Challenges in Assessing Long-Term Health Effects Studies

  • Eldon P. Savage
Conference paper
Part of the Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology book series (RECT, volume 129)


The assessment of long-term health effects from exposure to pesticides has been a serious challenge to research scientists for several decades. Causal inferences following exposures to pesticides and acute disease usually proceed without difficulty since the exposure and resultant disease are close in time. To the contrary, long-term health effects are much more difficult to assess and many factors related to person-place-time-agent interactions must be evaluated.


Biological Effective Dose General Population Study Proxy Respondent Disease Endpoint Phenoxy Herbicide 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bond GG, Bodner KM, Sobel W, Shellenberger RJ, Flores GH (1988) Validation of work histories obtained from interviews. Am J Epidemiol 128: 343–351.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Boyle CA, DeCoufle P, O’Brien TR (1989) Long-term health consequences of military service in Vietnam. Epidemiol Rev 11: 1–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brenner H, Savitz DA, Jockel K, Greenland S (1992) Effects of nondifferential exposure misclassification in ecologic studies. Am J Epidemiol 135: 85–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Falk F, Ricci A, Wolff MS, Godbold J, Deckers P (1992) Pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyl residues in human breast lipids and their relation to breast cancer. Arch Environ Hlth 47: 143–146.Google Scholar
  5. Gordis L (1988) Reviews and commentary, challenges to epidemiology in the next decade. Am J Epidemiol 128: 1–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Hulka BS, Wilcosky T (1988) Biological markers in epidemiologic research. Arch Environ Hlth 43: 83–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H (1982) Epidemiologic research: Principles and quantitative methods. Wadsworth, Inc, Belmont, CA.Google Scholar
  8. Lilienfeld DE, Gallo MA (1989) 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, and 2,3,7,8-TCDD: An overview. Epidemiol Rev 11: 28–58.Google Scholar
  9. Maclure KM, MacMahon B (1980) An epidemiologic perspective of environmental carcinogenesis. Epidemiol Rev 2: 91–112.Google Scholar
  10. Mantel N, Haenszel W (1988) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. In: Buck C, Llopis A, Najera E, Terris M (eds) The challenge of epidemiology, issues and selected readings. Pan Am Health Organ, Washington, DC, pp 533–553.Google Scholar
  11. Nelson LM, Longstreth WT, Koepsell TD, Van Belle G (1990) Proxy respondents in epidemiologic research. Epidemiol Rev 12: 71–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Rothman KJ (1981) Induction and latent periods. Am J Epidemiol 114: 59–75.Google Scholar
  13. Savage EP, Tessari JD, Malberg JW, Wheeler HW, Bagby JR (1973) A search for polychlorinated biphenyls in human milk in rural Colorado. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 9: 222–226.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Savage EP, Keefe TJ, Mounce LM, Heaton RK, Lewis JS, Burcar PJ (1988) Chronic neurological sequelae of acute organophosphate pesticide poisoning. Arch Environ Hlth 43: 38–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. U.S. Dept Health and Human Services (1991) 6th Ann Rept on Carcinogens, Nat Toxicol Prog. Research Triangle Park, NC, pp 1–461.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eldon P. Savage
    • 1
  1. 1.Environmental Health ServicesColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations