27 research outputs found
Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs Programme identifies chemicals, drugs, mixtures, occupational exposures, lifestyles and personal habits, and physical and biological agents that cause cancer in humans and has evaluated about 1000 agents since 1971. Monographs are written by ad hoc Working Groups (WGs) of international scientific experts over a period of about 12 months ending in an eight-day meeting. The WG evaluates all of the publicly available scientific information on each substance and, through a transparent and rigorous process,1 decides on the degree to which the scientific evidence supports that substance's potential to cause or not cause cancer in humans. For Monograph 112,2 17 expert scientists evaluated the carcinogenic hazard for four insecticides and the herbicide glyphosate.3 The WG concluded that the data for glyphosate meet the criteria for classification as a probable human carcinogen. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the primary agency of the European Union for risk assessments regarding food safety. In October 2015, EFSA reported4 on their evaluation of the Renewal Assessment Report5 (RAR) for glyphosate that was prepared by the Rapporteur Member State, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR). EFSA concluded that ?glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans and the evidence does not support classification with regard to its carcinogenic potential?. Addendum 1 (the BfR Addendum) of the RAR5 discusses the scientific rationale for differing from the IARC WG conclusion. Serious flaws in the scientific evaluation in the RAR incorrectly characterise the potential for a carcinogenic hazard from exposure to glyphosate. Since the RAR is the basis for the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) conclusion,4 it is critical that these shortcomings are corrected
Basic inorganic chemistry, 2nd ed.
Indeks Bibl. : Setiap babx, 708 hlm. : il. ; 26 cm
Recommended from our members
Timing and significance of pathological features in C9orf72 expansion-associated frontotemporal dementia.
SEE SCABER AND TALBOT DOI101093/AWW264 FOR A SCIENTIFIC COMMENTARY ON THIS ARTICLE: A GGGGCC repeat expansion in C9orf72 leads to frontotemporal dementia and/or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Diverse pathological features have been identified, and their disease relevance remains much debated. Here, we describe two illuminating patients with frontotemporal dementia due to the C9orf72 repeat expansion. Case 1 was a 65-year-old female with behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia accompanied by focal degeneration in subgenual anterior cingulate cortex, amygdala, and medial pulvinar thalamus. At autopsy, widespread RNA foci and dipeptide repeat protein inclusions were observed, but TDP-43 pathology was nearly absent, even in degenerating brain regions. Case 2 was a 74-year-old female with atypical frontotemporal dementia-motor neuron disease who underwent temporal lobe resection for epilepsy 5 years prior to her first frontotemporal dementia symptoms. Archival surgical resection tissue contained RNA foci, dipeptide repeat protein inclusions, and loss of nuclear TDP-43 but no TDP-43 inclusions despite florid TDP-43 inclusions at autopsy 8 years after first symptoms. These findings suggest that C9orf72-specific phenomena may impact brain structure and function and emerge before first symptoms and TDP-43 aggregation