Bioassay bashing is bad sciences (multiple letters) [1]

Environmental Health Perspectives

Volumn 110, Issue 12, 2002, Pages

  Johnson, Frank M ^a   Huff, James ^a   Cohen, Samuel M ^b   MacDonald, James S ^c  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

1,3 BUTADIENE; BENZENE; BROMINE DERIVATIVE; CARCINOGEN; DIBROMOCHLOROPROPANE; DICHLOROMETHANE; TETRANITROMETHANE;

ACCURACY; ANALYTIC METHOD; BIOASSAY; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CARCINOGEN TESTING; CARCINOGENICITY; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LETTER; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; RAT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; TOXICOLOGY; TRANSGENICS; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL ASSAY; CARCINOGENS; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; MICE; MICE, TRANSGENIC; NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RODENTIA;

EID: 0036908933     PISSN: 00916765     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Letter

References (0)