Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

In Vitro Test Validation: High-hurdling, but Not Pole Vaulting

In Vitro Test Validation: High-hurdling, but Not Pole Vaulting 355 ATLA 20 355-357 1992 Editorial----- I very much hope that the ATLA Editorial Office will soon be flooded with comments provoked by the challenge issued by ATLA's North American Editor, Oliver Flint, in the Editorial (In Vitro Test Validation: A House Built on Sand) published in the last issue ofthejoumal. This has not yet begun to happen. I hope this is because of the time taken for the April issue to cross the Atlantic Ocean and that the flood will soon begin. Meanwhile, I offer the following response, in order to keep the pot boiling. I share Flint's concern about the state of development and validation of in vitro toxicity tests, but I disagree with his analysis of the situation. My view is that the problem is not that the Amden principles for new test validation are wrong, but that none of the validation studies conducted to date have met the criteria they lay down. The problems of inadequate design and poor conduct and reporting of validation studies can be solved in the future. However, we must resist at all costs the adoption of Flint's proposed rule for validation, i.e. that all tests must have demonstrable mechanistic similarity http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Alternatives to Laboratory Animals SAGE

In Vitro Test Validation: High-hurdling, but Not Pole Vaulting

Balls, Michael
Alternatives to Laboratory Animals , Volume 20 (3): 3 – Jul 1, 1992
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/in-vitro-test-validation-high-hurdling-but-not-pole-vaulting-AovtYnd75B

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 1992 Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments
ISSN
0261-1929
eISSN
2632-3559
DOI
10.1177/026119299202000301
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

355 ATLA 20 355-357 1992 Editorial----- I very much hope that the ATLA Editorial Office will soon be flooded with comments provoked by the challenge issued by ATLA's North American Editor, Oliver Flint, in the Editorial (In Vitro Test Validation: A House Built on Sand) published in the last issue ofthejoumal. This has not yet begun to happen. I hope this is because of the time taken for the April issue to cross the Atlantic Ocean and that the flood will soon begin. Meanwhile, I offer the following response, in order to keep the pot boiling. I share Flint's concern about the state of development and validation of in vitro toxicity tests, but I disagree with his analysis of the situation. My view is that the problem is not that the Amden principles for new test validation are wrong, but that none of the validation studies conducted to date have met the criteria they lay down. The problems of inadequate design and poor conduct and reporting of validation studies can be solved in the future. However, we must resist at all costs the adoption of Flint's proposed rule for validation, i.e. that all tests must have demonstrable mechanistic similarity

Journal

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals – SAGE

Published: Jul 1, 1992

There are no references for this article.