We are contributing authors to a new publication which, we hope, presents a coherent framework for using existing evidence to classify chemicals as EDCs. The devil will be in the detail, of course, but one of the major contributions the paper makes is its clear and structured guidance for weighing evidence (or as we prefer to call […]
We are among a group of scientists investigating how to make best use of the best evidence to identify and classify endocrine disruptors, who have written to EU Health Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis in order to voice our concerns about the proposed criteria for identification and regulation of EDCs under the PPP and Biocides Regulations. We are concerned […]
Our Special Issue on systematic review methods for chemical risk assessment, which we have been guest editing, has been published. .
This is a new paper we have published (with the invaluable contributions of a small army of co-authors) about how systematic review methods have potential to make the chemical risk assessment process more transparent and scientifically robust. You will see a diverse spectrum of contributors which (I will take the liberty of interpreting) amounts to […]
Paul Whaley is presenting the poster below, outlining the new PFS Literature Review Appraisal Toolkit, intended to aid evaluation of the methodological quality of literature reviews conducted for the purpose of better understanding health risks posed by chemicals. (Click to enlarge.) See you at Eurotox!
This is later than it should be (interrupted by a nasty dose of the flu and some travel commitments) but we launched our report, Systematic Review and the Future of Evidence in Chemicals Policy, at a lunchtime debate at the European Parliament on 4 November. Kindly hosted by Corinne Lepage MEP (ALDE) it went pretty […]