The fairly high placebo effect observed is very similar to data obtained from patients affected by atypical facial pain. This study failed to support a role for ALA in the treatment of BMS, and further investigations are needed to identify the cause of BMS in order to develop efficacious therapies.

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) developed an opinion on the state of the art of Toxicokinetic/Toxicodynamic (TKTD) models and their use in prospective environmental risk assessment (ERA) for pesticides and aquatic organisms. TKTD models are species-and compound-specific and can be used to predict (sub)lethal effects of pesticides under untested (time-variable) exposure conditions. Three different types of TKTD models are described, viz., (i) the 'General Unified Threshold models of Survival' (GUTS), (ii) those based on the Dynamic Energy Budget theory (DEBtox models), and (iii) models for primary producers. All these TKTD models follow the principle that the processes influencing internal exposure of an organism, (TK), are separated from the processes that lead to damage and effects/mortality (TD). GUTS models can be used to predict survival rate under untested exposure conditions. DEBtox models explore the effects on growth and reproduction of toxicants over time, even over the entire life cycle. TKTD model for primary producers and pesticides have been developed for algae, Lemna and Myriophyllum. For all TKTD model calibration, both toxicity data on standard test species and/or additional species can be used. For validation, substance and species-specific data sets from independent refined-exposure experiments are required. Based on the current state of the art (e.g. lack of documented and evaluated examples), the DEBtox modelling approach is currently limited to research applications. However, its great potential for future use in prospective ERA for pesticides is recognised. The GUTS model and the Lemna model are considered ready to be used in risk assessment. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and no modifications or adaptations are made.The EFSA Journal is a publication of the European Food Safety Authority, an agency of the European Union. As a third deliverable of this mandate, the PPR Panel is asked to develop a Scientific Opinion describing the state of the art of Toxicokinetic/Toxicodynamic (TKTD) models for aquatic organisms and prospective environmental risk assessment (ERA) for pesticides with the main focus on: (i) regulatory questions that can be addressed by TKTD modelling, (ii) available TKTD models for aquatic organisms, (iii) model parameters that need to be included and checked in evaluating the acceptability of regulatory relevant TKTD models, and (iv) selection of the species to be modelled.Chapter 2 presents the underlying concepts, terminology, application domains and complexity levels of three different classes of TKTD models intended to be used in risk assessment, viz., (i) the 'General Unified Threshold models of Survival' (GUTS), (ii) toxicity models derived from the Dynamic Energy Budget theory (DEBtox models), and (iii) models for primary producers. All ...

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State France and co‐rapporteur Member State Estonia for the pesticide active substance fosetyl are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of fosetyl as a fungicide on grapes, citrus and pome fruits. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, the United Kingdom, for the pesticide active substance BAS 750 F (mefentrifluconazole) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use(s) of BAS 750 F (mefentrifluconazole) as a fungicide on cereals. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State the Netherlands and co-rapporteur Member State Spain for the pesticide active substance pyriproxyfen and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of pyriproxyfen as an insecticide on citrus fruit, pome fruit (apple, pears), tomatoes, ornamentals (field use) and tomatoes, ornamentals (greenhouse application). MRLs were assessed in citrus fruits. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.