You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

PostScript
Letter
Limitations, uncertainties and competing interpretations regarding chemical exposures and diabetes
  1. Gregory G Bond1,
  2. Daniel R Dietrich2
  1. 1 Manitou View Consulting, LLC, Northport, Michigan, USA
  2. 2 University of Konstanz—Human and Environmental Toxicology, Konstanz, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Gregory G Bond, Manitou View Consulting, LLC, 8797 N Gills Pier Rd, Northport, MI 49670, USA; gregory.g.bond{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2016-208711

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Trasande et al 1 reported that limiting exposure to alleged endocrine disrupting chemicals would reduce the burden of adult diabetes by 13% and save €4.51 billion/year. On review, however, their paper fails to meet standards for good practices in scientific reporting—stating the limitations of the underlying data, clearly articulating uncertainties, and presenting competing views or interpretations of data.

    First, Trasande et al based their analysis on an existing data set derived from an epidemiological study with significant limitations2 that were not fully discussed by the authors. The limitations include: (1) a cross-sectional design; (2) a 50% …

    View Full Text