中关于量子基态的直接观测。 还有一个明显的不足 。上世纪九十年代的理论和实验发现，波包演化最关键的非经典性质是所谓的 ( 超 ) 回复 ((super) revivral) 现象。《 Modern Quantum Mechanics 》凡是涉及到波包演化的讨论 (p.79 ， p.87 等处 ) ，总觉得言犹未尽 。 有些处理稍显粗糙 。例如，对时间能量不确定关系的处理、对 Ehrenfest 定理的解释等方面，似乎有所不足。补充材料之一 (Supplement I) 关于几何相的讨论印刷错误较多，序言中声称“ ...the revised edition has been "finely toothcombed" for misprint errors.... ”，看来并不尽然。 有些说法有些可疑 。例如，p.275上，关于时间反演算符作用到球谐函数|l,m上等于|l,-m乘上一个系数，数学是没有问题的。但是关于该结果的解释认为定态有经典图像，有些“初等量子力学”，本质上不甚妥当。 少量处理未知深意 。例如，中子相干实验的内容居然出现了两次。习题2.37(p.150)和正文p.162，连图都是一样的。 尽管如此，这部著作依然不失为最优秀的高量教材 ! 值得大力推荐。 四：最后一次高量课决定不用 Sakurai 量子力学并非如教材表述的那样完美无缺，需要不断发展和演进。一个人要利用量子力学解决一点实际的、物理的问题，殚思竭虑苦其心志未必能得其门径，劳其筋骨饿其体肤可能依然一无所获。 Sakurai 的 《 Modern Quantum Mechanics 》可谓“ 顺溜 ” 。 “ 顺溜 ” 的学名叫 “ 行云流水 ”， 这是一本书作为一本教材应该具有的最基本品质。那么，我 最后一次的高量课程讲什么 ? 我的着眼点却在于破除学生头脑中慢慢形成的量子力学的“顺溜”观 !! 决定不再用这本书。 最后一次课四课时，我准备请南京大学物理系王凡先生和我一起各讲两课时。我准备的题目是《量子力学应用于石墨烯的一个基本困难》；而王凡先生讲授的主题是(四维)规范势的分解及其量子力学问题，近两年来他已经就这个问题发表了两篇 PRL! 这两个量子力学研究课题，都有很多问题等待进一步深入研究。聪明的学生，一定会从高量的教学到研究课题的提炼和深入进行过程中，激发出一点点参与量子力学本身发展的欲望。 在下一篇博文中，我将简单介绍为什么说量子力学应用于石墨烯时具有一个基本困难。 五：物理学教师的快意人生 研读一本书，觉芷芬兰芳进而宠辱偕忘，不亦快哉 ? 附件： 2010级研究生高等量子力学考题 附答案.pdf
Five renowned European institutesoffer you a unique Erasmus Mundus joint European Master of Science (MSc) Course in Geo-information Science and Earth Observation for Environmental Modelling and Management (GEM). The course has a duration of 22 months and will be taught by world class faculty in five countries: Iceland, UK, Sweden, Poland and The Netherlands. While studying in at least two of the five universities, as well as studying in a multi-cultural environment, students will gain valuable insight into the academic, social and cultural diversity of northern and central Europe. Graduates gain a multiple MSc degree from the consortium universities. The course will start with a foundation year. Depending on their background and preference, students will start their studies either in The Netherlands (Twente University, Faculty ITC) or in Sweden (Lund University). After the foundation year, students continue with their MSc research, including fieldwork, on a topic of their choice at one of the other 4 universities. This top-quality MSc course is supported by the prestigious EU Erasmus Mundus programme and is open to full-fee paying students from the EU and the rest of the world. DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION For the course starting September 2011 we are inviting applications from motivated, high quality graduates from all over the world. Deadline for application: 30 December 2010 Apply now online: http://www.gem-msc.org/application/Registration/ MORE INFORMATION More information can be obtained from www.gem-msc.org or send an email to info@gem-msc.org
一切罪恶都有其直接原因和间接原因，以及根源。事实上，哲学上最落后最简单的部分，无过于关于因果关系的认识。哲学家对因果关系的论述是极为贫乏的，相反法学的论述非常好。它把因果关系区分为：直接的、间接的，原因、因素、条件以及根源，主观的和客观的，个人的和社会的，必然的、偶然的，等等。形式逻辑也有一些因果论，例如关于必要条件与充分条件的论述。哲学上任何一个课题，对他的反思和发展是没有止境的。不要以为因果论是古老的，就以为他已经完备了，恰恰相反。 讲到罪恶，个人自然不能逃避责任，但是社会根源也是不可抹杀，以及历史原因，以及社会的自然规律属性，即人类社会的纯粹的必然性。 欧洲在反思纳粹的时候，做得比较好。恐怕就在于他不仅没有停留在阶级分析上，没有停留在追究少数人的责任上，而是深入到多数人的灵魂，深入到所有苟活者的灵魂。也就是没有停留在批判罪人，而是进而批判所有所谓的义人。 恶在于义人，而不是在于恶人。 Hitler Exhibit Explores a Wider Circle of Guilt 希特勒时代的展览，从中可以探讨更大范围的罪恶。 BERLIN As artifacts工艺品 go, they are mere纯粹 trinkets装饰 an old purse钱包, playing cards扑克牌, a lantern灯笼. Even the display that caused the crowds人群 to stop驻足 and stare瞪 is a simple embroidered绣 tapestry幕布, stitched缝 by village women. （本段讲普通展览的情况，下面讲一个特别的展览） But the exhibits展览 that opened Friday at the German Historical Museum are intentionally prosaic无聊: they emphasize the everyday way日常生活方式 that ordinary Germans once accepted, and often celebrated歌颂, Hitler . The household家常 items物品 had Nazi logos标志 and colors. The tapestry, a tribute贡品 to the union of church, state and party, was woven编织 by a church congregation集会 at the behest命令 of their priest. This is what we call self-mobilization of society, said Hans-Ulrich Thamer, one of three curators管理人 to assemble收集 the exhibit at the German Historical Museum. As a person, Hitler was a very ordinary man. He was nothing without the people. 下面一句是讲这次展览的主题：希特勒和德国人：民族和犯罪 This show, Hitler and the Germans: Nation民族 and Crime, opened Friday. It was billed as the first in Germany since the end of World War II to focus exclusively专门，特别地 on Adolf Hitler. Germany outlaws禁止 public公开的 displays of some Nazi symbols符号, and the curators took care to avoid showing items that appeared to glorify宣扬，美化 Hitler. His uniforms制服, for example, remained in storage. 进一步说明这次展览的主题：批判整个社会。 Instead, the show focuses on the society that nurtured培育 and empowered培植 him . It is not the first time historians have argued that Hitler did not corral攫取 the Germans as much as the Germans elevated推举 Hitler. 不是希特勒攫取了德国人，而是德国人推出了希特勒。 下面说展览的现实意义。 But one curator said the message was arguably无疑 more vital for Germany now than at any time in the past six decades, as rising nationalism民族主义, more open hostility敌视 to immigrants移民 and a generational disconnect断层 from the events of the Nazi era have older Germans concerned about repeating the past. 让年老的德国人担心历史重演。 The only hope for stopping extremists is to isolate them from society so that they are separated, so they do not have a relationship with the bourgeoisie资产阶级 and the other classes, Mr. Thamer said. The Nazis were members of high society. This was the dangerous moment. This we have to avoid from happening. Increasingly, Germans have put the guilt of the past behind them, reasserting重建 their pride in national identity in many positive ways. But there also have been troubling signs seeping流露 from the margins into the mainstream. A best-selling book by a former banker promoted宣传 genetic theories种族理论 of intelligence and said that Muslims were dumbing down society. A leading politician condemned谴责 alien外来 cultures. A new right-wing party recently attracted hundreds to a speech by the far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders . Even government officials say that immigrant children are picking on native Germans. The media is filled daily with reports of conflict between immigrants, especially Muslims, and Germans. The planners began discussing this kind of show 10 years ago, Mr. Thamer said. An expert committee viewed it as part of a continuum整体 of penance赎罪 and awareness反省 that historians say began with the Auschwitz奥斯威辛 trials. The process did not always go smoothly. A 1995 exhibition in Hamburg was widely condemned for showing that the Wehrmacht纳粹的国防军, or regular army, committed atrocities惨剧 on the eastern front, just like the SS, the Nazi special police. The public was not ready to widen the sense of responsibility for Nazi-era wrongs . But for this show, museum officials thought the time would be right. And in the end, they said, the timing added special value. It would be presumptuous武断 to say that an exhibition could counter消除 the radiance扩散 of populism民粹主义, said Rudolf Trabold, spokesman for the museum. We try to achieve what we can afford, and to achieve our mission履行使命. But if that outshines盖过 the populist power of a Geert Wilders, I myself would not presume to say. As he walked through the exhibit on Friday, Eric Pignolet, a Belgian who has lived in Berlin for 22 years, said he was pleased that Germans were no longer saying, I didnt know.对历史的无知 But he said he was troubled担忧 by parallels比较 between then and now过去和现在. I think if you had someone like him today, it could be very dangerous, he said halfway through his walk through the displays about Hitler. There are a lot of people out there who want jobs, who are not happy with the political leadership, who would vote for someone like him if he came along. The line had already formed when the museum doors opened at 10 a.m. An estimated 3,000 visitors paid the $8.40 admission fee to see the nearly 1,000 items, including photographs, videos, uniforms and a narrative that explained the early appeal of a man and a party that offered jobs, pride美丽的许诺 and a sense of purpose, while employing使用 wholesale大规模 violence and brutality to those who did not go along. 以下是最严厉的，最直接的对德国人全体的批判。但是为什么不对全人类批判呢？ This exhibition is about Hitler and the Germans meaning the social and political and individual processes进程 by which much of the German people became enablers教唆犯, colluders共谋, co-criminals共犯 in the Holocaust大屠杀, said Constanze Stelzenmller, a senior trans-Atlantic fellow with the German Marshall Fund of the United States in Berlin. That this was so is now a mainstream view , rejected only by a small minority of very elderly and deluded蒙蔽 people, or the German extreme right-wing fringe. But it took us a while to get there. The museum placed the display downstairs地下室, below street level, so it was dark and silent. Three images of Hitler projected投影 on a mesh多孔的 screen opened the show; behind them were pictures of cheering crowds欢呼的人群, marching soldiers and other demonstrations of popular support. Around the corner were details of how Hitler was embraced early on, by the elite精英 in Munich. The wives of entrepreneurs, such as Elsa Bruckhmann, vied争夺 to be the first to drag Hitler to a social event社交, one display said. Our teachers in the past, were integrated正派 in that system, and I can remember they wanted to tell us that the German people became the first victim of Hitler, that they were practically mugged绑架, said Klaus Peter Triebel from Seefeld, near Munich. The exhibit explains the early appeal主张 of the Nazis, who demonstrated a keen热情 appreciation赞扬 for the politics of populism民粹主义s creating a sense of unity and purpose意志: Attending popular sports events, film premiers, they dedicated autobahns高速公路 and new industrial builds工厂, read a display一个展示这样说. There were also the familiar striped uniforms囚服 forced on prisoners in the concentration camps集中营, and the cold calculation in maps that showed the division of Poland between Germany and Russia. But over and over, the point was spelled out表达 clearly in the exhibits plaques匾额 like one, near letters written by children who were sent off to concentration camps, that said: Hitler was able to implement his military and extermination灭绝 objectives目标 because the military and economic elites精英 were willing to carry out his war. The exhibit, with all its photographs of young and old adoring Hitler, also sought to dispel驳斥 the notion that the Nazi spirit was simply impossible to resist. It held up Johann Georg Elser as proof that it was possible for an individual to develop into a resistance fighter抵抗战士. Mr. Elser was a carpenter who tried to kill Hitler at the outset of the war and was hanged绞刑 for his actions . His story, however, left some viewers to wonder why their parents and grandparents had not rejected Hitler. Why everyone went mad. My father was a Hitler Youth, said Gutfreund Keller, as she walked through the exhibit with her husband and two daughters. Its hard to understand. Stefan Pauly contributed reporting. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/world/europe/16hitler.html?pagewanted=2_r=1ref=global-home
Wageningen University The Netherlands 09.10.11 晚 今天，学校组织我们食品专业的学生去德国科隆参加了两年一届世界食品博览会，整个食品博览会分为精细食品、肉产品、冷冻食品、谷物食品、奶制品、软饮料、酒类等十几个大类，号称是食品行业的最高盛会。顺便还参观了著名的科隆大教堂，博览会上有各国企业参展，自己也品尝了很多厂家的产品，中国尤其是山东的企业也不少，但主要是做速冻产品或低级农产品加工的，在德国展区，我们看到了先进的真空包装机械和连续灌装机械，其自动化和机械化之高，不由得使人们感叹德国工业的高度发达，也显示了我国的食品工业门类较为单一，技术含量不高，精深加工程度过低的现实，但是我们也可喜的看到，我国的企业敢于走出去，敢于积极的开拓欧洲尤其是西欧市场的勇气和决心，中国的食品工业加油！ 下午，我们参观了举世闻名的科隆大教堂，它是世界三大教堂之一，据说已经有600余年的历史。我们一边惊讶于教堂的辉煌和大气，一边感叹德国文化的博大和德国政府对于传统的保护力度。我静静的坐在教堂里，面对着上帝，祝福我的父母，也祝福我在荷兰的学业能够顺利完成。参观教堂是免费的，很多大人带着小孩来祈祷、祝福显得十分的和谐和恬静。 虽然只在德国呆了短短的一天，但我们从荷兰一路上畅通无阻，没有任何的警察检查我们的护照，这让我真正感受到申根签证对于欧盟一体化是多么的重要，联想到国内，每过一个省就要检查，就要收费，欧盟的做法是具有很大的借鉴意义的。一眼望去，德国的高速公路上行驶的都是宝马、奔驰、奥迪，甚至连我们坐的公交车也是奔驰的。不由得让我感叹德国汽车工业的高度发达。德国的市容较好，但不如荷兰那么干净和清新，真的祝愿我们伟大的祖国能够快速赶上德国、荷兰这些高度发达的国家，我坚信这样的日子不长了。
Recommended Universities by Disciplines Discipline University Architecture University of Cambridge University of Nottingham University of Wales, Cardiff University of Sheffield University of Bath University of Edinburgh University of Dundee University of De Montfort University of Liverpool University of Newcastle Computer Science University of Cambridge University of York Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine University of Bristol University of Warwick University of Oxford University of St Andrews University of Edinburgh University of Southampton University of Surrey Communication and Media Studies Loughborough University University of Warwick University of East Anglia University of Sheffield Royal Holloway, London Goldsmiths' College University of Westminster University of Leeds University of Ulster West of England Business Studies University of Oxford London School of Economics Aston University University of Warwick University of Bath Imperial College Queens, Belfast University of Nottingham Lancaster University Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Loughborough University Economics University of Cambridge University of Warwick University College London London School of Economics University of Nottingham University of Bath University of Durham University of York University of St Andrews University of Southampton General Engineering University of Cambridge University of Southampton University of Oxford Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine University of Durham University of Strathclyde Brunel University University of Surrey Lancaster University University of Warwick Chemical Engineering University of Cambridge Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine University of Manchester Queen's University, Belfast Loughborough University University of Newcastle University of Birmingham University of Sheffield University College London University of Bath Civil Engineering University of Wales, Cardiff University of Wales, Swansea Queen's University, Belfast University of Nottingham University of Bristol University of Nottingham University of Bath Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine University of Manchester University of Liverpool University of Surrey Electrical and Electronic Engineering University of Southampton University of Bristol Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine University of Cambridge Queen's University, Belfast University of Sheffield University of Edinburgh University of Surrey University of York University of Birmingham Mechanical Engineering Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine University of Bath University of Bradford University of Bristol University of Southampton University of Nottingham University of Sheffield Loughborough University University of Liverpool Queen's University, Belfast University of Nottingham Law University of Cambridge University of Oxford London School of Economics University of Durham University of Nottingham University of Manchester University College London University of Edinburgh Medicine University of Oxford University of Cambridge University of Glasgow University of Liverpool University of Newcastle University of Aberdeen University of Manchester University of Edinburgh University of Southampton St George's Hospital Medical School Molecular Biosciences University of Cambridge University of Oxford University of Durham University of Nottingham University College London University of Edinburgh London School of Economics Queen's University, Belfast University of Nottingham University of Glasgow University of Strathclyde
欧洲生命科学合作组织（ ELSO ）的重头戏是一年一度的欧洲生命科学 年度 会议，是欧洲分子生物学、细胞生物学科研前沿的展示与交流。其会议组织与规模都与美国细胞生物学学会（ American Society for Cell Biology ）的 年 会相似，试图为欧洲分子生物学、细胞生物学的研究者提供一个交流平台。今年的会议在 地中海沿岸的海滨城市尼斯 (Nice) 举行，从飞机上望下去，阳光下的地中海一片湛蓝，朵朵白帆点缀其间。海岸则是山峦起伏，色彩鲜艳的小屋在茂盛的热带植物中时隐时现，海鸥起处，浪花点点。 一些精彩的讲座 整个 会议共有近两百场讲座，一个下午同时有七个平行会议。 Science, Nature 和 Cell 是这场会议的赞助商，都在发送纪念品或积极地吸纳新的会员，努力在新一代的作者群中建立自己的声望。会议的重头戏是大约 400 个 poster ，平均一天有近 150 个 poster 。在熙熙攘攘的大厅里穿行，人头攒动，讨论声声，真有科研赶集的味道。但这也是会议当中最有可能取得收获的时机，碰到自己感兴趣的问题，可以和本人面对面的交流与讨论，真正让人受益匪浅。这次会议 的官方网站（ http://www.elso.org ）对整个会议的内容有一个介绍，我在这里谈谈影响深刻的讲座。 系统生物学已经无可辩驳的影响到了整个生命科学的发展，会议的第一场特邀报告就是由哈佛大学的 Pamela Silver 做的 Design Biological system ，主要介绍了哈佛大学新近成立的 Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering （ http://hibie.harvard.edu/ ）的科研方向。随着近五十年细胞生物学与分子生物学的飞速发展，人类已经就基因与遗传、细胞的结构与各种生理机制，发现了大量的事实。正如十八世纪天文学大量观测数据的积累导致了物理学的大发展一样，目前生物学的大量事实与观测数据的积累，也必然促进系统生物学的发展，即通过建立系统模型来推动对生命现象的深刻认识，揭示生命功能的构成规则。通过生物学与物理学、微观工程技术和计算模型相接合，创造出新的材料、微型生物机器和揭示出新的控制理论。 系统生物学的发展直接改变了人们对疾病的认识。细胞生物学与分子生物学的研究成果不再束之高阁，分子生物学家需要和临床医生交流，以基因、细胞生化机制为基础，以系统生物学为方法，对疾病建立分子和细胞生物学的系统模型，为疾病的诊断和治疗提供新的思路。基于分子生物学的 Disease Models Mechanisms ，正在成为一个热门话题。 当人们研究的对象不再是单一的生化路径，而是一个综合系统时，很自然的，生命科学的另一个发展方向是对同一生命现象的多领域综合研究。比如今年赢得 Louis-Jeantet 年度大奖的法国巴斯德研究所的 Pascale Cossart 研究感染性细菌进入人体细胞的生化过程，其结合了 biochemisty, cell biology, molecular biology, gene analysis and Immunology 等各领域，其研究的细致与全面，令人赞叹。最近读到有文章感叹，国际知名的《细胞》杂志上，中国 1981 － 2004 年空白，近年仍不到 1% 。听了 Pascale Cossart 的研究，不仅对其中原因有所感悟：她坦诚相告，就这一项研究，她已经作了近二十年。 第二天剑桥的 Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz 关于多细胞发育的实验也非常精彩。通常的认识以为受精卵细胞的极性（ Polarity ）就决定了将来细胞分裂的位置，然后其位置决定了其基因表达模式 (gene expression pattern) ，人的四肢五官也就逐渐发育成型。她精心设计的实验表明，细胞分裂的方向也会决定细胞的命运，并且令人吃惊的发现是，不但是细胞的位置决定其基因表达模式，反过来改变基因表达模式也会改变细胞的位置。通常是出于外围纵向分裂的干细胞，通过改变某种基因蛋白的浓度，会被挤入内部变为横向分裂。 Magdalena 讲得很生动，可能是兴高采烈之时有些用力过猛，她的苹果电脑从一米多高的讲台上摔下来，居然安然无恙。（真应该把这段录像拍下来，应该是绝佳的苹果电脑的广告）。 她 关于干细胞与胚胎发育的图片做得非常漂亮. Fig. 1 3D reconstruction of the mouse blasotcyst showing how the first set of pluripotent cells that will give rise to the future body (yellow) is cradled by the outside cells of the embryo (blue). (Image from Emlyn Parfitt and Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz). Fig. 2 Over-expression of Carm1 in a single 2-cell stage blastomere directs cells to the pluripotency at the blastocyst stage. Daughters of cells in which Carm1 was overexpressed are in red. (Image from Maria-Elena Torres-Padilla and Emlyn Parfitt). 第三天哈佛大学的 Donald Ingber 关于细胞的力学结构模型和基因控制的动力系统模型也很精彩。他的发现改变了人们对细胞的认识：通常人们认为细胞只不过是装满水的气球而已，但是由于细胞骨架 cytoskeleton 的存在，细胞更像由若干绷紧绳索拉起来的 帐篷。通过改变细胞环境的压强，我们可以人为的使细胞进入分裂、生长和自我调亡。 Donald Ingber 也是 Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering 的一员。 Fig. 3 细胞更像由若干绷紧绳索拉起来的 帐篷 这场会议的内容很多，目前正在消化与整理，以后会就有特色的内容写一些专题。 关于 鼓励青年研究者 没想到在这样一场高水平的国际会议当中，会对青年研究者给于如此高度的关注。除了学术交流之外，会议专门有 session 来指导青年研究者如何选择职业道路，如何申请泛欧洲科研基金、如何建立和管理自己的实验室，如何与公共媒体打交道等。 Cell 杂志的前任执行主编，还以自己的现身经历来如何说明选择最适合自己的职业道路。并且由欧洲科研基金（ ERC ）负责人、西班牙国家癌症研究中心所长等政策制定者们，与刚出道的博士生、博士后进行对话 (Open floor debate) ，就青年研究者遇到的问题进行讨论。为什么青年研究者成长得快？其后面确实有很多政策支持，比如： 欧洲科研基金由专门的 Junior Research fellowship ， 每年 10-40 万欧元，支持 3-5 年，这笔钱给人而不是给所在的机构。青年研究者可以自由选择科研机构，独立的建立自己的实验室和购买设备，人走到哪里，基金就跟到哪里。 鼓励青年研究者流动。在英国作了 4 年博士后，在德国拿到位置，可以将实验设备无偿带走。彼此承认相互的学术职称。 对新成立实验室的 PI, 不要求写详细的 Plan of Budget 。因为对新成立实验室的 PI ，还不太可能有太详细的科研方向，需要摸索和尝试，基金部门对他们有特殊的政策照顾。 这些政策的背后，也正是因为欧洲的青年研究者成长起来有诸多的困难。一般在欧洲大约 10 个博士毕业生中，只有大约 3 个人能拿到终身的职位。在长幼分明的学术机构中，很困难能独立的得到资助和建立自己的实验室。而且欧盟国家学术机构林林总总，各不相同，比如英国的 Lecturer 很难流动到法国作 Group Leader 。欧陆的大学教职都是政府公务员，对新人做独立科研和得到稳定职位并不热心，所以去年成立的欧洲科研基金（ ERC ）正尝试在改变这些不利于青年人成长的制度。 END
标签: 欧洲
![[转载]欧洲的死穴](http://image.sciencenet.cn/album/201205/14/104644ufccci69vf3mujvi.jpg.thumb.jpg)
![[转载]欧洲最高产捐精男子奇特生活揭秘:青睐知识女性](http://image.sciencenet.cn/album/201204/22/1853513tob3ofot2zai32d.jpg.thumb.jpg)
![[转载]新华国际再揭欧洲广泛种植转基因谎言](http://image.sciencenet.cn/album/201201/16/230205a115c454nacmmcm3.jpg.thumb.jpg)
![[转载]中国援欧的两难选择](http://image.sciencenet.cn/album/201111/22/0854225u0uonl857g5dof0.jpg.thumb.jpg)
![[转载]欧洲人看欧洲](http://image.sciencenet.cn/album/201209/13/165158xona5aodgnxa9ag4.jpg.thumb.jpg)
![[转载]MagForce的纳米癌症治疗获得欧洲监管部门的批准](http://image.sciencenet.cn/album/201108/19/134035drfrddd7yfdr7dl5.jpeg.thumb.jpg)
