For scientists in a democracy, to dissent is to be reasonable. George Monbiot: It’s as clear and chilling a statement of intent as you’re likely to read. Scientists should be “the voice of reason, rather than dissent, in the public arena”. Vladimir Putin? Kim Jong-un? No, Professor Ian Boyd, chief scientific adviser at the UK’s Department for Environment.
Special report: Scientists critical of EU chemical policy have industry ties. Seventeen scientists who have criticized plans in Europe to regulate endocrine-disrupting chemicals have past or current ties to regulated industries – yet did not declare these as interests in their editorial. “We do not believe the discussion on the conflicts of interests will serve anybody because it takes away the focus from the real issue,” the lead author said in an interview.
Journal editors trade blows over toxicology. NATURE: Dozens more researchers this week joined the fray in a row over how regulators should assess the risks of potentially dangerous chemicals used in everything from plastics to pesticides.
Policy Decisions on Endocrine Disruptors Should Be Based on Science Across Disciplines: A Response to Dietrich et al. We are writing as scientists and editors of leading peer-reviewed journals that have published important contributions in the study of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). By signing this editorial, we affirm that regulatory decisions on EDCs should be made based on the best available science and expertise that involves, among others, reproductive biology, endocrinology, medicine, genetics, behavior, developmental biology and toxicology.
Eight questions for toxicologists opposed to new EU chemicals laws. Normally a reclusive subject rarely sighted in the media, the intersection between science and chemicals policy has been unusually prominent this summer, with the editors of journals of toxicology, endocrinology and other related fields publishing combative editorials about how endocrine disrupting chemicals should be regulated. This article summarises the main questions which, according to the various commentaries, these toxicologists should be answering.