Search

How do States define and protect their «strategic» industries? After more than three decades since the waves of privatization begun in Europe, States did not entirely give up their willingness and capacity to define some economic sectors as strategic. Instead, they have devised strategies to protect industries operating in such sectors, either limiting the possibility of foreign acquisitions or regulating how companies acquired by foreigner entities should operate. Yet, analyses of how European states define such interests and vigilate over them are scarce. This article identifies a specific policy domain consisting in the regulation of property rights and more specifically in the powers enabling governments to define strategic industries and interfere in the transactions regarding them. Empirically, the paper provides evidence on the varieties of institutional arrangements and policy strategies emerged in the four largest economies of the region such as France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom. Two macro-patterns seem to emerge: on the one hand, the scope of state regulation of France and Italy has been broad and the policy tools more intrusive than in Germany and the UK. On the other hand, we found that agency matters in determining specific policy outcomes.

Objectives To evaluate the in vitro antimicrobial/antivirulence action of bovine lactoferrin and its ability to synergize with levofloxacin against resistant Helicobacter pylori strains and to analyse the effect of levofloxacin, amoxicillin and esomeprazole with and without bovine lactoferrin as the first-line treatment for H. pylori infection. Methods The bovine lactoferrin antimicrobial/antivirulence effect was analysed in vitro by MIC/MBC determination and twitching motility against six clinical H. pylori strains and a reference strain. The synergism was evaluated using the chequerboard assay. The prospective therapeutic trial was carried out on two separate patient groups, one treated with esomeprazole/amoxicillin/levofloxacin and the other with esomeprazole/amoxicillin/levofloxacin/bovine lactoferrin. Treatment outcome was determined with the [13C]urea breath test. Results In vitro, bovine lactoferrin inhibited the growth of 50% of strains at 10 mg/mL and expressed 50% bactericidal effect at 40 mg/mL. The combination of levofloxacin and bovine lactoferrin displayed a synergistic effect for all strains, with the best MIC reduction of 16- and 32-fold for levofloxacin and bovine lactoferrin, respectively. Bovine lactoferrin at one-fourth MIC reduced microbial motility significantly for all strains studied. In the in vivo study, 6 of 24 patients recruited had treatment failure recorded with esomeprazole/amoxicillin/levofloxacin (75% success, 95% CI 57.68%–92.32%), and in the group with esomeprazole/amoxicillin/levofloxacin/bovine lactoferrin, 2 out of 53 patients recruited had failure recorded (96.07% success, 95% CI 90.62%–101.38%). Conclusions Bovine lactoferrin can be considered a novel potentiator for restoring susceptibility in resistant H. pylori strains. Bovine lactoferrin added to a triple therapy in first-line treatment potentiates the therapeutic effect.