Extract

In their letter to the editor of Toxicological Sciences, vom Saal et al. (2011) declare that we have misrepresented or omitted relevant details and used “numerous” flawed assumptions to conclude that humans exposed to high dietary levels of bisphenol A (BPA) have undetectable internal levels of the bioactive form of BPA, levels that are expected to be substantially lower than effect levels in sensitized test animals. Their comments demand a thoughtful and critical review to either substantiate the criticisms and rectify them or refute them, ensuring that unsubstantiated criticisms do not discredit the original work.

Three major claims are made by vom Saal et al. We review each and then turn our attention to eight additional claims, using peer-reviewed findings, emphasizing the fundamental concepts concerning BPA pharmacokinetics and biomonitoring along with basic concepts of mass balance or statistics. We are concerned that many of criticisms of vom Saal et al. were made with disregard for these fundamental principles.

You do not currently have access to this article.

Comments

0 Comments
Submit a comment
You have entered an invalid code
Thank you for submitting a comment on this article. Your comment will be reviewed and published at the journal's discretion. Please check for further notifications by email.