205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15497239)
1. Hormesis: the new approach in risk assessment?
Christiani DC; Zhou W
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):399-400. PubMed ID: 15497239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Hormesis and industrial hygiene: a new hypothesis for low-dose response in occupational risk assessment.
Carelli G; Iavicoli I; Castellino N
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):401-3. PubMed ID: 15497240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comments on "Implications of Hormesis for Industrial Hygiene".
Brown SL
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):397-8. PubMed ID: 15497238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Implications of hormesis for industrial hygiene.
Jayjock MA; Lewis PG
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):385-9. PubMed ID: 12269701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Jayjock and Lewis reply.
Jayjock MA; Lewis PG
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):407-8. PubMed ID: 15497243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Examining the risks and benefits of replacing traditional dose-response with hormesis.
Pickrell JA; Oehme FW
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2005 May; 24(5):259-64. PubMed ID: 16004190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. How much is enough to accept hormesis as the default? or 'At what point, if ever, could/should hormesis be employed as the principal dose-response default assumption in risk assessment?'.
Jayjock MA
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2005 May; 24(5):245-7. PubMed ID: 16004187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comments: implications of hormesis for industrial hygienists.
Brophy MO
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):391-3. PubMed ID: 15497233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comments on the Jayjock et al. paper.
Rozman KK
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):405-6. PubMed ID: 15497241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A critique of the use of hormesis in risk assessment.
Kitchin KT; Drane JW
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2005 May; 24(5):249-53. PubMed ID: 16004188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Review of "Implications of Hormesis for Industrial Hygiene".
Brosseau LM
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jul; 21(7):395. PubMed ID: 15497236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Hormesis [biological effects of low-level exposure (B.E.L.L.E.)] and dermatology.
Thong HY; Maibach HI
Cutan Ocul Toxicol; 2007; 26(4):329-41. PubMed ID: 18058307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Reproductive stimulation by low doses of xenoestrogens contrasts with the view of hormesis as an adaptive response.
Weltje L; vom Saal FS; Oehlmann J
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2005 Sep; 24(9):431-7. PubMed ID: 16235731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluating the evidence for hormesis: a statistical perspective.
Crump K
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2001 Jul; 31(4-5):669-79. PubMed ID: 11504196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Hormesis and its place in nonmonotonic dose-response relationships: some scientific reality checks.
Mushak P
Environ Health Perspect; 2007 Apr; 115(4):500-6. PubMed ID: 17450215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Hormesis and risk communication.
Renn O
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2003 Jan; 22(1):3-24. PubMed ID: 12643299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Hormesis: how it could affect the risk assessment process.
Calabrese EJ; Cook RR
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2005 May; 24(5):265-70. PubMed ID: 16004191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Should hormesis be the default model in risk assessment?
Calabrese EJ
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2005 May; 24(5):243. PubMed ID: 16004186
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Limits to chemical hormesis as a dose-response model in health risk assessment.
Mushak P
Sci Total Environ; 2013 Jan; 443():643-9. PubMed ID: 23220756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Hormesis: a highly generalizable and reproducible phenomenon with important implications for risk assessment.
Calabrese EJ; Baldwin LA; Holland CD
Risk Anal; 1999 Apr; 19(2):261-81. PubMed ID: 10765404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
