Literature DB >> 15163548

Hormesis: from marginalization to mainstream: a case for hormesis as the default dose-response model in risk assessment.

Edward J Calabrese1.   

Abstract

The paper provides an account of how the hormetic dose response has emerged in recent years as a serious dose-response model in toxicology and risk assessment after decades of extreme marginalization. In addition to providing the toxicological basis of this dose-response revival, the paper reexamines the concept of a default dose model in toxicology and risk assessment and makes the argument that the hormetic model satisfies criteria (e.g., generalizability, frequency, application to risk assessment endpoints, false positive/negative potential, requirements for hazard assessment, reliability of estimating risks, capacity for validation of risk estimates, public health implications of risk estimates) for such a default model better than its chief competitors, the threshold and linear at low dose models. The selection of the hormetic model as the default model in risk assessment for noncarcinogens and specifically for carcinogens would have a profound impact on the practice of risk assessment and its societal implications.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15163548     DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2004.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol        ISSN: 0041-008X            Impact factor:   4.219


  28 in total

1.  A test battery approach for the ecotoxicological evaluation of estuarine sediments.

Authors:  M Davoren; S Ní Shúilleabháin; J O'Halloran; M G J Hartl; D Sheehan; N M O'Brien; F N A M van Pelt; C Mothersill
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2005-09-28       Impact factor: 2.823

2.  Nuclear energy and health: and the benefits of low-dose radiation hormesis.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler; Myron Pollycove
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-11-10       Impact factor: 2.658

3.  A perspective on the scientific, philosophical, and policy dimensions of hormesis.

Authors:  George R Hoffmann
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2009-01-19       Impact factor: 2.658

4.  Low doses of radiation are protective in vitro and in vivo: evolutionary origins.

Authors:  R E J Mitchel
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-08-19       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  Hormesis: implications for cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  Jonathan Borak; Greg Sirianni
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-05-01       Impact factor: 2.658

6.  The linear no-threshold relationship is inconsistent with radiation biologic and experimental data.

Authors:  Maurice Tubiana; Ludwig E Feinendegen; Chichuan Yang; Joseph M Kaminski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Biphasic dose response in low level light therapy.

Authors:  Ying-Ying Huang; Aaron C-H Chen; James D Carroll; Michael R Hamblin
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 8.  FoxOs: Unifying links between oxidative stress and skeletal homeostasis.

Authors:  Stavroula Kousteni
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.096

9.  The effect of different doses of cigarette smoke in a mouse lung tumor model.

Authors:  Ludmilla Nadir Santiago; Juliana de Camargo Fenley; Lúcia Campanario Braga; José Antônio Cordeiro; Patrícia M Cury
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2008-08-25

10.  Reproductive effects of life-cycle exposure to difenoconazole on female marine medaka (Oryzias melastigma).

Authors:  Xiaocui Dong; Zhenghong Zuo; Jiaojiao Guo; Hongbin Li; Lemeng Zhang; Meng Chen; Zhibin Yang; Chonggang Wang
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 2.823

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.