Scientifically unfounded precaution drives European Commission's recommendations on EDC regulation, while defying common sense, well-established science and risk assessment principles.

Daniel R. Dietrich, Sonja von Aulock, Hans Marquardt , Bas Blaauboer, Wolfgang Dekant, James Kehrer, Jan Hengstler, Abby Collier, Gio Batta Gori, Olavi Pelkonen, Florian Lang, Frans P. Nijkamp , Kerstin Stemmer, Albert Li , Kai Savolainen, A. Wallace Hayes, Nigel Gooderham, Alan Harvey, Frank A. Barile

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

Abstract

We, the undersigned editors of prominent journals of pharmacology and toxicology, are drawing your attention to the imminent decisions by the European Commission to enforce a regulatory framework for so-called endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). The currently drafted framework is based on virtually complete ignorance of all well-established and taught principles of pharmacology and toxicology, of opinions raised by the European Commission's own competent expert authority (European Food Safety Authority ( EFSA, 2013)), and of critical statements made by member countries, while avoiding asking for support from the European Commission's own scientific expert committees.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)A1-A2
Number of pages2
JournalToxicon
Volume76
Early online date24 Oct 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Dec 2013

Keywords

  • scientifically unfounded
  • european commission
  • EDC regulation
  • risk assessment
  • endocrine disrupting chemicals
  • toxicology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Scientifically unfounded precaution drives European Commission's recommendations on EDC regulation, while defying common sense, well-established science and risk assessment principles.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this