| Autor: |
Anderson, Elizabeth L. elanderson@sciences.com, McDaniel, Patricia A.1 patricia.mcdaniel@ucsf.edu, Solomon, Gina2, Malone, Ruth E.3, Claire B. Ernhart4 cxe@po.cwru.edu, Lanphear, Bruce P.5,6 bruce.lanphear@chmcc.org, Hornung, Richard5,6, Khoury, Jane5,6, Yolton, Kimberly5,6, Dietrich, Kim N.5,6, Tim Evans7 tim@timevansenvironment.com, Sharpe, Richard8 r.sharpe@hrsu.mrc.ac.uk, Shanna H. Swan9 shanna_swan@urmc.rochester.edu, Enneking, Patricia A.10 patty_enneking@plastics.org |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Environmental Health Perspectives. Feb2006, Vol. 114 Issue 2, pA 84. 7p. |
| Abstrakt: |
The article presents the author's views regarding the comments made by other researchers on the evaluation of the case study regarding the reregistration of phosphine by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. According to the author, the case study passed through a thorough peer review and was handled properly in all aspects, which is contrary to the accusations of the researchers that the author improperly used his status in the publication where the study was published. The author reveals that there are legitimate scientific concerns that require resolution but was neglected in the study. |
| Databáze: |
GreenFILE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
