A New Method for Determining Allowable Daily Intakes¶
CRUMP, K. S. (1984). A New Method for Determining Allowable Daily Intakes. Toxicological Sciences, 4(5).
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Empirical No-Failure Anchor
- It is evidence for a lower bound on tolerance, not an estimate of where the system actually breaks.
This sourceShows that the no-observed-effect level has no general defining rule, is particularly uncertain where the lesion also occurs in untreated animals, and rises as experiments get smaller, so it records what a protocol did not register rather than where the system fails.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
Crump's abstract says NOEL has no general defining rule and defines the benchmark dose as a statistical lower confidence limit, supporting a lower-bound reading.
“A BD is a statistical lower confidence limit to a dose producing some predetermined increase in response rate”
- It is evidence for a lower bound on tolerance, not an estimate of where the system actually breaks.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:a89741b54e49 · see in the full table