In March 1972, Frederick Coulston and colleagues at the Albany Medical College reported results of an intentional chlorpyrifos dosing study to the study’s sponsor, Dow Chemical Company. Their report concluded that 0.03 mg/kg-day was the chronic no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) for chlorpyrifos in humans. We demonstrate here that a proper analysis by the original statistical method should have found a lower NOAEL (0.014 mg/kg-day), and that use of statistical methods first available in 1982 would have shown that even the lowest dose in the study had a significant treatment effect. The original analysis, conducted by Dow-employed statisticians, did not undergo formal peer review; nevertheless, EPA cited the Coulston study as credible research and kept its reported NOAEL as a point of departure for risk assessments throughout much of the 1980′s and 1990′s. During that period, EPA allowed chlorpyrifos to be registered for multiple residential uses that were later cancelled to reduce potential health impacts to children and infants. Had appropriate analyses been employed in the evaluation of this study, it is likely that many of those registered uses of chlorpyrifos would not have been authorized by EPA. This work demonstrates that reliance by pesticide regulators on research results that have not been properly peer-reviewed may needlessly endanger the public.

1972年3月，奥尔巴尼医学院的Frederick Coulston及其同事向研究的发起者陶氏化学公司报告了毒死rif定量给药研究的结果。他们的报告得出结论，0.03 mg / kg-day是毒死rif的慢性无人观察到的不良反应水平（NOAEL）。我们在此证明，通过原始统计方法进行的适当分析应发现较低的NOAEL（0.014 mg / kg-day），并且使用1982年首次使用的统计方法将表明，即使该研究中的最低剂量也有明显的治疗效果。陶氏雇用的统计学家进行的原始分析并未经过正式的同行评审。但是，EPA称库尔斯顿研究是可靠的研究，并在1980年代和1990年代的大部分时间里，将其报告的NOAEL保留为进行风险评估的出发点。在此期间，EPA允许毒死rif注册用于多种居住用途，后来被取消以减少对儿童和婴儿的潜在健康影响。如果在本研究的评估中采用了适当的分析方法，很可能许多毒死registered的注册用途都不会被EPA授权。这项工作表明，农药管理者对未经适当同行评审的研究结果的依赖可能会不必要地危害公众。EPA允许毒死rif注册用于多种居住用途，后来被取消以减少对儿童和婴儿的潜在健康影响。如果在本研究的评估中采用了适当的分析方法，很可能许多毒死registered的注册用途都不会被EPA授权。这项工作表明，农药管理者对未经适当同行评审的研究结果的依赖可能会不必要地危害公众。EPA允许毒死rif注册用于多种居住用途，后来被取消以减少对儿童和婴儿的潜在健康影响。如果在本研究的评估中采用了适当的分析方法，很可能许多毒死registered的注册用途都不会被EPA授权。这项工作表明，农药管理者对未经适当同行评审的研究结果的依赖可能会不必要地危害公众。