Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comment
. 2002 Jul-Sep;8(3):249-70.
doi: 10.1179/107735202800338795.

IARC monographs, industry influence, and upgrading, downgrading, and under-grading chemicals: a personal point of view. International Agency for Research on Cancer

Affiliations
Comment

IARC monographs, industry influence, and upgrading, downgrading, and under-grading chemicals: a personal point of view. International Agency for Research on Cancer

James Huff. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2002 Jul-Sep.

Erratum in

  • Int J Occup Environ Health. 2003 Jan-Mar;9(1):84

Abstract

The first IARC Monographs Volume was distributed in 1972, and over the 23 years through 1993, under the leadership of Dr Lorenzo Tomatis, 59 IARC Monographs were completed. During 1977-1979 the author was privileged to lead the program for Volumes 15-22, and participated in the pioneering development of the LARC Preamble and Categories of Evidence. During this era other Chiefs of the IARC Monographs included Claus Agthe, Harri Vainio, Antero Aitio, and Julian Wilbourn. Since then (starting with Volume 62: 1995), a new attitude seems to have pervaded the IARC Monographs program, resulting in an increasing influence of or partiality for industry and a diminishing dedication to public and occupational health and safety concerns, and for primary prevention. Some of this attitude comes from an apparent misguided scientific zest prematurely to endorse purported or hypothetical mechanisms of chemical carcinogenesis or modes of action of chemicals causing cancer in experimental animals. These speculations are in turn used cavalierly to discount the value of experimental evidence for predicting probable carcinogenicity to humans. Most often this is accomplished by opining that the mechanism(s) of carcinogenicity in animals would not be operative in humans. End of explanation. Examples whereby the IARC has recently "down-graded" or "under-graded" the available evidence of carcinogenicity include: acrylonitrile; atrazine; benzidine-based dyes; 1,3-butadiene, dichloromethane (methylene chloride); di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate; glass wool insulation; MtBE [methyl tertiary butyl ether]; ochratoxin A; saccharin; sunlamps and sunbeds (use of); trichloroethylene; sulfamethazine; and others more inclusively mentioned in the text and tables. Further impeding or compromising public health, chemicals causing site-specific cancers in animals attendant with calculi/precipitate in the urinary bladder, goiter and thyroid gland, kidney and alpha-2mu globulin, peroxisome proliferation and liver tumors, and cell proliferation in general have led the IARC to discount these car- cinogenic effects. To stem this tide at the IARC, new leadership, with more objectivity and public health perspective, is needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Integrity of the conduct of the IARC monographs program.
    Kleihues P. Kleihues P. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2003 Jan-Mar;9(1):78-9; author reply 82. doi: 10.1179/107735203800328993. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2003. PMID: 12749635 No abstract available.
  • The IARC's role in public health.
    Hooper K. Hooper K. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2003 Jan-Mar;9(1):90. doi: 10.1179/107735203800328920. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2003. PMID: 12749642 No abstract available.

Comment on

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources