Weiss Bernard, Cory-Slechta Deborah, Gilbert Steven G, Mergler Donna, Miller Elise, Miller Claudia, Newland M Christopher, Rice Deborah, Schettler Ted
Department of Environmental Medicine and Environmental Health Sciences Center, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.
Neurotoxicology. 2008 Sep;29(5):883-90. doi: 10.1016/j.neuro.2008.04.004. Epub 2008 Apr 20.
Neurotoxicology is entering a new phase in how it views and practices risk assessment. Perhaps more than any of the other disciplines that comprise the science of toxicology, it has been compelled to consider a daunting array of factors other than those directly coupled to chemical and dose, and the age and sex of the subject population. In epidemiological investigations, researchers are increasingly cognizant of the problems introduced by allegedly controlling for variables classified as confounders or covariates. In essence, they reason, the consequence is blurring or even concealing interactions of exposure with modifiers such as the individual's social ecology. Other researchers question the traditional practice of relying on values such as NOAELs when they are abstracted from a biological entity that in reality represents a multiplicity of intertwined systems. Although neurotoxicologists have come to recognize the complexities of assessing risk in all its dimensions, they still face the challenge of communicating this view to the health professions at large.
神经毒理学在看待和进行风险评估的方式上正在进入一个新阶段。或许比构成毒理学这门科学的其他任何学科都更甚，它不得不考虑一系列令人望而生畏的因素，这些因素不仅仅直接与化学物质、剂量以及受试人群的年龄和性别相关。在流行病学调查中，研究人员越来越意识到在所谓控制被归类为混杂因素或协变量的变量时所引入的问题。从本质上讲，他们推断，结果是模糊甚至掩盖了暴露与诸如个体社会生态等修饰因素之间的相互作用。其他研究人员质疑从实际上代表多个相互交织系统的生物实体中抽象出无可见有害作用水平（NOAELs）等数值时的传统做法。尽管神经毒理学家已经开始认识到在各个层面评估风险的复杂性，但他们仍然面临着向广大卫生专业人员传达这一观点的挑战。
