Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34631497›Full record

ReviewToxicological research2021

Trans-disciplinary diagnosis for an in-depth reform of regulatory expertise in the field of environmental toxicology and security.

Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, Jean-Paul Bourdineaud, Arnaud Apoteker, Nicolas Defarge, Emilie Gaillard, Corinne Lepage, Jacques Testart, Christian Vélot

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxicological research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Joël Spiroux de VendômoisCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.
Jean-Paul BourdineaudCNRS, UMR 5234, Laboratory of Fundamental Microbiology and Pathogenicity, European Institute of Chemistry and Biology, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Arnaud ApotekerCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.
Nicolas DefargeCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.
Emilie GaillardCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.
Corinne LepageCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.
Jacques TestartCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.
Christian VélotCommittee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), 42 rue de Lisbonne, 75008 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6272-7200

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Repeated health and environmental scandals, the loss of biodiversity and the recent burst of chronic diseases constantly remind us the inability of public authorities and risk assessment agencies to protect health and the environment. After reviewing the main shortcomings of our evaluation system of chemicals and new technologies, supported by some concrete examples, we develop a number of proposals to reform both the risk assessment agencies and the evaluation processes. We especially propose the establishment of an independent structure, a High Authority of Expertise, supervising, either at European level or at national level, all the evaluation agencies, and ensuring the transparency, the methodology and the deontology of the expertise. In addition to modifying the evaluation protocols, both in their nature and in their content, especially in order to adapt them to current pollutants such as endocrine disruptors, we propose a reform of the expertise processes based on transparency, contradiction, and greater democracy, including close collaboration between the institutional and scientific parties on the one hand and the whole civil society on the other. All the proposals we make are inspired by the desire to prevent, through appropriate mechanisms, the human, health, ecological, but also economic consequences of contemporary technological choices.

Indexed as

Conflict of interestDeontologyEndocrine disrupterHigh Authority of ExpertisePesticideRegulatory evaluation

Identifiers

PMID34631497
PMCPMC8476664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.