Literature DB >> 16030328

The weight of scientific evidence in policy and law.

Sheldon Krimsky1.   

Abstract

The term "weight of evidence" (WOE) appears in regulatory rules and decisions. However, there has been little discussion about the meaning, variations of use, and epistemic significance of WOE for setting health and safety standards. This article gives an overview of the role of WOE in regulatory science, discusses alternative views about the methodology underlying the concept, and places WOE in the context of the Supreme Court's decision in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc (1993). I argue that whereas the WOE approach to evaluating scientific evidence is gaining favor among regulators, its applications in judicial processes may be in conflict with some interpretations of how the Daubert criteria for judging reliable evidence should be applied.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16030328     DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.044727

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  15 in total

1.  Is exposure to formaldehyde in air causally associated with leukemia?--A hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence analysis.

Authors:  Lorenz R Rhomberg; Lisa A Bailey; Julie E Goodman; Ali K Hamade; David Mayfield
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 5.635

Review 2.  Correlating neurobehavioral performance with biomarkers of organophosphorous pesticide exposure.

Authors:  Diane S Rohlman; W Kent Anger; Pamela J Lein
Journal:  Neurotoxicology       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 4.294

3.  Using problem formulation to clarify the meaning of weight of evidence and biological relevance in environmental risk assessments for genetically modified crops.

Authors:  Alan Raybould; Karen Holt; Ian Kimber
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 3.074

Review 4.  Regulatory decisions on endocrine disrupting chemicals should be based on the principles of endocrinology.

Authors:  Laura N Vandenberg; Theo Colborn; Tyrone B Hayes; Jerrold J Heindel; David R Jacobs; Duk-Hee Lee; John Peterson Myers; Toshi Shioda; Ana M Soto; Frederick S vom Saal; Wade V Welshons; R Thomas Zoeller
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2013-02-11       Impact factor: 3.143

Review 5.  The Inadmissibility of What We Eat in America and NHANES Dietary Data in Nutrition and Obesity Research and the Scientific Formulation of National Dietary Guidelines.

Authors:  Edward Archer; Gregory Pavela; Carl J Lavie
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 7.616

6.  Incorporating Low-dose Epidemiology Data in a Chlorpyrifos Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Julie E Goodman; Robyn L Prueitt; Lorenz R Rhomberg
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 7.  Using systematic reviews for hazard and risk assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals.

Authors:  Anna Beronius; Laura N Vandenberg
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 6.514

Review 8.  Current status of the epidemiologic evidence linking polychlorinated biphenyls and non-hodgkin lymphoma, and the role of immune dysregulation.

Authors:  Shira Kramer; Stephanie Moller Hikel; Kristen Adams; David Hinds; Katherine Moon
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  New views on the hypothesis of respiratory cancer risk from soluble nickel exposure; and reconsideration of this risk's historical sources in nickel refineries.

Authors:  Philip G Thornhill; Bruce R Conard; James G Heller
Journal:  J Occup Med Toxicol       Date:  2009-08-23       Impact factor: 2.646

10.  Endocrine Disruptors: Improving Regulatory Science Policy.

Authors:  Paolo F Ricci
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 2.658

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.