Submit a manuscript Sign up for article alerts Contact us Support

RSS

Latest comments

Typographical error in abstract (Daniel Dutton, 03 December 2013)

It recently came to my attention that the abstract of this manuscript has a typographical error.  The first sentence in the Discussion section says "Our estimates indicate that an individual with seven or more dental amalgam surfaces has 30% to 50% higher urinary mercury levels than an individual without amalgams." In order to match the numbers reported in the document (which are correct), this sentence should read: "Our estimates indicate that an individual with seven or more dental amalgam surfaces has 30% to 65% higher urinary mercury levels than an individual without amalgams." As corresponding author, I feel I have to apologize for any confusion this caused. I thank readers who pointed this out to me. Daniel J. Dutton read full comment

Comment on: Dutton et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 8:22

An experimental approach to confirm that an occupational agent causes asthma (Jean-Luc Malo, 31 July 2013)

I read with great interest the article by Baur in the J Occup Med Toxicol. 2013; 8: 15. A compendium of causative agents of occupational... read full comment

Comment on: Baur Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 8:15

Author reply (Peter Morfeld, 23 April 2013)

I'd like to thank Drs Silverman and Attfield for their profound reply [1] to my commentary [2] and their in-depth explanations of specific aspects of the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study [DEMS, 3, 4]. It was my motivation to instigate discussions about this important and impressive epidemiological project. Thus, I highly appreciate that the leading DEMS authors responded to my commentary in such a great detail. The Editors of JOMT invited me to follow-up on this discussion and I will respond to the points as they were numerated in Silverman and Attfield [1].... read full comment

Comment on: Morfeld Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 7:10

Letter-to-the-Editor RE: 'Diesel exhaust in miners study: how to understand the findings?' by Peter Morfeld (Debra Silverman, 05 March 2013)

We thank Dr. Morfeld for providing us the opportunity to clarify several points regarding the analyses of data from both the cohort (1) and case-control (2) components of the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study (DEMS).... read full comment

Comment on: Morfeld Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 7:10

Value of biomonitoring for organic diisocyanate exposure (Heikki Savolainen, 20 December 2011)

Dear Editor,

The careful study points out the requirements for correct interpretation of biomonitoring of exposure to diisocyanates (1). The initial urinary elimination half-lives of hexamethylene diisocyanate (2) or toluene diisocyanate monomers (3) are short which may limit the optimal sampling period immediately after the exposure peak (4). However, even end to the shift sampling can reveal the order of the magnitude of the exposure (5,6).

Finally, the mass spectrometric detection of the metabolites may have forensic value as they reveal the polyurethane source in e.g. the fire smoke victims (7).

1 Budnik LT, Nowak D, Merget R, et al. Elimination kinetics of diisocyanates after sepcific inhalative chanllenges in humans: mass spectrometry analaysis... read full comment

Comment on: Budnik et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 6:9

Cancer incidence ecological study in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany, provides strong support for the ultraviolet B–vitamin D–cancer hypothesis (William B. Grant, 19 July 2010)

The paper by Seidler et al. [1] provides strong support for the ultraviolet B–vitamin D–cancer hypothesis [2-5]. This study was designed to look for a potential association between pesticide exposure and cancer risk. By dividing the state into three categories, (small: >0 to 5 percent; medium: >5 to 20 percent; large: >20 percent area under wine cultivation), the study essentially divided the state into urban, mixed, and rural regions. It is reasonable to expect that those living in the rural region would have greater solar ultraviolet (UV) irradiance, and, based on the standardized incidence ratios (SIR) for non melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) and malignant melanoma for men shown in Table 4, that seems to be the case. The situation is not as clear for women as shown in... read full comment

Comment on: Seidler et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 3:12

Principal author's response to the August 24, 2009 comments by the chief editors (James Heller, 11 March 2010)

December 21, 2009

Editors-in-Chief, Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology

Prof. Axel Fischer (Email: axel.fischer@charite.de)
Head, Allergy Research Division
Charité - School of Medicine, Free University and Humboldt University of Berlin
Berlin, Germany

Prof. David A. Groneberg (Email: david.groneberg@charite.de)
Professor and Director, Institute of Occupational Medicine
Charité - School of Medicine, Free University and Humboldt University of Berlin
Berlin, Germany

Dear Sirs:

Re: Science and industry: Conflict-of-interests in the field of toxicology

I am writing to respond to your letter of August 24, 2009 commenting on our manuscript, New views on the hypothesis of... read full comment

Comment on: Heller et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 4:23

Response to comments posted by Drs David A. Groneberg and Axel Fischer, JOMT Editors-in-Chief (Adriana Oller, Ph.D., DABT, 11 March 2010)

In their comments, JOMT editors suggest that arguments made in the Heller et al. paper were not supported by solid scientific data, but they decided to publish this paper because "it can be regarded as a typical example of the approach of private companies towards the scientific discussion of compound toxicity and carcinogenicity," among other reasons. If the editors were of the view that the Heller et al. paper was not based on solid science, then it was their responsibility to reject it, as the whole purpose of the peer-review process is to ensure publication of sound science. Whether the author of a paper is an industry scientist or an academic scientist, different opinions can aid the scientific discourse as long as they are supported by solid, transparent data and subjected to the... read full comment

Comment on: Heller et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 4:23

Science and industry: Conflict-of-interests in the field of toxicology (David A. Groneberg, 24 August 2009)

In this report by Heller et al., two companies which are involved in the exploration, mining, and processing of nickel, sponsored a study that questions soluble nickel as a carcinogenic substance.
Although the editors agreed to publish this hypothesis, we feel that some clarifying words should be stated:

1) The editors-in-chief and the publisher questioned the integrity of the article on first sight. The first impression was to reject the article due to the magnitude of the conflict of interest. This conflict of interest arises from the nature of the sponsoring companies: The companies are Vale Inco and Falconbridge Ltd. Vale Inco is the second largest mining company in the world, with a market capitalization of more than US$ 125 billion and over 12,000 employees... read full comment

Comment on: Heller et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 4:23

its a good report about music (Gul Ghuttai, 27 January 2009)

HI<br><br> this is a very informative article..i learned a lot from it. I want to ask that is music also toxic to brain? are there new experiments done in this regard? read full comment

Comment on: Iñesta et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 3:16

DENTAL ASSISTANTS (and the rest of the dental personnel) MUST BE GLAD (Servando Pérez-Domínguez, 21 August 2008)

INDEED, dental assistants and the rest of the dental personnel, including dentists, must be glad because their professions (considered by the International Labour Organization as professions at risk for Chronic Mercury Poisoning), are, at last, really starting to be better studied, and, therefore, the dangers are timidly starting to be not fully hidden at the Faculties of Dentistry, Medicine, etc., or ‘underneath’ research projects, books or articles written by authors with various conflicts of interest, empty words, promises... We all know (the FDA had to recently recognised it publicly: www.mercuriados.org/es/pag254), that also those who have in their mouths dental amalgam fillings are at risk (but this was not the aim of this article).Most probably, future generations will... read full comment

Comment on: Moen et al. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 3:10

Need for greater restraint in prescribing skeletal muscle relaxants specially to the elderly (Samuels hurstong, 02 January 2008)

I would like to add to this article by pointing out the potential toxicity of skeletal muscle relaxant at theraputic doses, especially in the elderly population. I am interested in geriatric medicine, as guest faculty at UCSF we have seen a spate of confusion and agitation associated with the prescription of this class of drugs recently. Poly pharmacy in the elderly is something that needs to be looked at. This class of agents in particular can be associated with vast manifestations. read full comment

Comment on: Chabria Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 1:16

very topical and informative (Samuels hurstong, 02 January 2008)

I was recently privy to the treatment of a patient with cyclobenzaprine overdose. This article details very well the protocols used in the management of such patients. There is very little data regards the management of such patients and this article certainly adds to the body of literature in this field. I must convey my regards to the author(s) for such a presentation. read full comment

Comment on: Chabria Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 1:16