Till Örebro universitet

oru.seÖrebro universitets publikationer
Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Peer-reviewed and unbiased research, rather than 'sound science', should be used to evaluate endocrine-disrupting chemicals
New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA; NYU Wagner School of Public Service, New York, USA; NYU Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, New York, USA; NYU Global Institute of Public Health, New York, USA.
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA.
University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Environmental Health Sciences, Charlottesville, USA.
Visa övriga samt affilieringar
2016 (Engelska)Ingår i: Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, ISSN 0143-005X, E-ISSN 1470-2738, Vol. 70, nr 11, s. 1051-1056Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

Evidence increasingly confirms that synthetic chemicals disrupt the endocrine system and contribute to disease and disability across the lifespan. Despite a United Nations Environment Programme/WHO report affirmed by over 100 countries at the Fourth International Conference on Chemicals Management, 'manufactured doubt' continues to be cast as a cloud over rigorous, peer-reviewed and independently funded scientific data. This study describes the sources of doubt and their social costs, and suggested courses of action by policymakers to prevent disease and disability. The problem is largely based on the available data, which are all too limited. Rigorous testing programmes should not simply focus on oestrogen, androgen and thyroid. Tests should have proper statistical power. 'Good laboratory practice' (GLP) hardly represents a proper or even gold standard for laboratory studies of endocrine disruption. Studies should be evaluated with regard to the contamination of negative controls, responsiveness to positive controls and dissection techniques. Flaws in many GLP studies have been identified, yet regulatory agencies rely on these flawed studies. Peer-reviewed and unbiased research, rather than 'sound science', should be used to evaluate endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2016. Vol. 70, nr 11, s. 1051-1056
Nyckelord [en]
ENDOCRINOLOGY, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, Environmental epidemiology, TOXICOLOGY
Nationell ämneskategori
Miljövetenskap
Forskningsämne
Miljövetenskap
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-83786DOI: 10.1136/jech-2016-207841ISI: 000386516300001PubMedID: 27417427Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84978909863OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-83786DiVA, id: diva2:1448240
Anmärkning

Funding Agency:

NIDDK NIH HHS, Grant Number: R01 DK100307

NIEHS NIH HHS, Grant Number: R01 ES022972, U01 ES020952, R01 ES021394, K22 ES025811

Tillgänglig från: 2020-06-26 Skapad: 2020-06-26 Senast uppdaterad: 2024-05-14Bibliografiskt granskad

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltext saknas i DiVA

Övriga länkar

Förlagets fulltextPubMedScopus

Person

Zoeller, R. Thomas

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
Zoeller, R. Thomas
I samma tidskrift
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Miljövetenskap

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 83 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf