Cargando…

Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks

OBJECTIVE: This analysis is a critical assessment of current hormesis literature. I discuss definitions, characterization, generalizability, mechanisms, absence of empirical data specific for hormesis hypothesis testing, and arguments that hormesis be the “default assumption” in risk assessment. DAT...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Mushak, Paul
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17450215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9619
_version_ 1782133076483112960
author Mushak, Paul
author_facet Mushak, Paul
author_sort Mushak, Paul
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This analysis is a critical assessment of current hormesis literature. I discuss definitions, characterization, generalizability, mechanisms, absence of empirical data specific for hormesis hypothesis testing, and arguments that hormesis be the “default assumption” in risk assessment. DATA SOURCES: Hormesis, a biological phenomenon typically described as low-dose stimulation from substances producing higher-dose inhibition, has recently garnered interest in several quarters. The principal sources of published materials for this analysis are the writings of certain proponents of hormesis. Surprisingly few systematic critiques of current hormesis literature exist. Limits to the phenomenon’s appropriate role in risk assessment and health policy have been published. DATA SYNTHESIS: Serious gaps in scientific understanding remain: a stable definition; generalizability, especially for humans; a clear mechanistic basis; limitations in the presence of multiple toxic end points, target organs, and mechanisms. Absence of both arms-length, consensus-driven, scientific evaluations and empirical data from studies specifically designed for hormesis testing have limited its acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Definition, characterization, occurrence, and mechanistic rationale for hormesis will remain speculative, absent rigorous studies done specifically for hormesis testing. Any role for hormesis in current risk assessment and regulatory policies for toxics remains to be determined.
format Text
id pubmed-1852676
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-18526762007-04-20 Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks Mushak, Paul Environ Health Perspect Commentaries & Reviews OBJECTIVE: This analysis is a critical assessment of current hormesis literature. I discuss definitions, characterization, generalizability, mechanisms, absence of empirical data specific for hormesis hypothesis testing, and arguments that hormesis be the “default assumption” in risk assessment. DATA SOURCES: Hormesis, a biological phenomenon typically described as low-dose stimulation from substances producing higher-dose inhibition, has recently garnered interest in several quarters. The principal sources of published materials for this analysis are the writings of certain proponents of hormesis. Surprisingly few systematic critiques of current hormesis literature exist. Limits to the phenomenon’s appropriate role in risk assessment and health policy have been published. DATA SYNTHESIS: Serious gaps in scientific understanding remain: a stable definition; generalizability, especially for humans; a clear mechanistic basis; limitations in the presence of multiple toxic end points, target organs, and mechanisms. Absence of both arms-length, consensus-driven, scientific evaluations and empirical data from studies specifically designed for hormesis testing have limited its acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Definition, characterization, occurrence, and mechanistic rationale for hormesis will remain speculative, absent rigorous studies done specifically for hormesis testing. Any role for hormesis in current risk assessment and regulatory policies for toxics remains to be determined. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2007-04 2007-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC1852676/ /pubmed/17450215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9619 Text en http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, ?Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives?); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright.
spellingShingle Commentaries & Reviews
Mushak, Paul
Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks
title Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks
title_full Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks
title_fullStr Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks
title_full_unstemmed Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks
title_short Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks
title_sort hormesis and its place in nonmonotonic dose–response relationships: some scientific reality checks
topic Commentaries & Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17450215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9619
work_keys_str_mv AT mushakpaul hormesisanditsplaceinnonmonotonicdoseresponserelationshipssomescientificrealitychecks