Search

The study aimed to reveal the similarities and differences of the tongue of the merlin with other bird species. Merlin is the smallest bird of the Falconidae family and lives in America, the northern regions of Europe and Asia, the Middle East, and Central Asia. Since these species don’t have teeth, lips, and cheeks, the tongue fulfills significant functions related to nutrition, and it differs morphologically as a result of differences in eating habits. In this study, the tongues obtained from five adult merlin (falco columbarius) were examined by morphological and stereological methods. It was determined that the tongue of the merlin was thin, long, and rectangular, the front part was oval, W-shaped papilla linguales caudales were found between the body and root of the tongue. The average length of the tongue was 26.32 ± 1.38 mm, the width was 7.26 ± 0.32 mm, and the thickness was 1.58 ± 0.14 mm. The histology of the tongue showed that the dorsal and ventral surfaces are covered with keratinized multilayered squamous epithelium; there are taste buds in the epithelial layer, the number of taste buds is higher especially on the root of the tongue; and the presence of paraglossum, which is in the hyaline cartilage structure. The volume of the tongue was on an average of 374.2 ± 14.08 mm3.

Narratives are a veritable type of metadata. Narratives are power-laden storylines that conjure up emotions and enact value systems that markedly affect scientific practices, and to what ends, and for whom science and health innovations are made available. Narratives, if they are left unchecked, can undermine critical thinking and the agency of publics, threatening the possibilities for robust, responsible, relevant, and democratic science. One such narrative, a sociotechnical metadata in its own right, and of immense relevance in the current historical moment of the pandemic, is the uncritical use of the war and other military metaphors in COVID-19 science and planetary health interventions. In October 2022 issue of

This study was carried out to determine the effect of sodium nitroprusside (SNP), a nitric oxide (NO) exogenous donor, and NG-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME), a NO inhibitor, on the development of chicken embryos by injected into the egg. A total of 210 hatching fertilized chicken eggs used into control, Sham control (SC), serum physiological (SP) and treatment groups containing 30 eggs. The air space of the remaining eggs was pierced at the beginning of the incubation, whereas the eggs in the control group were not subjected to any application (negative control). The SC group of the drilled eggs was immediately closed with paraffin. After the SP group was called a positive control, 50 and 200 mg/kg SNP respectively and L-NAME solutions at the same levels were injected into the hole opened to the air space into the experimental groups consisting of the remaining eggs. The eggs were opened on some days 7th and 14th of the embryonic period and the following parameters of each group were determined: Relative embryo weights, weights and lengths of the embryos (on days 7th and 14th), hatching weight, hatching length, hatching rate and embryonal deaths (on day 21st). The results showed that the relative embryo weight and embryo length on the days 7th and 14th of the hatching and the hatching weight on the day 21st of the hatching were not affected by injection of SNP and L-NAME (P>0.05). Hatching rate on the day 21st was highest in the L-NAME50 group, whereas this rate was lowest in the SNP200 group (P, Bu araştırma, nitrik oksidin (NO’nun) ekzojen donörü sodyum nitroprussid (SNP) ve NO inhibitörü N-nitro-L-Arjinin metil esterin (L-NAME’in) yumurtaya enjeksiyon yapılarak kanatlı embriyonal gelişimi üzerinde oluşturduğu etkisini belirlemek amacıyla yapıldı. Araştırmada toplam 210 adet kuluçkalık döllü tavuk yumurtası her biri 30 yumurtadan oluşan kontrol, Sham kontrol (SK), serum fizyolojik (SF) ve deneme gruplarında kullanıldı. Kontrol grubundaki yumurtalara hiçbir uygulama yapılmazken (negatif kontrol), geri kalan yumurtaların kuluçka başlangıcında hava kamarası delindi. Delinen yumurtalardan SK grubu hemen parafinle kapatıldı. SF grubu pozitif kontrol olarak adlandırıldıktan sonra geriye kalan yumurtaların oluşturduğu deneme gruplarına sırasıyla 50 ve 200 mg/kg SNP ve aynı düzeylerde L-NAME solüsyonları hava kamarasına açılan deliğe enjekte edildi. Embriyonik dönemin 7 ve 14. günlerinde yumurtalar açılarak gruplarda rölatif embriyo ağırlığı ve embriyo uzunluğu (7. ve 14. günlerde) ile çıkım ağırlığı, çıkım uzunluğu, çıkım oranı ve embriyonal ölümler (21. günde) belirlendi. Kuluçkanın 7. ve 14. günlerindeki rölatif embriyo ağırlığı ve embriyo uzunluğu değerleri ile 21. güne ait çıkım ağırlığının SNP ve L-NAME enjeksiyonundan etkilenmediği görüldü (P>0.05). Araştırmada 21. gününe ait çıkım oranı L-NAME50 grubunda en yüksek iken, SNP200 grubunda en düşük olarak belirlendi (P

Lies and disinformation have always existed throughout human history. However, disinformation has become a "pandemic within a pandemic" with convergence of COVID-19 and digital transformation of health care, climate emergency, and pervasive human-computer interaction in all facets of life. We are living through an era of post-truth. New approaches to fight disinformation are urgently needed and of paramount importance for systems science and planetary health. In this study, we discuss the ways in which extractive and entrenched epistemologies such as technocracy and neoliberalism co-produce disinformation. We draw from the works of David Collingridge in technology entrenchment and the literature on digital health, international affairs, climate emergency, degrowth, and decolonializing methodologies. We expand the vocabulary on and interventions against disinformation, and propose the following: (1)

"The pandemic is a portal." In the words of the novelist scholar Arundhati Roy, the COVID-19 pandemic is not merely an epic calamity. It has opened up a new space, a portal, to rethink everything, for example, in how we live, work, produce scientific knowledge, provide health care, and relate to others, be they humans or nonhuman animals in planetary ecosystems. Meanwhile, as the intensity of the pandemic escalates, digital health tools such as the Internet of Things (IoT), biosensors, and artificial intelligence (AI) are being deployed to address the twin goals of social distancing and health care in a "no touch" emergency state. Permanent integration of digital technologies into every aspect of post-pandemic civic life-health care, disease tracking, education, work, and beyond-is considered by governments and technology actors around the world. Although digital transformation of health care and industry are in the works, we ought to ensure that digital transformation does not degenerate into "digitalism," which we define here as an unchecked and misguided belief on extreme digital connectivity without considering the attendant adverse repercussions on science, human rights, and everyday practices of democracy. Indeed, the current shrinking of the critically informed public policy space amid a devastating pandemic raises principled questions on the broader and long-term impacts that digital technologies will have on democratic governance of planetary health and society. To this end, a wide range of uncertainties-technical, biological, temporal, spatial, and political-is on the COVID-19 pandemic horizon. This calls for astute and anticipatory innovation policies to steer the health sciences and services toward democratic ends. In this article, we describe new and critically informed approaches to democratize COVID-19 digital health innovation policy, especially when the facts are uncertain, the stakes are high, and decisions are urgent, as they often are in the course of a pandemic. In addition, we introduce a potential remedy to democratize pandemic innovation policy, the concept of "epistemic competence," so as to check the frames and framings of the pandemic innovation policy juggernaut and the attendant power asymmetries. We suggest that if epistemic competence, and attention to not only scientific knowledge but also its framing are broadly appreciated, they can help reduce the disparity between the enormous technical progress and investments made in digital health versus our currently inadequate understanding of the societal dimensions of emerging technologies such as AI, IoT, and extreme digital connectivity on the planet.

An open distributed ledger system, blockchain records digital transactions and offers the potential to disruptively transform the way we conduct biomedical research, provide health care, and perform economic transactions. This expert review provides the overarching background, key definitions, prospects and socio-technical challenges at the intersection of blockchain and digital health. In addition, we discuss the tenets of next-generation technology policy for blockchain, drawing from the field of responsible innovation.

We are currently facing and traversing in the thick of a twin pandemic: coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and disinformation. Disinformation is false information created and spread deliberately with the intention to mislead public opinion, obscure truths, and undermine trust in knowledge. The digital age we live in is quite different than the printing revolution and invention of the oil-based ink printing press centuries ago. Digital technologies can spread and repeat disinformation at extremely high speeds, while anyone, a qualified expert or not, and with internet access, can become an author. To fight disinformation, we ought to dismantle the entrenched and extractive epistemologies that act as upstream drivers and sites of disinformation production. Epistemology refers to the value-laden knowledge frames, overarching master narratives, and storylines, in which knowledge is produced. If the epistemologies in which we generate knowledge are false, then the knowledge products will be laden with disinformation. Moreover, the harms caused by disinformation can extend well beyond the immediate knowledge domain where disinformation has originated. This occurs when "false equivalence" is used as a form of rhetoric. False equivalence is a type of flawed sense making where equal weight is given to arguments with concrete material evidence, and those that are conjecture, untrue, or unjust. This article presents an analysis of the disinformation pandemic attendant to COVID-19, with an eye to its causes-of-causes: unchecked extractive epistemologies (e.g., technocracy), and the practice of false equivalence in pandemic discourses. We argue that holding the political agency of master narratives to account is essential (1) to fight the disinformation pandemic and (2) for prefigurative politics to build egalitarian and democratic societies in place of the instrumental/transactional relationships that typify the contemporary nation states and the neoliberal university whose ossified rituals lack the normative capacities for critical governance in a time of converging social, digital, and ecological crises. For liberation from disinformation, we should start with liberation from entrenched extractive epistemologies in science and society.

In May 2019, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services warned that "around one million animal and plant species are now threatened with extinction." In September 2019, Naomi Klein, an astute writer on environmental change, described the interconnected social and ecological breakdowns on the planet in a new book. Ecological crises noted by these and other scholars speak well to the rise of planetary health as a new scholarship. Loss of biodiversity has manifold negative impacts on health, for example, rise of zoonotic infections and changes in healthy microbiome. But reducing our ecological footprints is not enough. We ought to change mindsets, the narrow science, and technology governance regimes that value nature and other life forms instrumentally by their usefulness to us. I describe three new, broader and critically informed, frames on governance for planetary health. First, I explain why we ought to acknowledge animal sentience, for example, as recognized in Article 13 of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. I describe how political determinants of health, power, and agency operate at multiple sociological and planetary loci, not only among human beings but also at human and nonhuman animal interfaces. Second, planetary health calls for a shift toward ecological and political determinants beyond a narrow anthropocentric view, while resisting the entrenched dogma of exponential growth with finite planetary natural resources. Third, for critically informed governance of emerging technologies in planetary health (e.g., glycomics, artificial intelligence, health care robots), I refer to a question highlighted recently (Frodeman, 2019): "When Plato (more exactly, Juvenal) asked who guards the guardians, he was questioning whether any group can be trusted to look past its own interests for the common good." Hence, it is time we broaden the question "Who will guard the guardians?" beyond the scientific community, to actors in science policy as well. Policy questions cannot be limited to "which social issues emerge from a new technology?" but ought to include, "who should be framing science and technology policy, and why?" Youth leaders of the global climate movement such as Greta Thunberg and others are now rightly asking these epistemological questions that might contribute toward a new social contract on health for all sentient beings on planet Earth. While ecological changes accelerate and a new space industry is emerging, governance for planetary health will continue to be at the epicenter of systems thinking, responsible innovation and science policy in the 21st century.

In a digital society, shall we be the authors of our own experience, not only during our lifetime but also after we die? We ask this question because dying and bereavement have become even harder, and much less private, in the digital age. New big data-driven digital industries and technologies are on the rise, with promises of interactive 3D avatars and storage of digital memories of the deceased, so they can continue to exist online as the "living dead" in a digital afterlife. Famous rock and roll icons like Roy Orbison, Frank Zappa, Ronnie James Dio, and Amy Winehouse have famously been turned into holograms that can once again give "live" performances on the touring circuit, often pulling in large audiences. Death studies, dying, and grief have become virtual in the 21st century. We live in truly unprecedented times for human-computer interactions. Thanatology is the scientific study of death, dying, loss, and grief. In contrast to the biological study of biological aging (cellular senescence) and programmed cell death (apoptosis), thanatology employs multiple professional lenses, medical, psychological, physical, spiritual, ethical, descriptive, and normative. In 1997, Carla Sofka introduced the term thanatechnology as "technological mechanisms such as interactive videodiscs and computer programs that are used to access information or aid in learning about thanatology topics." Onward to 2021, the advent of social media, the Internet of Things, and sensors that digitize and archive nearly every human movement and experience are taking thanatechnology, and by extension, digital transformation, to new heights. For example, what happens to digital remains of persons once they cease to exist physically? This article offers a critical study and snapshot of this nascent field, and the "un-disciplinary" sociotechnical issues digital thanatechnologies raise in relation to big data. We also discuss how best to critically govern this new frontier in systems science and the digital society. We suggest that new policy narratives such as (1) the right to nonparticipation in relation to information and communication technologies and (2) the planetary public goods deserve further attention to democratize thanatechnology and big data. To the extent that systems science often depends on data from online platforms, for example, in times of pandemics and ecological crises, "critical thanatechnology studies," introduced in this article, is a timely and essential field of scholarship with broad importance for systems science and planetary health.

In our study, the effect of essential oil obtained from Nigella sativa L. (NSE) on thyroid hormones and antioxidant balance in hypothyroidism (HT) and hyperthyroidism (HP) models induced by propylthiouracil(PTU) and L-thyroxine(LT4 ), respectively, in rats were investigated for 4 weeks. NSE was administered by gastric gavage at a dose of 200 mg/kg body weight. In this study, 48 male Wistar albino rats with an average weight of 180-290 g and age 5-6 months were divided into eight groups, as follows: groups with HT, (1) control, (2) HT, (3) NSE, and (4) HT + NSE; groups with HP, (1) control, (2) HP, (3), and NSE (4) HP + NSE. As a result, we found that NSE administration increased total triiodothyronine (TT3 ) and decreased nitric oxide in HT + NSE. Besides, it decreased TT3 in HP + NSE and increased total antioxidant capacity. Our findings suggest that NSE may have beneficial effects on thyroid gland abnormalities owing to its antioxidant properties. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Essential oils derived from Nigella sativa L. seed contain many bioactive substances such as thymoquinone and cymene. This paper emphasizes the effect of NSE on thyroid hormone abnormalities and negative oxidative state that occurs in HT and HP models. The present study provides evidence of a positive effect of NSE particularly on TT3 levels in the HT and HP models. It can therefore be assumed that NSE could be used as a supportive natural alternative source to improve thyroid hormone levels and relieve increased oxidative stress.

Digital health is a rapidly emerging field that offers several promising potentials: health care delivery remotely, in urban and rural areas, in any time zone, and in times of pandemics and ecological crises. Digital health encompasses electronic health, computing science, big data, artificial intelligence, and the Internet of Things, to name but a few technical components. Digital health is part of a vision for systems medicine. The advances in digital health have been, however, uneven and highly variable across communities, countries, medical specialties, and societal contexts. This article critically examines the determinants of digital health (DDH). DDH describes and critically responds to inequities and differences in digital health theory and practice across people, places, spaces, and time. DDH is not limited to studying variability in design and access to digital technologies. DDH is situated within a larger context of the political determinants of health. Hence, this article presents an analysis of DDH, as seen through political science, and the feminist studies of technology and society. A feminist lens would strengthen systems-driven, historically and critically informed governance for DDH. This would be a timely antidote against unchecked destructive/extractive governance narratives (e.g., technocracy and patriarchy) that produce and reproduce the health inequities. Moreover, feminist framing of DDH can help cultivate epistemic competence to detect and reject false equivalences in how we understand the emerging digital world(s). False equivalence, very common in the current pandemic and post-truth era, is a type of flawed reasoning in decision-making where equal weight is given to arguments with concrete material evidence, and those that are conjecture, untrue, or unjust. A feminist conceptual lens on DDH would help remedy what I refer to in this article as "the normative deficits" in science and technology policy that became endemic with the rise of neoliberal governance since the 1980s in particular. In this context, it is helpful to recall the feminist writer Ursula K. Le Guin. Le Guin posed "what if?" questions, to break free from oppressive narratives such as patriarchy and re-imagine technology futures. It is time to envision an emancipated, equitable, and more democratic world by asking "what if we lived in a feminist world?" That would be truly awesome, for everyone, women and men, children, youth, and future generations, to steer digital technologies and the new field of DDH toward broadly relevant, ethical, experiential, democratic, and socially responsive health outcomes.

Historically, pharmacogenomics has origins in biochemical genetics in the 20th century and astute observations on unusual clinical responses to medicines. Extreme drug response phenotypes observed in the clinic have triggered molecular research on mechanisms of personto-person variations in drug safety and efficacy (Kalow, 1962; Ozdemir et al., 2009), and paved the way for the contemporary field of pharmacogenomics. WOS:000713619200001 34699259 Q2

Pharmacogenomics, nutrigenomics, vaccinomics, and the nascent field of plant omics are examples of variability science. They are embedded within an overarching framework of personalized medicine. Across these public health specialties, the significance and biology of the placebo response have been historically neglected. A placebo is any substance such as a sugar pill administered in the guise of medication, but one that does not have pharmacological activity. Placebos do have clinical effects, however, that can be substantive in magnitude and vary markedly from person-to-person depending, for example, on the type of disease, symptoms, or clinical trial design. Research over the past several decades attests to a genuine neurobiological basis for placebo effects. All drugs have placebo components that contribute to their overall treatment effect. Placebos are used in clinical trials as control groups to ascertain the net pharmacological effect of a drug candidate. Not only less well known but also relevant to rational therapeutics and personalized medicine is the nocebo. A nocebo effect occurs when an inert substance is administered in a context that induces negative expectations, worsening patients' symptoms. With the COVID-19 pandemic, there are high public expectations for new vaccines and medicines to end the contagion, while at the same time antiscience, post-truth, and antivaccine movements are worrisomely on the rise. These social movements, changes in public health cultures, and conditioned behavioral responses can trigger both placebo and nocebo effects. Hence, in clinical trials, forecasting and explaining placebo and nocebo variability are more important than ever for robust science and personalized health care. Against this overarching context, this article provides (1) a brief history of placebo and (2) a discussion on biology, mechanisms, and variability of placebo effects, and (3) discusses three emerging new concepts: placebogenomics, nocebogenomics, and augmented placebo, that is, the notion of a "placebo dose." We conclude with a roadmap for placebogenomics, its synergies with the nascent field of social pharmacology, and the ways in which a new taxonomy of drug and placebo variability can be anticipated in the next decade.

Health futures are not preordained, nor are they entirely predictable by extrapolation from the past. This is particularly relevant in an era of unprecedented uncertainties converging from the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple zoonotic outbreaks for the past two decades, and the climate crisis currently unfolding. Moreover, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services cautioned in 2019 that around one million animal and plant species are threatened with extinction. Human existence and medical innovations are closely intertwined with preservation and sustainability of biodiversity. COVID-19 is a "dry run" for future ecological crises in the 21st century. We need new frames and ways of conceptualizing planetary health, biodiversity futures, and their principled governance post-COVID-19. In this article, I propose "One Nature" as a critically informed planetary health governance frame, and outline its key conceptual pillars. One Nature aims to transcend the socially constructed binaries between humans versus nature, humans versus nonhuman animals or inanimate objects in nature, among other false binaries, and thus, envisions nature as an overlapping, interdependent, and co-constitutive continuum among life forms and ecosystems. One Nature also recognizes animal sentience and agency of nonhuman animals. In doing so, the One Nature governance frame places a firm emphasis on the internal levers of social change and the human values essential to cultivate collective action to curb unchecked extraction of nature that placed human societies in harm's way for future health crises. One Nature is a governance frame and reflexive value system that can be transformative to correct the astigmatism we have long suffered, from the ways in which we have conceived, enacted on, and extracted the natural systems over the centuries. All in all, One Nature supports planetary health and biodiversity through a new vocabulary and post-anthropocentric critical governance lens, and shall help formulate progressive policies to prevent zoonotic outbreaks and future ecological crises.

The article makes the case for establishing planetary public goods, through means of open science which requires an institutional change in the way research and innovation is funded and rewarded

Among today's health problems, metabolic diseases are at the forefront. Hypothyroidism (HT) is a disease characterized by increased TSH, decreased T3&T4 concentrations in serum, with overall metabolic slowdown. Although there are many studies in the literature about oxidative status in HT, statements in these studies are contradictory. In our study, the effect of essential oils obtained from the leaves, flowers, and roots of Myrtus communis L. on oxidative metabolism in an HT model induced by propylthiouracil (PTU) in rats was investigated. A total of 36 Wistar albino rats were randomly divided into six groups as follows: (1) Control, (2) PTU, (3) M. communis L. oil 200 (MO 200), (4) M. communis L. oil 400 (MO 400), (5) PTU + MO 200, and (6) PTU + MO 400. In our study, while oxidative status deteriorates in groups given PTU, antioxidant activity increases in groups given M. communis L. oil. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Essential oils are aromatic oily liquids derived from different parts of plants. M. communis L. is one of the best-known herbs in the class of aromatic and medicinal plants. This paper emphasizes the effect of M. communis L. oil on the negative oxidative state that occurs in HT conditions. The present study provides a positive effect of essential oils obtained from the M. communis L. on the oxidative state seen in HT. In light of this information, it may be beneficial to use M. communis L. oil due to its antioxidative effect in HT conditions.

Precision/personalized medicine is a hot topic in health care. Often presented with the motto "the right drug, for the right patient, at the right dose, and the right time," precision medicine is a theory for rational therapeutics as well as practice to individualize health interventions (e.g., drugs, food, vaccines, medical devices, and exercise programs) using biomarkers. Yet, an alien visitor to planet Earth reading the contemporary textbooks on diagnostics might think precision medicine requires only two biomolecules omnipresent in the literature: nucleic acids (e.g., DNA) and proteins, known as the first and second alphabet of biology, respectively. However, the precision/personalized medicine community has tended to underappreciate the third alphabet of life, the "sugar code" (i.e., the information stored in glycans, glycoproteins, and glycolipids). This article brings together experts in precision/personalized medicine science, pharmacoglycomics, emerging technology governance, cultural studies, contemporary art, and responsible innovation to critically comment on the sociomateriality of the three alphabets of life together. First, the current transformation of targeted therapies with personalized glycomedicine and glycan biomarkers is examined. Next, we discuss the reasons as to why unraveling of the sugar code might have lagged behind the DNA and protein codes. While social scientists have historically noted the importance of constructivism (e.g., how people interpret technology and build their values, hopes, and expectations into emerging technologies), life scientists relied on the material properties of technologies in explaining why some innovations emerge rapidly and are more popular than others. The concept of sociomateriality integrates these two explanations by highlighting the inherent entanglement of the social and the material contributions to knowledge and what is presented to us as reality from everyday laboratory life. Hence, we present a hypothesis based on a sociomaterial conceptual lens: because materiality and synthesis of glycans are not directly driven by a template, and thus more complex and open ended than sequencing of a finite length genome, social construction of expectations from unraveling of the sugar code versus the DNA code might have evolved differently, as being future-uncertain versus future-proof, respectively, thus potentially explaining the "sugar lag" in precision/personalized medicine diagnostics over the past decades. We conclude by introducing systems scientists, physicians, and biotechnology industry to the concept, practice, and value of responsible innovation, while glycomedicine and other emerging biomarker technologies (e.g., metagenomics and pharmacomicrobiomics) transition to applications in health care, ecology, pharmaceutical/diagnostic industries, agriculture, food, and bioengineering, among others.

Globalization and knowledge mobilization (KM) are twin challenges impacting precision medicine currently. Previous KM models have been largely limited to an implementation framework whereby knowledge is imagined as a billiard ball to be simply rolled over from the laboratory to society and from developed to developing countries. This narrow and sanitized understanding of KM and science as being detached from social forces, human values, politics, and power inequities does not help to achieve robust and responsible emergence of precision medicine, not least because tailored medicines are not simple products ready to use off-the-shelf without customization in each country, local context and society. It is time to broaden the art and science of KM by rethinking knowledge as a dynamic co-product of both technology and social systems in which science is embedded. This article presents an analysis of the four possible approaches to KM available to the precision medicine community: (1) "knowledge implementation," (2) "research collaborator capacity building," (3) "collaborative entanglement" that removes the barriers between research and practice, and extends knowledge co-creation activities beyond scientists by inviting publics, patients, and clinicians as researchers, and (4) "knowledge ecosystem" approach that adopts systems thinking, addressing not only technology development but also the politics of innovation, whereby power differences in scientific practice are addressed, for example, to achieve gender parity and diversity in the scientific work force. Blending of laboratory science with KM theory and practice informs robust and responsible emergence of precision medicine innovations, and helps strike the right balance between promotion and regulation of emerging technologies.