To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Planned maintenance
A system upgrade is planned for 10/12-2024, at 12:00-13:00. During this time DiVA will be unavailable.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology
Tufts University, Medford, USA.
The Endocrine Disruption Exchange, Paonia, USA.
University of California, Berkeley, USA.
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, USA.
Show others and affiliations
2013 (English)In: Reproductive Toxicology, ISSN 0890-6238, E-ISSN 1873-1708, Vol. 38, p. 1-15Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

For years, scientists from various disciplines have studied the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on the health and wellbeing of humans and wildlife. Some studies have specifically focused on the effects of low doses, i.e. those in the range that are thought to be safe for humans and/or animals. Others have focused on the existence of non-monotonic dose-response curves. These concepts challenge the way that chemical risk assessment is performed for EDCs. Continued discussions have clarified exactly what controversies and challenges remain. We address several of these issues, including why the study and regulation of EDCs should incorporate endocrine principles; what level of consensus there is for low dose effects; challenges to our understanding of non-monotonicity; and whether EDCs have been demonstrated to produce adverse effects. This discussion should result in a better understanding of these issues, and allow for additional dialog on their impact on risk assessment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2013. Vol. 38, p. 1-15
Keywords [en]
Weight of evidence, Organizational, Adaptive effect, Hormesis, Human exposure, Epidemiology, Flare
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Enviromental Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-83738DOI: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2013.02.002ISI: 000319535200001PubMedID: 23411111Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84874777882OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-83738DiVA, id: diva2:1448075
Note

Funding Agency:

National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA, Grant Number: GM 087107, ES 08314, ES 010026, ES 018764, HL 53560, UMC MO-VMFC0018

Susan G. Komen for Cure grant, Grant Number: FAS0703860

Mitchell Kapor Foundation  

Cornell-Douglas Foundation  

Wallace Global Fund  

Kendeda Foundation

Available from: 2020-06-26 Created: 2020-06-26 Last updated: 2021-04-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Zoeller, R. Thomas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Zoeller, R. Thomas
In the same journal
Reproductive Toxicology
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 75 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf