2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.02.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critical comments on the WHO-UNEP State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals – 2012

Abstract: Early in 2013, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a 2012 update to the 2002 State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals. Several significant concerns have been identified that raise questions about conclusions reached in this report regarding endocrine disruption. First, the report is not a state-of-the-science review and does not follow the 2002 WHO recommended weight-of-evidence approach. Second, endocrine disruption is often presumed to occur based on exposure or a potential mechanism d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
57
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 83 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 109 publications
0
57
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The background of our analysis is summarized in two contrasting recent publications [12,13]. The first is co-authored by Lamb et al [12], who critically reviewed the 2012 WHO/UNEP report on EDCs [14,] which, according to them, lacked a balanced perspective and presented inconsistencies with the state of the science on endocrine disruption.…”
Section: Non-endocrine and Endocrine Principles Of Edc Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The background of our analysis is summarized in two contrasting recent publications [12,13]. The first is co-authored by Lamb et al [12], who critically reviewed the 2012 WHO/UNEP report on EDCs [14,] which, according to them, lacked a balanced perspective and presented inconsistencies with the state of the science on endocrine disruption.…”
Section: Non-endocrine and Endocrine Principles Of Edc Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first is co-authored by Lamb et al [12], who critically reviewed the 2012 WHO/UNEP report on EDCs [14,] which, according to them, lacked a balanced perspective and presented inconsistencies with the state of the science on endocrine disruption. The paper by Lamb et al [12] provides opinions that we refer to here as the ‘non-endocrine' perspective.…”
Section: Non-endocrine and Endocrine Principles Of Edc Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…World Summary for Decision-Makers [5]. All these authoritative publications, however, are not unanimously accepted and a very small part of the scientific community [6][7][8], also presenting valid reasons, disputes the conclusions of the reports above mentioned. The conclusions, however, become more complicate considering that in the environment more classes of EDCs are simultaneous present and, therefore, one must take in account their additive or synergistic effects.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%