Literature DB >> 10774768

Laboratory animal tests and human cancer.

D P Rall.   

Abstract

The use of the results of laboratory animal tests to predict human cancer is effective in identifying potential human carcinogens before human exposure, permitting measures to be taken to prevent that exposure, a foolproof way to prevent human cancer. The purported, and highly publicized, faults of these tests, when examined critically, are shown not to be significant. Most chemicals are not carcinogenic; only about 1 in 10 are truly carcinogenic. The high doses used to maximize sensitivity do not produce false positives. All human carcinogens are carcinogenic in laboratory animals, and almost all animal carcinogens for which there is human exposure, when analyzed by epidemiological studies, show responses that are not statistically different. Most carcinogens are not banned, some are regulated, but many are not. The claimed costs of these health regulations are typically overestimated, and often greatly overestimated. Using the results of laboratory animal studies is good science and good public health.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10774768     DOI: 10.1081/dmr-100100565

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Metab Rev        ISSN: 0360-2532            Impact factor:   4.518


  7 in total

1.  Animal Models of Chemical Carcinogenesis: Driving Breakthroughs in Cancer Research for 100 Years.

Authors:  Christopher J Kemp
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Protoc       Date:  2015-10-01

Review 2.  Benzene-induced cancers: abridged history and occupational health impact.

Authors:  James Huff
Journal:  Int J Occup Environ Health       Date:  2007 Apr-Jun

3.  3S - Systematic, systemic, and systems biology and toxicology.

Authors:  Lena Smirnova; Nicole Kleinstreuer; Raffaella Corvi; Andre Levchenko; Suzanne C Fitzpatrick; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 6.043

4.  The limits of two-year bioassay exposure regimens for identifying chemical carcinogens.

Authors:  James Huff; Michael F Jacobson; Devra Lee Davis
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2008-06-30       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 5.  Are animal models predictive for humans?

Authors:  Niall Shanks; Ray Greek; Jean Greek
Journal:  Philos Ethics Humanit Med       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 2.464

6.  David Rall and the national toxicology program.

Authors:  James Huff
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 7.  New exposure biomarkers as tools for breast cancer epidemiology, biomonitoring, and prevention: a systematic approach based on animal evidence.

Authors:  Ruthann A Rudel; Janet M Ackerman; Kathleen R Attfield; Julia Green Brody
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 9.031

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.