Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Bisphenol-A And The Great Divide: A Review Of Controversies In The Field Of Endocrine Disruption, Laura Vandenberg, Maricel V. Maffini, Carlos Sonnenschein, Beverly S. Rubin, Ana M. Soto
Bisphenol-A And The Great Divide: A Review Of Controversies In The Field Of Endocrine Disruption, Laura Vandenberg, Maricel V. Maffini, Carlos Sonnenschein, Beverly S. Rubin, Ana M. Soto
Laura Vandenberg
In 1991, a group of 21 scientists gathered at the Wingspread Conference Center to discuss evidence of developmental alterations observed in wildlife populations after chemical exposures. There, the term “endocrine disruptor” was agreed upon to describe a class of chemicals including those that act as agonists and antagonists of the estrogen receptors (ERs), androgen receptor, thyroid hormone receptor, and others. This definition has since evolved, and the field has grown to encompass hundreds of chemicals. Despite significant advances in the study of endocrine disruptors, several controversies have sprung up and continue, including the debate over the existence of nonmonotonic dose …
Why Public Health Agencies Cannot Depend On Good Laboratory Practices As A Criterion For Selecting Data: The Case Of Bisphenol A, John Peterson Myers, Frederick S. Vom Saal, Benson T. Akingbemi, Koji Arizono, Scott Belcher, Theo Colborn, Ibrahim Chahoud, D. Andrew Crain, Francesca Farabollini, Louis J. Guillette Jr., Terry Hassold, Shuk-Mei Ho, Patricia A. Hunt, Taisen Iguchi, Susan Jobling, Jun Kanno, Hans Laufer, Michele Marcus, John A. Mclachlan, Angel Nadal, Jörg Oehlmann, Nicolás Olea, Paola Palanza, Stefano Parmigiani, Beverly S. Rubin, Gilbert Schoenfelder, Carlos Sonnenschein, Ana M. Soto, Chris E. Talsness, Julia A. Taylor, Laura Vandenberg, John G. Vandenbergh, Sarah Vogel, Cheryl S. Watson, Wade V. Welshons, R. Thomas Zoeller
Why Public Health Agencies Cannot Depend On Good Laboratory Practices As A Criterion For Selecting Data: The Case Of Bisphenol A, John Peterson Myers, Frederick S. Vom Saal, Benson T. Akingbemi, Koji Arizono, Scott Belcher, Theo Colborn, Ibrahim Chahoud, D. Andrew Crain, Francesca Farabollini, Louis J. Guillette Jr., Terry Hassold, Shuk-Mei Ho, Patricia A. Hunt, Taisen Iguchi, Susan Jobling, Jun Kanno, Hans Laufer, Michele Marcus, John A. Mclachlan, Angel Nadal, Jörg Oehlmann, Nicolás Olea, Paola Palanza, Stefano Parmigiani, Beverly S. Rubin, Gilbert Schoenfelder, Carlos Sonnenschein, Ana M. Soto, Chris E. Talsness, Julia A. Taylor, Laura Vandenberg, John G. Vandenbergh, Sarah Vogel, Cheryl S. Watson, Wade V. Welshons, R. Thomas Zoeller
Laura Vandenberg
BACKGROUND: In their safety evaluations of bisphenol A (BPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and a counterpart in Europe, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), have given special prominence to two industry-funded studies that adhered to standards defined by Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). These same agencies have given much less weight in risk assessments to a large number of independently replicated non-GLP studies conducted with government funding by the leading experts in various fields of science from around the world. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed differences between industry-funded GLP studies of BPA conducted by commercial laboratories for regulatory purposes and …