Response to the reply by C. J. Portier and P. Clausing, concerning our review “Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC”

[1]  C. Portier,et al.  Re: Tarazona et al. (2017): Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC. doi: 10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5 , 2017, Archives of Toxicology.

[2]  Frederique Istace,et al.  Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC , 2017, Archives of Toxicology.

[3]  S. Srinivasan,et al.  Sero-Prevalence of Rodent Pathogens in India , 2015, PloS one.

[4]  H. Greim,et al.  Evaluation of carcinogenic potential of the herbicide glyphosate, drawing on tumor incidence data from fourteen chronic/carcinogenicity rodent studies , 2015, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[5]  R. Boston,et al.  Incidence rates of spontaneous disease in laboratory mice used at a large biomedical research institution. , 2013, Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS.

[6]  A. Shih,et al.  Microbial contaminations of laboratory mice and rats in Taiwan from 2004 to 2007. , 2009, Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS.

[7]  K. Pritchett-Corning,et al.  Contemporary prevalence of infectious agents in laboratory mice and rats , 2009, Laboratory animals.

[8]  Junhai Guo,et al.  Statistical significance and biological relevance of microarray data clustering , 2008 .

[9]  D. Bleyl,et al.  IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Overall Evaluations of Carcinogenicity: An Updating of IARC Monographs vol. 1 to 42. Supplement 7. 440 Seiten. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon 1987. Preis: 65, – s.Fr , 1989 .