Good laboratory practices: Becker et al. Respond

Environmental Health Perspectives

Volumn 118, Issue 5, 2010, Pages

  Becker, Richard A ^a   Janus, Erik R ^b   White, Russell D ^c   Kruszewski, Francis H ^d   Brackett, Robert E ^e  

^a AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL   (United States)

^b CropLife Foundation   (United States)

^c AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d Soap and Detergent Association   (United States)

^e Grocery Manufacturers Association   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE; GOVERNMENT; INDUSTRY; LETTER; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; RELIABILITY; RESEARCH; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 77951751516     PISSN: 00916765     EISSN: 15529924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.0901755R     Document Type: Letter

References (9)

1. Barrow CS, Conrad JW Jr 2006. Assessing the reliability and credibility of industry science and scientists. Environ Health Perspect 114: 153-155.
2. Becker RA, Erik R., Janus ER, White RD, Kruszewski FH, Brackett RF. 2009. Good Laboratory Practices and safety assessments. Environ Health Perspect 117: A482-A483.
3. Boobis AR, Cohen SM, Dellarco V, McGregor D, Meek ME, Vickers C, et al. 2006. IPCS Framework for analyzing the relevance of a cancer mode of action for humans. Crit Rev Toxicol 36: 781-792.
4. Boobis AR, Doe JE, Heinrich-Hirsch B, Meek ME, Munn S, Ruchirawat M, et al. 2008. IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a noncancer mode of action for humans. Crit Rev Toxicol 38: 87-96.
5. Maurissen JP, Gilbert SG, Sander M, Beauchamp TL, Johnson S, Schwetz BA, et al. 2005. Workshop proceedings: managing conflict of interest in science. A little consensus and a lot of controversy. Toxicol Sci 87: 11-14.
6. Myers JP, vom Saal FS, Benson T, Akingbemi BT, Arizono K, Belcher S, et al. 2009. Why public health agencies cannot depend on Good Laboratory Practices as a criterion for selecting data: the case of bisphenol A. Environ Health Perspect 117: 309-315.
7. Schneider K, Schwarz M, Burkholder I, Kopp-Schneider A, Edle L, Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, et al. 2009. "ToxRTool," a new tool to assess the reliability of toxicological data. Toxicol Lett 189: 138-144.
8. Society of Toxicology 2008. Principles for Research Priorities in Toxicology. Available: http://www.toxicology.org/ms/PrinResearc?h.asp [accessed 12 January 2010].
9. Tyl RW 2009. Basic exploratory research versus guideline-compliant studies used for hazard evaluation and risk assessment: bisphenol A as a case study. Environ Health Perspect 117: 1644-1651.