Everyone gets a hearing at the VHP4Safety Designathon at KWR

The VHP4Safety-project (2021-2026) is to make it possible to assess the safety of substances, not with animal testing but on the basis of knowledge about the human body. This is being done by bringing together a range of scientific disciplines in a consortium of which KWR is a member. There is also collaboration with numerous stakeholders so that the assessment of chemicals and pharmaceuticals on the basis of information about humans rather than animal studies can count on support from society and make the transition to application.

Bringing together innovative methods

“There are both ethical and scientific arguments explaining why we no longer see animal testing as the gold standard as a model for human health,” says Dingemans. “Work on alternatives has been going on for a long time. The VHP4Safety project brings innovative methods together in a platform that fits in with how risk assessment is done in practice. This makes it possible to obtain an impression faster of the aspects involved in these risks for many different substances. That’s why I think the platform can play a role in making it possible to determine water quality better, now and in the future.” As an example of an innovative method of this kind, Dingemans refers to QSARs: mathematical models that can predict expected health effects on the basis of the chemical structure of substances. Dingemans: “When you’re looking at mixtures of many different substances, as in the case of the water system, that’s very useful for us.”

World Café

The co-organiser of the Designathon was Aniek de Winter, Communication & Stakeholder Engagement Officer at Utrecht University, one of the coordinating organisations for VHP4Safety. She explained the interactive approach of the meeting, which was a very deliberate decision. “The project brings together all kinds of different disciplines whose input we need. Diehard IT people got on board, for example, as well as toxicologists who are working with in vitro models in the lab. And then there are also the social scientists. Making the meetings interactive clearly provides everyone with the opportunity to share their insights. For example, we worked with a ‘World Café’ format. In this approach, small groups of participants repeatedly go to a different table with a facilitator, tackling a particular issue on each occasion. The beauty is that the input from the previous groups serves as a stepping stone for the group that comes next. In this way, you can go into greater depth in a short time because you move ahead together. Instead of talking past each other, you make the project – and therefore the final product, the platform – a lot stronger.”

Good vision

The nicest compliment that De Winter received indicating that this interactive approach works came from one of the participants who was attending a VHP4Safety project meeting of this kind for the first time. “He had expected to be sitting and listening for a lot of the time but he was pleasantly surprised by the open atmosphere in which he was invited to participate. He said himself that he had had a really enjoyable time. Of course, the beautiful location at KWR and the sunny weather also played a role. It was just the right overall picture.” Dingemans is also upbeat about how the project is organised on non-conventional lines. “You can really see that there are powerful people with a good vision at the helm,” she says. “They are strong in terms of the interdisciplinary approach and they focus on the type of communications needed. Often, with long-term projects like this, you will see that there is a strong focus on consultation and coordination, particularly at the beginning and end. This means that your input actually remains slightly diffuse. In the case of VHP4Safety, consultations are very good and constructive throughout. I find that my input is generally taken into consideration and that I can say which requirements the platform needs to meet so that it can be used for our work relating to water quality. I really appreciate that.”

Dot on the horizon

What results did the Designathon produce on those inspiring days at KWR? “We now have over a year to go with the project,” says De Winter. “And with each meeting, we get a sharper picture of what the platform should be and what it should look like. That happened again here. On the basis of three specific case studies, we are developing workflows that help the user answer certain questions from a particular context. The case studies are not currently focused on water but we still find KWR’s input very useful. For example, they say mixtures of substances have to be tested, even though we are still focusing at the moment on individual substances with the platform. This is one reason why it is the intention is to develop the platform further with additional cases after the project ends. We also talked about this sustainability aspect during the meeting. That dot on the horizon should definitely include KWR’s perspective.”

VHP4Safety

VHP4Safety is part of the NWA research programme ‘Research into Routes by Consortia (ORC)’, which is funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). The project has a budget of more than 10 million euros, it started on 1 June 2021 and it has a running time of five years. It is coordinated by Utrecht University with the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) and Utrecht University of Applied Sciences (HU).