ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2006
Late lessons from early warnings: Toward realism and precaution with endocrine-disrupting substances.
Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A proposed framework for the systematic review and integrated assessment (SYRINA) of endocrine disrupting chemicals.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2016Pooled it
- Using systematic reviews for hazard and risk assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2015Pooled it
- Conducting evaluations of evidence that are transparent, timely and can lead to health-protective actions.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2022Article
- Emotional and behavioral attitudes of Tunisian youth towards childhood leukemia: health education and primary prevention in perspective.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Thresholds and Endocrine Disruptors: An Endocrine Society Policy Perspective.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2020Article
- Childhood Leukemia and Primary Prevention.Current problems in pediatric and adolescent health care · 2016Article
- Maternal bodies and medicines: a commentary on risk and decision-making of pregnant and breastfeeding women and health professionals.BMC public health · 2011Article
- Leveraging Epidemiology to Improve Risk Assessment.The open epidemiology journal · 2011Article
- Seven deadly sins of environmental epidemiology and the virtues of precaution.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2008Article
- Introduction: The ecological relevance of chemically induced endocrine disruption in wildlife.Environmental health perspectives · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The histories of selected public and environmental hazards, from the first scientifically based early warnings about potential harm to the subsequent precautionary and preventive measures, have been reviewed by the European Environment Agency. This article relates the "late lessons" from these early warnings to the current debates on the application of the precautionary principle to the hazards posed by endocrine-disrupting substances (EDSs). Here, I summarize some of the definitional and interpretative issues that arise. These issues include the contingent nature of knowledge; the definitions of precaution, prevention, risk, uncertainty, and ignorance; the use of differential levels of proof; and the nature and main direction of the methodological and cultural biases within the environmental health sciences. It is argued that scientific methods need to reflect better the realities of multicausality, mixtures, timing of dose, and system dynamics, which characterize the exposures and impacts of EDSs. This improved science could provide a more robust basis for the wider and wise use of the precautionary principle in the assessment and management of the threats posed by EDSs. The evaluation of such scientific evidence requires assessments that also account for multicausal reality. Two of the often used, and sometimes misused, Bradford Hill "criteria," consistency and temporality, are critically reviewed in light of multicausality, thereby illustrating the need to review all of the criteria in light of 40 years of progress in science and policymaking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.