Comment on 'Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies' by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927-935

Michael Kundi

首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >Comment on 'Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies' by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927-935

【24h】

Comment on 'Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies' by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927-935

机译：评论Kheifets等人的“面对科学不确定性制定政策：从EMF流行病学研究中解释0.3μT或0.4μT临界点”。 in Risk Analysis，25（4），927-935

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

There is a decades-long controversy about how to respond to the potential health risks from power-frequency electromagnetic fields (PF EMF). In their article, Kheifets et al. argue against adopting lower exposure limits, while maintaining that policies based on precaution are feasible. Their considerations are at odds with widely accepted and applied standards of deriving exposure guidelines and based on fundamentally flawed arguments on the role of epidemiologic data in setting standards.

机译：关于如何应对来自工频电磁场（PF EMF）的潜在健康风险的争论长达数十年之久。在他们的文章中，Kheifets等。反对采用较低的暴露极限，同时保持基于预防措施的政策是可行的。他们的考虑与推导暴露准则的被广泛接受和应用的标准相矛盾，并且基于流行病学数据在制定标准中的作用的根本错误的论点。

著录项

来源
《Risk analysis》 |2006年第3期|p.579-581|共3页
作者
Michael Kundi;
展开▼
作者单位

Institute of Environmental Health, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15, A-1095 Vienna, Austria;

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类自然科学总论;
关键词

相似文献

外文文献

1. Comment on 'Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies' by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927-935 [J] . Michael J. OCarroll, Denis L. Henshaw Risk analysis . 2007,第2期

机译：评论Kheifets等人的“面对科学不确定性制定政策：从EMF流行病学研究中解释0.3μT或0.4μT临界点”。 in Risk Analysis，25（4），927-935
2. Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4μT Outpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies [J] . Leeka Kheifets, Jack D. Sahl, Riti Shimkhada, Risk analysis . 2005,第4期

机译：面对科学不确定性制定政策：从EMF流行病学研究中解释0.3μT或0.4μT阈值
3. Reply to comment on: Gerstein HC, Pogue J, Mann JFE et al. (2005) The relationship between dysglycaemia and cardiovascular and renal risk in diabetic and non-diabetic participants in the HOPE study: a prospective epidemiological analysis. Diabetologia 48:1749–1755 [J] . H. C. Gerstein Diabetologia . 2006,第3期

机译：回复评论：Gerstein HC，Pogue J，Mann JFE等。（2005）在HOPE研究中，糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者的血糖异常与心血管和肾脏风险之间的关系：前瞻性流行病学分析。糖尿病48：1749–1755
4. Uncertainty analysis of multiple epidemiological studies using frequency distributions of relative risks [C] . Shlyakhter, A. . 1995

机译：使用相对风险的频率分布对多种流行病学研究进行不确定性分析
5. Comment on: Pan et al. Bidirectional Association Between Depression and Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Epidemiological Studies. Diabetes Care 2012;35:1171–1180 [O] . Tomoyuki Kawada 2013

机译：评论：Pan等。抑郁症和代谢综合征之间的双向关联：流行病学研究的系统评价和荟萃分析。糖尿病护理2012; 35：1171-1180
6. Reply to comment on: Gerstein HC, Pogue J, Mann JFE et al. (2005) The relationship between dysglycaemia and cardiovascular and renal risk in diabetic and non-diabetic participants in the HOPE study: a prospective epidemiological analysis. Diabetologia 48:1749–1755 [O] . H. C. Gerstein 2006

机译：回复评论：Gerstein HC，Pogue J，Mann Jfe等。（2005）希望研究中糖尿病和非糖尿病参与者在糖尿病和非糖尿病参与者之间的关系：预期流行病学分析。糖尿病症48：1749-1755

Comment on 'Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies' by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927-935

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅