Science and policy on endocrine disrupters must not be mixed: a reply to a “common sense” intervention by toxicology journal editors

Environmental Health

Commentary

Roseline Ochieng¹  Andreas Kortenkamp²  Susan Jobling²  Jayne V Brian²  Olwenn V Martin²  Ulla Hass³  Anne Marie Vinggaard³  Åke Bergman⁴  Martin Scheringer⁵  Derek Muir⁶  Charles R Tyler⁷  Nicolas Olea⁸  Peter S Ross⁹  Heloise Frouin⁹  Carl-Gustaf Bornehag^1,10  Olle Söder^1,11  Taisen Iguchi^1,12  Georg Becher^1,13  Erik Ropstad^1,14  Riana Bornman^1,15  Anna-Maria Andersson^1,16  Niels Erik Skakkebaek^1,16  Anders Juul^1,16  Shanna Swan^1,17  Christina Rudén^1,18  Karin Wiberg^1,19  Leif Norrgren^1,19  Carlos Sonnenschein^2,20  Ana Soto^2,20  Laura N Vandenberg^2,21  Paul A Fowler^2,22  Bruce Blumberg^2,23  Stephanie C Casey^2,23  Linda C Giudice^2,24  R Thomas Zoeller^2,25  Karen A Kidd^2,26  Poul Bjerregaard^2,27  Jorma Toppari^2,28  Monica Lind^2,29  Ingvar Brandt^2,29  Martin van den Berg^3,30 

[1] Aga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya;Brunel University, London, UK;Danish Technical University, Copenhagen, Denmark;Department of Materials and Environmental Chemistry, Stockholm University, SE-10691, Stockholm, Sweden;ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland;Environment Canada, Burlington, Canada;Exeter University, Exeter, UK;Granada University, Granada, Spain;Institute of Ocean Sciences, Fisheries and Oceans, Sidney, BC, Canada;Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden;Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden;National Institute for Basic Biology, Okazaki, Japan;Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway;Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Oslo, Norway;Pretoria Academic Hospital, Pretoria, South Africa;Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark;School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA;Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden;Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden;Tufts University, Boston, USA;Tufts University, Medford, USA;University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK;University of California, Irvine, USA;University of California, San Francisco, USA;University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA;University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada;University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark;University of Turku, Turku, Finland;Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden;Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands;

关键词: Endocrine disrupting chemicals;    Environment;    Health;    Precautionary principle;    Regulatory toxicology;   

DOI  :  10.1186/1476-069X-12-69

 received in 2013-08-06, accepted in 2013-08-07,  发布年份 2013

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

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.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Bergman et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013