Talk:ERF of methylmercury
-- Heta 10:43, 13 October 2012 (EEST)
Toxicology of methylmercury
| Statements: Is the toxicology of methylmercury known enough to get a reliable result?Needs editing
Resolution: The method is a general way of doing these transformations, we can rely on this (A stable resolution, when found, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation:
⇤1 Is this variable toxicologically sound? --Olli 15:59, 17 September 2007 (EEST)
--1 : This toxicological approach is generally approved --Olli 13:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
| Statements: Author judgement about the chosen distribution should have a reference.
Resolution: Accepted. In the case of MeHg ERF, it is Cohen et al 2005. (A stable resolution, when found, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation:
←# : Author judgement was part of the peer-reviewed study of Cohen JT, Bellinger DC, Shaywitz BA. A quantitative analysis of prenatal methyl mercury exposure and cognitive development. Am J Prev Med. 2005 Nov;29(4):353-65. They published the MeHg ERF estimate of triangular distribution (0, 0.7, 1.5) decrease of IQ points per 1 ug/g maternal hair. --Jouni (talk) 18:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC) --1: Justifiable procedure in author judgement would be to use name(s) of the author(s) used --> here e.g. (Leino O., 2007). Scientific information should always be citable. Maybe even a short rationale about the chosen distribution would be needed. (While proposing this, I understand this may seen trivial to someone. However, to my understanding reference issues the method will anyway face sooner or later.) --Anna Karjalainen 16:51, 20 November 2007 (EET) |
