Published in
BioMed Central, Environmental Health, 1(12), p. 69
Links
- ORCID
- ORCID
- ORCID
- ORCID
- BioMed Central | PDF
- [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] | PDF
- [works.bepress.com]
- [works.bepress.com]
- [hdl.handle.net]
- [urn.kb.se] | PDF
- [fox.leuphana.de]
- [www.ehjournal.net] | PDF
- [works.bepress.com] | PDF
- [works.bepress.com] | PDF
- [uu.diva-portal.org] | PDF
- [cloudfront.escholarship.org] | PDF
- [cloudfront.escholarship.org] | PDF
- [bura.brunel.ac.uk] | PDF
- [aura.abdn.ac.uk] | PDF
- [europepmc.org] | PDF
- [www.researchgate.net] | PDF
- [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] | PDF
- [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] | PDF
Tools
Science and policy on endocrine disrupters must not be mixed: a reply to a “common sense” intervention by toxicology journal editors
,
Riana Bornman,
Maria S. (Riana) Bornman,
Ingvar Brandt,
Jayne V. Brian,
Stephanie C. Casey,
Paul A. Fowler,
Heloise Frouin,
Linda C. Giudice
and other authors.
Full text: Download
Abstract
The “common sense” intervention by toxicology journal editors regarding proposed European Union endocrine disrupter regulations ignores scientific evidence and well-established principles of chemical risk assessment. In this commentary, endocrine disrupter experts express their concerns about a recently published, and is in our considered opinion inaccurate and factually incorrect, editorial that has appeared in several journals in toxicology. Some of the shortcomings of the editorial are discussed in detail. We call for a better founded scientific debate which may help to overcome a polarisation of views detrimental to reaching a consensus about scientific foundations for endocrine disrupter regulation in the EU. ; Stockholm University ; http://www.ehjournal.net/content/12/1/69 ; am2014