From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Recent article in AJIM[edit]

This article says that "On the basis of the evidence of the potential carcinogenic effects of APM herein reported, a re-evaluation of the current position of international regulatory agencies must be considered an urgent matter of public health." It seems like it might be a review article. On the other hand it is also described as a "commentary" in the abstract. Do other editors think it meets MEDRS? Everymorning talk 01:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I suppose it is a review, but the results obtained by the Ramazzini Institute are generally rejected by regulators due to a number of irregularities in the way they do their testing. EFSA has rejected their aspartame studes twice (here and here) and the EPA won't use them either. Half of the review is actually a defense of the Institute's own credibility. So if you use it, it might be worth mentioning that the Institute itself is rather controversial. Formerly 98 talk|contribs|COI Statement 03:44, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
This is just a repetition of special pleading by the shoddy researchers at Ramazzini. They don't like that their research has been rejected for poor methodology. There isn't really anything new here. -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)