title: Does the term carcinogen send the wrong message?
abstract: The term carcinogen has been used by scientists and health regulatory officials for decades. During the last 20 years there have been attempts to redefine the term to make it more rigorous. But, as predicted two decades ago by a benchmark-setting subcommittee of the National Cancer Advisory Board, advances in scientific understanding have brought about dramatic changes in the way we are able to view the term carcinogen. These changes, their scientific bases and their effect on defining the term carcinogen are described. An alternative to the use of the term carcinogen is suggested by the recently proposed US Environmental Agency's guidelines for cancer risk assessment which appear to be in accord with current scientific understanding and the importance of considering the factors affecting the term carcinogen. The guidelines set forth four questions, the answers to which could, in our judgment, replace the need to define or use the term carcinogen which, in light of new scientific knowledge, has become more misleading than useful.
authors.forename: W G
authors.initials: WG
authors.lastname: Flamm
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Hughes
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D002273:Carcinogens; D006801:Humans; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000139:chemically induced*; D009626:Terminology as Topic
chemical_list: D002273:Carcinogens