Calabrese E J, Baldwin L A
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA.
Hum Exp Toxicol. 2000 Jan;19(1):32-40. doi: 10.1191/096032700678815594.
Despite the substantial development and publication of highly reproducible toxicological data, the concept of hormetic dose-response relationships was never integrated into the mainstream of toxicological thought. Review of the historical foundations of the interpretation of the bioassay and assessment of competitive theories of dose-response relationships lead to the conclusion that multiple factors contributed to the marginalization of hormesis during the middle and subsequent decades of the 20th century. These factors include: (a) the close-association of hormesis with homeopathy lead to the hostility of modern medicine toward homeopathy thereby creating a guilt by association framework, and the carry-over influence of that hostility in the judgements of medically-based pharmacologists/ toxicologists toward hormesis; (b) the emphasis of high dose effects linked with a lack of appreciation of the significance of the implications of low dose stimulatory effects; (c) the lack of an evolutionary-based mechanism(s) to account for hormetic effects; and (d) the lack of appropriate scientific advocates to counter aggressive and intellectually powerful critics of the hormetic perspective.
尽管已经有大量高度可重复的毒理学数据得到发展和发表,但剂量效应关系的 hormetic 概念从未融入毒理学思想的主流。回顾生物测定解释的历史基础以及剂量效应关系竞争理论的评估,得出的结论是,在 20 世纪中叶及随后几十年中,多种因素导致了 hormesis 的边缘化。这些因素包括:(a) hormesis 与顺势疗法的紧密联系导致现代医学对顺势疗法的敌意,从而形成一种牵连有罪的框架,以及这种敌意对基于医学的药理学家/毒理学家对 hormesis 判断的持续影响;(b) 对高剂量效应的强调,同时缺乏对低剂量刺激效应重要性的认识;(c) 缺乏基于进化的机制来解释 hormetic 效应;以及(d) 缺乏适当的科学倡导者来反驳对 hormetic 观点的激进且有影响力的批评者。