{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/6324c3f2a8cfed0012150035/633d13cbb282d00011bda3de?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Hazard vs risk: Peter Matthiessen on assessing environmental effects of endocrine disruptors","thumbnail_width":200,"thumbnail_height":200,"thumbnail_url":"https://open-images.acast.com/shows/6324c3f2a8cfed0012150035/1664947089907-062179482c09ac331ce30a49c5a1ccca.jpeg?height=200","description":"<p>From the infamous bisphenol A (BPA) to feminized male fish, endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDS) remain at the center of many controversies involving chemicals in consumer products. International efforts to address concerns over ecotoxicological effects from EDS include both risk- and hazard-based approaches to preventing adverse effects, depending on the country or intergovernmental agency. A recent SETAC Pellston workshop convened researchers from all over the world to advise on how regulators and policy makers can make science-based decisions when evaluating EDS. Workshop organizer and lead author Peter Matthiessen joins us to discuss the synthesis paper from the workshop, “Recommended approaches to the scientific evaluation of ecotoxicological hazards and risks of endocrine-active substances.”</p>","author_name":"IEAM"}