Reader TTS

Access through your institution Buy or subscribe To the Editor: Reviewing the three pathways, even the 'soft' Brexit option (the Norwegian model) fails to achieve status quo

pre-Brexit. Under this arrangement, Britain would renounce EU membership before rejoining the European Economic Area (EEA) as a European Free Trade Association (EFTA) affiliate. The

arrangement would require consent to contentious EU policies (including 'freedom of movement' rules), while necessitating payment of considerable fees in exchange for EU

marketplace access. This option seems increasingly unlikely, given that triggering Article 50 signifies a 'harder' stance toward Brexit (i.e., exiting the single market). Rejoining

as an EFTA affiliate additionally obligates UK-based EU regulatory bodies (like the London-based European Medicines Agency; EMA) to relocate to EU-member states and strips the UK of any

influence over EU regulation. In anticipation, several countries are actively courting the EMA to be its future home1,2. This is a preview of subscription content, access via your

institution ACCESS OPTIONS Access through your institution Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription $29.99 / 30 days cancel

any time Learn more Subscribe to this journal Receive 12 print issues and online access $209.00 per year only $17.42 per issue Learn more Buy this article * Purchase on SpringerLink *

Instant access to full article PDF Buy now Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout ADDITIONAL ACCESS OPTIONS: * Log in * Learn about institutional

subscriptions * Read our FAQs * Contact customer support REFERENCES * Cressey, D. & Abbott, A. _Nature_ http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.20153 (2016). * Anonymous. _Nature_ 544, 6

(2017). * European Commission. _Swiss participation in Horizon 2020_. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-hi-swiss-part_en.pdf (EU, 2017). * Matthes, J.

& Busch, B. _Vox_ http://voxeu.org/article/meta-analysis-economic-impact-brexit (2016). * Pain, N. & Young, G. _Econ. Model._ 21, 387–408 (2004). Article  Google Scholar  * Abraham,

J. _Lancet_ 360, 1498–1502 (2002). Article  Google Scholar  * Lang, A. _House of Commons Library_ http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06522#fullreport (2013).

Google Scholar  * Mossialos, E., Simpkin, V., Keown, O. & Darzi, A. _LSE_ http://www.lse.ac.uk/LSEHealthAndSocialCare/impacts/news/NHS-and-EU-Referendum-briefing.pdf (2016). * Gibney, E.

_Nature_ 540, 16–17 (2016). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Cressey, D. _Nature_ http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.20434 (2016). Download references AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND

AFFILIATIONS * University of California San Diego, School of Medicine, Global Public Health and Anesthesiology, San Diego, California, USA John Annaloro & Tim K Mackey Authors * John

Annaloro View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Tim K Mackey View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google

Scholar CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Tim K Mackey. ETHICS DECLARATIONS COMPETING INTERESTS The authors declare no competing financial interests. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS Reprints and

permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE Annaloro, J., Mackey, T. Policy implications for post-Brexit biotech. _Nat Biotechnol_ 35, 710–711 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3930

Download citation * Published: 01 August 2017 * Issue Date: August 2017 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3930 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to

read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing

initiative