Redox biology and toxicology are interrelated fields that have produced valuable evidence regarding the role and clinical significance of reactive species. These issues are analyzed herein by presenting 6 arguments, as follows: Argument 1: There is no direct connection of redox-related pathologies with specific reactive species; Argument 2: The measurement of reactive species concentration is a major challenge due to their very short half lives; Argument 3: There is an interplay between reactive species generation and fundamental biological processes, such as energy metabolism; Argument 4: Reactive species exert beneficial biological action; Argument 5: Reactive species follow the hormesis phenomenon; Argument 6: Oxidative modifications of redox-related molecules are not necessarily interpreted as oxidative damage. We conclude that reactive species do not seem to exert clinical significance, which means that they lack a measurable cause-effect relation with chronic diseases. Unpredictable results could, nevertheless, arise through novel experimental setups applied in the field of toxicology. These are related to the real-life exposure scenario via the regimen of long-term low-dose (far below NOAEL) exposure to mixtures of xenobiotics and can potentially offer perspectives in order to investigate in depth whether or not reactive species can be introduced as clinically significant redox biomarkers.

中文翻译：

---

在其临床意义范围内接近反应物种：毒理学评估。

氧化还原生物学和毒理学是相互关联的领域，已经产生了关于反应物种的作用和临床意义的有价值的证据。本文通过提出以下6个论点来分析这些问题：论点1：氧化还原相关的病理学与特定的反应性物种没有直接联系；论据2：由于活性物质的半衰期很短，因此测量其活性是一项重大挑战。论据3：反应性物种的产生与基本生物过程（例如能量代谢）之间存在相互作用。论据4：反应性物种发挥有益的生物作用。论据5：反应性物种遵循兴奋剂现象；论点6：氧化还原相关分子的氧化修饰不一定解释为氧化损伤。我们得出结论，反应性物种似乎没有发挥临床意义，这意味着它们与慢性疾病缺乏可测量的因果关系。但是，通过在毒理学领域应用的新颖实验装置可能会产生无法预测的结果。这些与通过长期低剂量（远低于NOAEL）接触异种生物混合物的方案与现实生活中的暴露场景有关，可以潜在地提供观点，以便深入研究是否可以将活性物质引入植物体内。具有临床意义的氧化还原生物标志物。