Sophia Antipolis, 6 March 2023

The ETSI group on Encrypted Traffic Integration (ISG ETI) is pleased to announce the release of the group report GR-ETI-002 “Requirements definition and analysis”, the next step for the problems previously outlined in the report GR-ETI-001 “Problem Statement”.

Read More...

Sophia Antipolis, 11 July 2023

ETSI is pleased to announce three new Reports developed by its Securing AI group (ISG SAI). They address explicability and transparency of AI processing and provide an AI computing platform security framework. The last Report is a multi-partner Proofs of Concepts framework.

Read More...

World Health Organization Launches Collaborating Centre for Governance, Accountability and Transparency in the Pharmaceutical Sector at University of TorontoToronto, ON – The University of Toronto and the World Health Organization are proud to launch the WHO Collaborating Centre for Governance, Accountability and Transparency for the Pharmaceutical Sector with a policy workshop and celebration at the Leslie […]

QuantumPay (QTP) represents an ambitious technological initiative that blends blockchain technology and artificial intelligence (AI) to create a secure, efficient, and transparent digital transaction  StreetInsider.com

Users can find if an image has been altered with AI in the photo details, under file name and size.

Read more: Google Photos increases transparency with new AI label

Gunner is successfully shaking up the residential roofing industry with a concept rarely seen: offering customers the ability to buy their roofs online.

El PP y Vox buscan "poner luz" sobre los negocios de la esposa del presidente del Gobierno y aclarar hasta qué punto "nacieron" en los despachos de Moncloa Leer

Murata ID Solutions reports that it has helped life science giant Bayer’s Italian division, Bayer S.p.A., leverage radio frequency identification (RFID) tracking in the first large-scale application of the technology in the pharmaceutical supply chain.

Manufacturers now expect logistics suppliers to further integrate with their operating systems DANX Carousel Chief Information Officer, Mohan Palaniandy, has told delegates at a recent supply chain transparency conference.

The trend toward open government is increasing worldwide.

The post Open government: Using data transparency as a driver of economic growth first appeared on Federal News Network.

The PGA Tour announced it is adding Tiger Woods to its policy board and making changes to its governance after criticism from several players over the lack of transparency in the lead-up to the announced deal between the PGA Tour and the Saudi-backed LIV Golf in June.

After being tapped to lead the Department of Government Efficiency with Vivek Ramaswamy, Elon Musk said all of the actions taken by the department will be posted online for "maximum transparency."

Panelistas plantearon salidas a las irregularidades y errores cometidos durante el preconteo y escrutinio de los votos de las elecciones del pasado 13 de marzo.

Escuche el programa de este miércoles 18 de octubre. La Luciérnaga un espacio de humor y opinión de Caracol Radio que acompaña desde hace más de 30 años a sus oyentes en el regreso a casa. 

En 10AM Hoy por Hoy de Caracol Radio estuvo es escritor colombiano, William Ospina, para hablar sobre su candidatura a la Gobernación del Tolima.

Andrés Idárraga, secretario de Transparencia de la Presidencia, explicó en 6AM las indagaciones que se están adelantando para conocer en detalle el escándalo de corrupción en la Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres

El dólar ha incrementado estos días producto de varios factores 

Herna Penagos, Registrador Nacional, habló en 6AM sobre las garantías de las próximas elecciones 

High-profile entities in India have become the target of malicious campaigns orchestrated by the Pakistan-based Transparent Tribe threat actor and a previously unknown China-nexus cyber espionage group dubbed IcePeony. The intrusions linked to Transparent Tribe involve the use of a malware called ElizaRAT and a new stealer payload dubbed ApoloStealer on specific victims of interest, Check Point

For a second time, Kari Lake has been denied a win in an election.  First, it was for governor of Arizona, which was clearly due to election and voter fraud.  Now, it appears something similar occurred in her race against Ruben Gallego.  Now, the head of her campaign is speaking out and saying that there …

CNN reportedly will be making more cuts in the near future, including to its highly paid on-air personalities, following poor election ratings. The New York Post reported that Fox News […]

The post On-Air Talent Will Not Be Spared as CNN Prepares Mass Layoffs in Wake of Election: Report appeared first on The Western Journal.

China Needs to Make the Belt and Road Initiative More Transparent and Predictable Expert comment sysadmin 29 April 2019

The global infrastructure project must move beyond mish-mash of opaque bilateral deals

As China welcomes dozens of world leaders to Beijing for its second Belt and Road forum, it has one simple aim: relaunching President Xi Jinping’s controversial global infrastructure drive.

Since it began five years ago, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has sunk hundreds of billions into port, railway and power projects stretching from south-east Asia to central Europe. But its path has been bumpy, drawing sharp criticism over the ruinous debts that some countries have racked up amid Chinese largesse.

Xi will stress sustainable financing and transparency this week, amid the usual talk of ‘win win’ cooperation. Yet BRI’s problems are structural, not presentational. For any pledges to be meaningful, China must move beyond its present mish-mash of opaque, bilateral deals.

After bad headlines last year, BRI has in fact enjoyed a good run in recent weeks. Malaysia announced it would resume a previously cancelled high-speed rail project, while Italy’s decision to join up last month marked a further European incursion. Indeed, if attendance is any guide to success, BRI looks in fine fettle. The first forum in 2017 attracted 29 world leaders. China says 37 will turn up this week. Phillip Hammond, UK chancellor, arrives hunting deals too, just a day after news that Chinese technology group Huawei will be allowed to help build 5G networks in Britain.

Even so, three interlinked problems remain at the heart of President Xi’s pet project, all of which must be addressed if BRI is to move beyond the pitfalls that have damaged its reputation.

The first and most obvious is debt. Critics allege that China ‘traps’ its BRI partners financially, often pointing to a debt-for-equity deal that handed China control of a port in Sri Lanka. These claims are exaggerated — few other projects have ended up this way. Yet poorer nations from Laos to Tajikistan are still signing up to vastly expensive Chinese schemes that offer poor value for money while straining their public finances.

The second problem is transparency. Despite its grand scale there is still no reliable list of BRI projects, no disclosure of the lending standards China follows, nor even the amount China has invested. Beijing claims more than $1 trillion; independent estimates suggest perhaps a few hundred billion. Either way, it will be hard for China to convince doubters on debts until it is open about the criteria it uses in deciding who to lend to and why.

BRI’s third and most important challenge is its muddled organization. Despite BRI’s image as a centrally run mega-project, China has allowed many deals to be struck locally, via a mix of state-backed companies, public sector banks and freewheeling regional governments. And it is here that the problems began.

Infrastructure deals are notoriously complex, especially for transnational projects like high-speed rail. Renegotiations are common, even for experienced bodies like the World Bank. Yet BRI has repeatedly seen terms negotiated behind closed doors, in countries such as Malaysia and Pakistan, come unstuck in the face of public outcry.

Rather than seeking to trap others with debt, China’s central government more often has to step in to fix dubious projects agreed by underlings lower down the chain.

These negotiations go one of two ways. Either China’s partners complain and win terms, as was true in Malaysia and in Myanmar over a multibillion-dollar deep-sea port. Or, as in the case of Sri Lanka, the renegotiations go in China’s favour, but at the cost of accusations of debt trickery. In both cases China looks bad.

Speaking last year, Xi responded to criticism of BRI by describing it as ‘an open platform for cooperation’. Yet, so far, he has proved resistant to the step that would deliver on that vision — namely turning BRI into an institution with open standards and international partners.

The reasons for his reluctance are obvious. Ending BRI’s reliance on loose bilateral deals would limit Beijing’s room for geopolitical manoeuvre. Yet what might be lost in political flexibility could easily be gained in economic credibility, while avoiding some of the painful renegotiations that have dogged many BRI projects.

At a time when China’s economy is slowing and its current account surplus is shrinking, formalising and institutionalising, BRI could also help avoid wasting scarce public resources on white elephant projects. China even has an easy template in the form of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Beijing-based institution that has won plaudits for its project quality and openness since it started in 2016.

Whichever model is chosen, a dose of Chinese-style central planning is called for, along with more openness. Without it, the oddly chaotic and decentralised model pioneered in BRI’s first five years is unlikely to help the project thrive over the next five.

This article was originally published in the Financial Times.

Read the series on how FAO increased efficiency, effectiveness and transparency to better support its Members in the transformation of agrifood systems.

Families of Norton Elementary School won’t be seeing their kids return anytime soon. Repairs are going to take longer than expected and students are expected to be back in the school by the start of the next school year.

The city said in a news release on Thursday that the Mayor’s Task Force on Transparency, Access and Accountability — which is in charge of reviewing community concerns about openness at the city — is looking for your feedback.

While the Trump administration proposal would not strip student eligibility for Head Start, the federal school lunch program, or the Individual with Disabilities Education Act, it could still affect millions of school-aged children who live with immigrant parents.

The aim of this work is to test whether the use of a transparent capsule affects the residual capsule weight after inhalation as a surrogate of the inhaled delivered dose for patients with non-reversible chronic airway disease. Researchers conducted an observational cross-sectional study with patients using a single-dose dry powder inhaler. The weight of the capsule was measured with a precision microbalance before and after inhalation. Ninety-one patients were included, of whom 63 (69.2%) used a transparent capsule. Inhalation with a transparent capsule achieved a weight decrease of 30.1% vs 8.6% for devices with an opaque capsule (P <0.001). These data reinforce the need to provide patients with mechanisms that verify the correct inhalation technique.

As misinformation about the upcoming US elections rockets across social media, creating chaos, companies need to be honest about where this content is coming from, says Annalee Newitz

The Connecticut Democrat suddenly thinks Democrats need to listen to people outside their coalition.

Today’s guest post comes from Angie Franks, Chief Executive Officer of Kalderos.

Angie discusses how the Maximum Fair Price provision of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 will challenge providers, pharmacies, and manufacturers. She explains how Kalderos’ Truzo platform could reduce duplicate claims and address compliance issues.

To learn more, register for Kalderos’ October 25 webinar Cracking the MFP Code: How Flexible Technology Helps You Navigate an Evolving Landscape.

Read on for Angie’s insights.
Read more »

A new survey of plan sponsors sheds light on their satisfaction with transparency at large and small pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).

As you will see, clients remain slightly more satisfied with the perceived transparency of smaller PBMs compared with the Big Three PBMs—CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and Optum Rx.

However, plan sponsors are dissatisfied with transparency about how both large and small PBMs make money. Smaller PBMs have an edge, but it’s narrower than you might think.

Perhaps PBMs’ clients are unable or unwilling to negotiate better deals, write more effective contracts, and switch to more satisfying relationships. Or maybe they don’t mind the current system, despite the challenges for patients. Some argue that transparency could swoop down to solve this problem. Riddle me this: Should we watch what plan sponsors say, or what they do?

Read on to see what you think of my arguments below. Then, click here to share your thoughts with the Drug Channels community.
Read more »

Here on Drug Channels, we have long highlighted the boom in provider-administered biosimilars. In contrast to the pharmacy market, adoption of these biosimilars is growing, prices are dropping, and formulary barriers continue to fall.

Novel transparency information reveals that this good news doesn’t always translate into savings. Below, we rely on a unique data set from Turquoise Health to examine how much four national commercial health plans—Aetna, Anthem, Cigna, and UnitedHealthcare—paid hospitals for Avastin and its two most significant biosimilar competitors.

As we demonstrate, health plans pay hospitals far above acquisition costs for biosimilars. What’s more, plans can pay hospitals more for a biosimilar than for the higher-cost reference product. The U.S. drug channel system is warping hospitals’ incentives to adopt biosimilars, while simultaneously raising costs for commercial plans.

The namesake of my alma mater once said: “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” What would happen if we disinfected the entire channel?
Read more »

The UK body that oversees health research is writing a new strategy on clinical trial transparency and it wants to hear opinions on it. The Health Research Authority (HRA) says its strategy aims to “make transparency easy, make compliance clear and make information public.” It has opened a public consultation on the strategy and some […]

PDUFA V commitments signal a strong commitment to tolerance of open debate in the face of uncertainty.

I can admit to a rather powerful lack of enthusiasm when reading about interpersonal squabbles. It’s even worse in the scientific world: when I read about debates getting mired in personal attacks I tend to simply stop reading and move on to something else.

However, the really interesting part of this week’s meeting of an FDA joint Advisory Committee to discuss the controversial diabetes drug Avandia – at least in the sense of likely long-term impact – is not the scientific question under discussion, but the surfacing and handling of the raging interpersonal battle going on right now inside the Division of Cardiovascular and Renal Products. So I'll have to swallow my distaste and follow along with the drama.

Two words that make us mistrust Duke:  Anil Potti Christian Laettner

Not that the scientific question at hand – does Avandia pose significant heart risks? – isn't interesting. It is. But if there’s one thing that everyone seems to agree on, it’s that we don’t have good data on the topic. Despite the re-adjudication of RECORD, no one trusts its design (and, ironically, the one trial with a design to rigorously answer the question was halted after intense pressure, despite an AdComm recommendation that it continue).  And no one seems particularly enthused about changing the current status of Avandia: in all likelihood it will continue to be permitted to be marketed under heavy restrictions. Rather than changing the future of diabetes, I suspect the committee will be content to let us slog along the same mucky trail.

The really interesting question, that will potentially impact CDER for years to come, is how it can function with frothing, open dissent among its staffers. As has been widely reported, FDA reviewer Tom Marciniak has written a rather wild and vitriolic assessment of the RECORD trial, excoriating most everyone involved. In a particularly stunning passage, Marciniak appears to claim that the entire output of anyone working at Duke University cannot be trusted because of the fraud committed by Duke cancer researcher Anil Potti:

I would have thought that the two words “Anil Potti” are sufficient for convincing anyone that Duke University is a poor choice for a contractor whose task it is to confirm the integrity of scientific research. 

(One wonders how far Marciniak is willing to take his guilt-by-association theme. Are the words “Cheng Yi Liang” sufficient to convince us that all FDA employees, including Marciniak, are poor choices for deciding matter relating to publicly-traded companies? Should I not comment on government activities because I’m a resident of Illinois (my two words: “Rod Blagojevich”)?)

Rather than censoring or reprimanding Marciniak, his supervisors have taken the extraordinary step of letting him publicly air his criticisms, and then they have in turn publicly criticized his methods and approach.

I have been unable to think of a similar situation at any regulatory agency. The tolerance for dissent being displayed by FDA is, I believe, completely unprecedented.

And that’s the cliffhanger for me: can the FDA’s commitment to transparency extend so far as to accommodate public disagreements about its own approval decisions? Can it do so even when the disagreements take an extremely nasty and inappropriate tone?

• Rather than considering that open debate is a good thing, will journalists jump on the drama and portray agency leadership as weak and indecisive?
• Will the usual suspects in Congress be able to exploit this disagreement for their own political gain? How many House subcommittees will be summoning Janet Woodcock in the coming weeks?

I think what Bob Temple and Norman Stockbridge are doing is a tremendous experiment in open government. If they can pull it off, it could force other agencies to radically rethink how they go about crafting and implementing regulations. However, I also worry that it is politically simply not a viable approach, and that the agency will ultimately be seriously hurt by attacks from the media and legislators.

Where is this coming from?

As part of its recent PDUFA V commitment, the FDA put out a fascinating draft document, Structured Approach to Benefit-Risk Assessment in Drug Regulatory Decision-Making. It didn't get a lot of attention when first published back in February (few FDA documents do). However, it lays out a rather bold vision for how the FDA can acknowledge the existence of uncertainty in its evaluation of new drugs. Its proposed structure even envisions an open and honest accounting of divergent interpretations of data:

When they're frothing at the mouth, even Atticus doesn't let them publish a review

A framework for benefit-risk decision-making that summarizes the relevant facts, uncertainties, and key areas of judgment, and clearly explains how these factors influence a regulatory decision, can greatly inform and clarify the regulatory discussion. Such a framework can provide transparency regarding the basis of conflicting recommendations made by different parties using the same information.

(Emphasis mine.)

Of course, the structured framework here is designed to reflect rational disagreement. Marciniak’s scattershot insults are in many ways a terrible first case for trying out a new level of transparency.

The draft framework notes that safety issues, like Avandia, are some of the major areas of uncertainty in the regulatory process. Contrast this vision of coolly and systematically addressing uncertainties with the sad reality of Marciniak’s attack:

In contrast to the prospective and highly planned studies of effectiveness, safety findings emerge from a wide range of sources, including spontaneous adverse event reports, epidemiology studies, meta-analyses of controlled trials, or in some cases from randomized, controlled trials. However, even controlled trials, where the evidence of an effect is generally most persuasive, can sometimes provide contradictory and inconsistent findings on safety as the analyses are in many cases not planned and often reflect multiple testing. A systematic approach that specifies the sources of evidence, the strength of each piece of evidence, and draws conclusions that explain how the uncertainty weighed on the decision, can lead to more explicit communication of regulatory decisions. We anticipate that this work will continue beyond FY 2013.

I hope that work will continue beyond 2013. Thoughtful, open discussions of real uncertainties are one of the most worthwhile goals FDA can aspire to, even if it means having to learn how to do so without letting the Marciniaks of the world scuttle the whole endeavor.

A recent report reveals that an impressive 96% of Indians are aware of medlinkArtificial Intelligence/medlink (AI), including generative AI platforms

As the January 1, 2025, filing deadline for the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) approaches, hotel owners, developers, and investors should be prepared to meet the new federal requirements for business transparency. Effective January 1, 2024, the CTA requires most U.S. business entities to submit detailed ownership information to FinCEN or face penalties up to $10,000. The article below by JMBM’s Taxation, Trusts & Estates Department outlines key CTA requirements, filing deadlines, and essential steps for compliance.

Learn more about how digital intelligence is the key to ‘regenerative retail’: https://www.wired.co.uk/bc/article/circular-economy-track-trace-transparency

The implications of the recent rate cut by the RBI

Distraught staff of Jet Airways and IL&FS feel that the bankruptcy apparatus is not concerned about what is due to them