| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Toxicology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Response to: Use of the Pup as the Statistical Unit in Developmental Neurotoxicity Studies: Overlooked Model or Poor Research Design?
Department of Environmental Toxicology, Uppsala University, Sweden
Received February 11, 2008; accepted February 14, 2008
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
Regarding the "Letter to the Editor" from Drs Hardy and Stedeford concerning our article "Co-exposure of neonatal mice to a flame retardant PBDE 99 (2,2',4,4',5-pentabromodiphenyl ether) and methyl mercury enhances developmental neurotoxic defects." The main comments and criticism are the use of the experimental design and its evaluation.
Although developmental toxicology is a relatively new science, it is firmly rooted in teratology. Consequently statistical evaluation is related to the situation where the mother is exposed and her fetus and offspring is exposed to a chemical via the placenta and the mother's milk. In such cases, not only is the genetic variable important but so too is uptake and distribution of the chemical in the mother, placental transfer, maternal, and fetal metabolism, etc. Exposure to a