{"title":"草甘膦毒理学","authors":"S. Krimsky","doi":"10.4018/978-1-5225-7635-8.CH015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores the glaring scientific differences in the human health assessment of the popular herbicide glyphosate between European and American institutions. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans. Both IARC's and the EPA's carcinogenic risk assessment processes are discussed. This work reveals uncertainties in the sciences of toxicology and epidemiology, as well as assumptions made in their applications for evaluating glyphosate. These uncertainties, along with the political context of chemical risk assessment, are at the root of the divergent findings on the carcinogenic risks of glyphosate.","PeriodicalId":402728,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Exposures and Human Health Challenges","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Glyphosate Toxicology\",\"authors\":\"S. Krimsky\",\"doi\":\"10.4018/978-1-5225-7635-8.CH015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter explores the glaring scientific differences in the human health assessment of the popular herbicide glyphosate between European and American institutions. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans. Both IARC's and the EPA's carcinogenic risk assessment processes are discussed. This work reveals uncertainties in the sciences of toxicology and epidemiology, as well as assumptions made in their applications for evaluating glyphosate. These uncertainties, along with the political context of chemical risk assessment, are at the root of the divergent findings on the carcinogenic risks of glyphosate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Exposures and Human Health Challenges\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Exposures and Human Health Challenges\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7635-8.CH015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Exposures and Human Health Challenges","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7635-8.CH015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本章探讨了欧洲和美国机构之间在流行除草剂草甘膦的人类健康评估方面的明显科学差异。国际癌症研究机构(IARC)将草甘膦列为可能的人类致癌物,而美国环境保护署(EPA)的结论是草甘膦不太可能对人类致癌。讨论了IARC和EPA的致癌风险评估过程。这项工作揭示了毒理学和流行病学科学的不确定性,以及它们在评估草甘膦应用中的假设。这些不确定性,加上化学品风险评估的政治背景,是草甘膦致癌风险研究结果分歧的根源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Glyphosate Toxicology
This chapter explores the glaring scientific differences in the human health assessment of the popular herbicide glyphosate between European and American institutions. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans. Both IARC's and the EPA's carcinogenic risk assessment processes are discussed. This work reveals uncertainties in the sciences of toxicology and epidemiology, as well as assumptions made in their applications for evaluating glyphosate. These uncertainties, along with the political context of chemical risk assessment, are at the root of the divergent findings on the carcinogenic risks of glyphosate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Arsenic Exposures, Poisoning, and Threat to Human Health The Waste-Energy-Health Nexus Exposure to Toxic Environmental Agents in the Form of Fragrances and Development of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) Environmental and Occupational Epidemiology Principles A Review on Chemsensors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1