Comments on “legal implications of hormesis”

1 Environmental Protection Agency . Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment . Fed Regist 1996; 61: 17960-17960 .

2 Environmental Protection Agency . Notices, benchmark dose peer consultation workshop . Fed Regist 1996; 61: 44308-44308 .

3 AFL-CIO v. OSHA, 965 F.2d 962. 11th Cir., 1992. OSHA's use of safety factor analysis to establish permissible exposure levels was held to have been inadequately explained.

4 American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. U.S.E.P.A., 175 F.3d 1027 (D.C. Cir.1999), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, and remanded, U.S. (2001).

5 Cross FB. Legal implications of hormesis. Hum Exp Toxicol 2001; (this issue).

6 Calabrese EJ , Baldwin LA , Holland CD. Hormesis: a highly generalizable and reproducible phenomenon with important implications for risk assessment . Risk Anal 1999; 19 (2): 261-273 .

7 Calabrese EJ , Baldwin LA. Hormesis as a default parameter in RfD derivation . Hum Exp Toxicol 1998; 17: 444-447 .

8 Calabrese EJ , Baldwin LA. The marginalization of hormesis . Toxicol Pathol 1999; 27 (2): 187-194 . The author takes no position on the scientific validity of hormesis. New scientific theories that do not fit the prevailing paradigm (in toxicology, the prevailing theory is generally that the lower the dose, the lesser the effect) often encounter resistance for a period of time.

9 U.S. EPA. Unfinished Business: A Comparative Assessment of Environment Problems, 1987.

10 Breyer S. Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation, 1993.

11 Graham JD , Weiner JB (eds). Risk vs. Risk: Trade-Offs in Protecting Health and the Environment, 1995.

12 Applegate JS. Comparative risk assessment and environmental priorities projects: a forum, not a formula . North Ky Law Rev 1997; 25: 71-71 .

13 National Research Council . Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment, 1994.

14 Poulter SR. Monte Carlo simulation in environmental risk assessment: science, policy and law . Risk: Health, Sci Law Winter 1998; 9: 7-7 .

15 Lave LB. Hormesis: policy implications . J Appi Toxicol 2000; 20 (2): 141-145 .

16 Paperiello CJ. Risk assessment and risk management implications of hormesis . i Appi Toxcol 2000; 20 (2): 147-148 .

17 Cross FB. Paradoxical perils of the precautionary principle . Wash Lee Law Rev 1996; 53: 851-851 .

18 Sielken RL Jr. , Stevenson DE. Some implications for quantitative risk assessment if hormesis exists . Hum Exp Toxicol 1998; 17 (5): 259-262 .

19 Wagner WE. The science charade in toxic risk regulation . Colum Law Rev 1995; 95: 1613-1631 .

20 Corrosion Proof Fittings v. EPA, 947 F.2d 1201. 5th Cir., 1991 (invalidating EPA ban on asbestos after 10 years of rulemaking).

21 Chlorine Chemistry Council v. E.P.A., 206 F.3d 1286. D.C. Cir. 2000 (vacating drinking water standard for chloroform based on assumption of low-dose linearity).

22 Cook R. personal communication.

23 Bailer AJ , Oris, JT. Incorporating hormesis in the routine testing of hazards . Hum Exp Toxicol 1998; 17 (5): 247-250 .