EJ Calabrese, I Iavicoli and V Calabrese. Hormesis: Its impact on medicine and health. Human and Experimental Toxicology. 32(2) 120–152.
This article offers a broad assessment of the hormetic dose response and its relevance to biomedical researchers, physicians, the pharmaceutical industry, and public health scientists. This article contains a series of 61 questions
followed by relatively brief but referenced responses that provides support for the conclusion that hormesis is a reproducible phenomenon, commonly observed, with a frequency far greater than other dose–response models
such as the threshold and linear nonthreshold dose–response models. The article provides a detailed background information on the historical foundations of hormesis, its quantitative features, mechanistic foundations, as well as
how hormesis is currently being used within medicine and identifying how this concept could be further applied in the development of new therapeutic advances and in improved public health practices.
Click here for full article (Open Source).
Sohel Saikat, Irene Kreis, Bethan Davies, Stephen Bridgman and Robie Kamanyire. The impact of PFOS on health in the general population: a review. Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts, 2013, DOI: 10.1039/C2EM30698K
Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS) is a persistent organic pollutant that is toxic, bioaccumulative and undergoes wide transportation across all environmental media. It has been widely detected in environmental samples but there is limited information about the health effects on humans from environmental exposure. This paper presents the findings of a review of the literature on the impact of PFOS on the health of the general population. Fifteen relevant epidemiological studies were identified that looked at the association between human PFOS exposure and a range of health related outcomes. Small but statistically significant associations have been reported with PFOS and total cholesterol, glucose metabolism, body mass index (BMI), thyroid function, infertility, breast feeding, uric acid and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The true significance of these findings is uncertain due to the inconsistencies in some of the study results and the limitations of the literature. The majority of studies were cross-sectional and considered surrogate markers of health (e.g. cholesterol levels). The available literature is also limited in ascertaining the link between PFOS concentrations in the environment, exposure pathways and health effects. We conclude that the current evidence is inconclusive and further large-scale prospective cohort studies would be useful to assess the association between environmental exposure to PFOS, appropriate biomarkers (e.g. serum levels of PFOS) and health outcomes.
Click here for full paper (fee).
Well good for them. 5 public officials in Australia are bucking the fluoride cabal and public relations blitz because they do know better…..and intend to vote fluoride out….
“Councillors defy experts on benefits of fluoride” The Gold Coast Bulletin, Jan 23, 2013, p1.
Posted in Fluoride