These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20149936)

  • 21. Development of veterinary drug residue controls by the Codex Alimentarius Commission: a review.
    Ellis RL
    Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess; 2008 Dec; 25(12):1432-8. PubMed ID: 19680853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Violations of mrls for pesticide residues in food reported for risk assessment according to RASFF procedures in Poland].
    Ludwicki JK; Kostka G
    Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig; 2008; 59(4):389-96. PubMed ID: 19227249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The precautionary principle and risk assessment in international food safety: how the world trade organization influences standards.
    Post DL
    Risk Anal; 2006 Oct; 26(5):1259-73. PubMed ID: 17054530
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The application of quantitative risk assessment to microbial food safety risks.
    Jaykus LA
    Crit Rev Microbiol; 1996; 22(4):279-93. PubMed ID: 8989514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Are data collected in France sufficient for a quantitative analysis of food-related infections?].
    Sanaa M
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 2002 Jan; 50(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 11938119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Approaches in the risk assessment of genetically modified foods by the Hellenic Food Safety Authority.
    Varzakas TH; Chryssochoidis G; Argyropoulos D
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2007 Apr; 45(4):530-42. PubMed ID: 17275157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Food fight: making sure our food is safe is harder than it seems.
    Farquhar D
    State Legis; 2007; 33(9):26-8. PubMed ID: 17972415
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Where we are in retail food safety, how we got to where we are, and how do we get there?
    Bryan FL
    J Environ Health; 2002 Sep; 65(2):29-36. PubMed ID: 12226906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Principles, application areas and an example of risk assessment conducted at the Danish Institute for Food and Veterinary Research.
    Greiner M; Paisley L; Hostrup-Pedersen J; Lo Fo Wong DM; Andersen JS; Stockmarr A; Korsgård H; Sommer HM; Hald T
    Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr; 2004; 117(5-6):177-81. PubMed ID: 15188675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Safe Food International: a blueprint for better global food safety.
    Smith DeWaal C; Guerrero Brito GR
    Food Drug Law J; 2005; 60(3):393-405. PubMed ID: 16304745
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The risk assessment paradigm and its application for trichothecenes.
    Tritscher AM; Page SW
    Toxicol Lett; 2004 Oct; 153(1):155-63. PubMed ID: 15342092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Constraints to microbial food safety policy: opinions from stakeholder groups along the farm to fork continuum.
    Sargeant JM; Ramsingh B; Wilkins A; Travis RG; Gavrus D; Snelgrove JW
    Zoonoses Public Health; 2007; 54(5):177-84. PubMed ID: 17542959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. FDA's expanding postmarket authority to monitor and publicize food and consumer health product risks: the need for procedural safeguards to reduce "transparency" policy harms in the post-9/11 regulatory environment.
    Roller ST; Pippins RR; Ngai JW
    Food Drug Law J; 2009; 64(3):577-98. PubMed ID: 19999646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Towards an integrated approach in supporting microbiological food safety decisions.
    Havelaar AH; Bräunig J; Christiansen K; Cornu M; Hald T; Mangen MJ; Mølbak K; Pielaat A; Snary E; Van Pelt W; Velthuis A; Wahlström H
    Zoonoses Public Health; 2007; 54(3-4):103-17. PubMed ID: 17456140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Safety of food contact articles in RASFF system].
    Cwiek-Ludwicka K; Stelmach A; Półtorak H
    Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig; 2007; 58(4):599-607. PubMed ID: 18578341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Risk assessment of biological hazards in the European Union.
    Hugas M; Tsigarida E; Robinson T; Calistri P
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2007 Nov; 120(1-2):131-5. PubMed ID: 17659800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Review of health safety aspects of nanotechnologies in food production.
    Bouwmeester H; Dekkers S; Noordam MY; Hagens WI; Bulder AS; de Heer C; ten Voorde SE; Wijnhoven SW; Marvin HJ; Sips AJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Feb; 53(1):52-62. PubMed ID: 19027049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: the role of animal feeding trials.
    EFSA GMO Panel Working Group on Animal Feeding Trials
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2008 Mar; 46 Suppl 1():S2-70. PubMed ID: 18328408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Interpretation of highlights in the Chinese food safety law from a scientific perspective].
    Liu P; Wu YN
    Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2010 Mar; 44(3):181-3. PubMed ID: 20450734
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. NAS issues mixed message on unintended effects of GM food.
    Fox JL
    Nat Biotechnol; 2004 Sep; 22(9):1062. PubMed ID: 15340456
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.