A novel account of scientific anomaly: Help for the dispute over low-dose biochemical effects

Philosophy of Science

Volumn 73, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 790-802

  Elliott, Kevin C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35348880803     PISSN: 00318248     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/518636     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (38)

1. Ashford, Nicholas, and Claudia Miller (1998), Chemical Exposures: Low Levels and High Stakes. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.
2. Bogen, J., and James Woodward (1988), "Saving the Phenomena," Philosophical Review 97: 303-352.
3. Bridgman, P. W. (1927), The Logic of Modern Physics. New York: Macmillan.
4. Calabrese, Edward (1999), "Evidence That Hormesis Represents an 'Overcompensation' Response to a Disruption in Homeostasis," Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 42: 135-137.
5. Calabrese, Edward, and Linda Baldwin (1998), Chemical Hormesis: Scientific Foundations. College Station, TX: Institute for the Advancement of Chemical Technology.
6. _ (2000), "Tales of Two Similar Hypotheses: The Rise and Fall of Chemical and Radiation Hormesis," Human and Experimental Toxicology 19: 85-97.
7. _ (2002), "Defining Hormesis," Human and Experimental Toxicology 21: 91-97.
8. _ (2003), "Toxicology Rethinks Its Central Belief," Nature 421: 691-692.
9. Colborn, Theo, Diane Dumanoski, and J. P. Myers (1996), Our Stolen Future. New York: Dutton.
10. Collins, Harry, and R. Evans (2002), "The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience," Social Studies of Science 32: 235-296.
11. Darden, Lindley (1991), Theory Change in Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. Davis, J. Michael, and David Svendsgaard (1990), "U-Shaped Dose-Response Curves: Their Occurrence and Implications for Risk Assessment," Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 30: 71-83.
13. Elliott, Kevin (2000a), "A Case for Caution: An Evaluation of Calabrese and Baldwin's Studies of Chemical Hormesis," Risk: Health, Safety, and Environment 11: 177-196.
14. _ (2000b), "Conceptual Clarification and Policy-Related Science: The Case of Chemical Hormesis," Perspectives on Science 8: 346-366.
15. _ (2004a), "Error as Means to Discovery," Philosophy of Science 71: 1-24.
16. _ (2004b), Scientific Anomaly and Biological Effects of Low-Dose Chemicals. Ph.D. dissertation. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame.
17. Gerber, Linda M., George C. Williams, and Sandra J. Gray (1999), "The Nutrient-Toxin Dosage Continuum in Human Evolution and Modern Health," Quarterly Review of Biology 74: 273-289.
18. Gooding, David (1990), Experiment and the Making of Meaning: Human Agency in Scientific Observation and Experiment. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
19. Gordon, T., and J. Doyle (1987), "Drinking and Mortality: The Albany Study," American Journal of Epidemiology 125: 263-270.
20. Hacking, Ian (1988), "On the Stability of the Laboratory Sciences," Journal of Philosophy 85: 507-514.
21. Herrick, C., and Daniel Sarewitz (2000), "Ex Post Evaluation: A More Effective Role for Scientific Assessments in Environmental Policy," Science, Technology, and Human Values 25: 309-331.
22. Jonas, W. (2001), "A Critique of 'The Scientific Foundations of Hormesis,'" Critical Reviews in Toxicology 31: 625-629.
23. Kaiser, J. (2003), "Sipping from a Poisoned Chalice," Science 302 (October 17): 376-379.
24. Kuhn, Thomas (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25. Lakatos, Imre (1970), "Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes," in Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 91-196.
26. Laudan, Larry (1977), Progress and Its Problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.
27. Machamer, Peter, Lindley Darden, and Carl Craver (2000), "Thinking about Mechanisms," Philosophy of Science 67: 1-25.
28. Mayo, Deborah (1996), Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29. Mayo, Deborah, and Aris Spanos (2006), "Philosophers of Science and Statistical Controversies in Ecological Testing," Philosophy of Science 73 (5), in this issue.
30. Nickles, Thomas (1997), "A Multi-pass Conception of Scientific Inquiry," Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 32: 11-44.
31. Popper, Karl (1959), The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.
32. Sarewitz, Daniel (2000), "Science and Environmental Policy: An Excess of Objectivity," in Robert Frodeman (ed.), Earth Matters: The Earth Sciences, Philosophy, and the Claims of Community. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 79-98.
33. Schaffner, Kenneth (1993), Discovery and Explanation in Biology and Medicine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Stebbing, A. R. D. (1998), "A Theory for Growth Hormesis," Mutation Research 403: 249-258.
35. Steinle, Friedrich (1997), "Entering New Fields: Exploratory Uses of Experimentation," Philosophy of Science 64 (supplement): S65-S74.
36. Vichi, P., and T. Tritton (1989), "Stimulation of Growth in Human and Murine Cells by Adriamycin," Cancer Research 49: 2679-2682.
37. Wimsatt, William (1987), "False Models as Means to Truer Theories," in Matthew Nitecki and Antoni Hoffman (eds.), Neutral Models in Biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 23-55.
38. Woodward, James (2000), "Data, Phenomena, and Reliability," Philosophy of Science 67: S163-S179.