You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Importance of Hormesis to Public Health
Ralph Cook and Edward J. Calabrese
Environmental Health Perspectives
Vol. 114, No. 11 (Nov., 2006), pp. 1631-1635
Published by: The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4091789
Page Count: 5
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Background: Hormesis is a specific type of nonmonotonic dose response whose occurrence has been documented across a broad range of biological models, diverse types of exposure, and a variety of outcomes. The effects that occur at various points along this curve can be interpreted as beneficial or detrimental, depending on the biological or ecologic context in which they occur. Objective: Because hormesis appears to be a relatively common phenomenon that has not yet been incorporated into regulatory practice, the objective of this commentary is to explore some of its more obvious public health and risk assessment implications, with particular reference to issues raised recently within this journal by other authors. Discussion: Hormesis appears to be more common than dose-response curves that are currently used in the risk assessment process [e.g., linear no-threshold (LNT)]. Although a number of mechanisms have been identified that explain many hormetic dose-response relationships, better understanding of this phenomenon will likely lead to different strategies not only for the prevention and treatment of disease but also for the promotion of improved public health as it relates to both specific and more holistic health outcomes. Conclusions: We believe that ignoring hormesis is poor policy because it ignores knowledge that could be used to improve public health.
Environmental Health Perspectives © 2006 The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences