rss
J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:824-825 doi:10.1136/jech.56.11.824
  • Debate

Persistent organic pollutants: potential health effects?

  1. T Damstra1,
  2. S W Page2,
  3. J L Herrman2,
  4. T Meredith2
  1. 1International Programme on Chemical Safety, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
  2. 2International Programme on Chemical Safety, Geneva, Switzerland
  1. Correspondence to:
 Tim Meredith, International Programme on Chemical Safety, World Health Organisation, 20 Avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland;
 mereditht{at}who.int

    Abstract

    It is not a point of debate that the Stockholm Convention for the prevention of further accumulation of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) should be ratified and implemented by all countries. However, in their article, Schafer and Kegley present an unbalanced “worst case scenario”. Approximately 20% of the food supply of the US is contaminated with POPs at extremely low levels; these levels are comparable to those found in many other countries. Furthermore, there is no scientific consensus that these levels are hazardous to most humans. More information is needed to determine the actual risks of extremely low levels of POPs to human health.

    This Article

    1. Abstract
    2. Full text
    3. PDF

    Responses

    1. Submit a response
    2. No responses published

    Register for free content

    The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

    Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

    Latest infectious diseases and epidemilogy jobs

    Ophthalmology Jobs

    Show me all >>