Suchergebnisse

To achieve a better understanding of the influence of National Culture, Corporate Culture and Leadership Style on Lean Six Sigma implementation and Corporate Success a quantitative empirical web-based survey with Lean Six Sigma professionals involved in the social professional network LinkedIn was carried out by Miriam Jacobs. The outcome of this survey suggests, that certain constellations of these five factors are more successful than others. Companies with an almost equal balance across different Leadership Styles and types of Corporate Culture achieve the best results, while companies equipped with a Rational and Hierarchical Corporate Culture in the absence of transformational, participative or supportive leadership are likely to fail. Contents: Theoretical Foundations and Concepts for Lean Six Sigma, Corporate Culture, National Culture, Leadership Style and Corporate Success - Development of an Overall Hypothesized Model · Introduction and Implementation of Structural Equation Modeling with Partial Least Squares (PLS) to Test the Hypothesized Model - Practical Implications and Recommendations. Target Groups: Researchers and students in the fields of management, leadership and quality management - Executives who are concerned with Lean Six Sigma. The Author Dr. Miriam Jacobs wrote her dissertation under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Armin Töpfer at the Faculty of Economics and Business Management, Research Group Corporate Management and Marketing at Technische Universität Dresden

Cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes play a key role in the metabolism of both xenobiotics and endogenous chemicals, and the activity of some CYP isoforms are susceptible to induction and/or inhibition by certain chemicals. As CYP induction/inhibition can bring about significant alterations in the level of in vivo exposure to CYP substrates and metabolites, CYP induction/inhibition data is needed for regulatory chemical toxicity hazard assessment. On the basis of available human in vivo pharmaceutical data, a draft Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Test Guideline (TG) for an in vitro CYP HepaRG test method that is capable of detecting the induction of four human CYPs (CYP1A1/1A2, 2B6, and 3A4), has been developed and validated for a set of pharmaceutical proficiency chemicals. However to support TG adoption, further validation data was requested to demonstrate the ability of the test method to also accurately detect CYP induction mediated by industrial and pesticidal chemicals, together with an indication on regulatory uses of the test method. As part of "GOLIATH", a European Union Horizon-2020 funded research project on metabolic disrupting chemical testing approaches, work is underway to generate supplemental validated data for an additional set of chemicals with sufficient diversity to allow for the approval of the guideline. Here we report on the process of proficiency chemical selection based on a targeted literature review, the selection criteria and considerations required for acceptance of proficiency chemical selection for OECD TG development (i.e. structural diversity, range of activity, relevant chemical sectors, global restrictions etc). The following 13 proposed proficiency chemicals were reviewed and selected as a suitable set for use in the additional validation experiments: tebuconazole, benfuracarb, atrazine, cypermethrin, chlorpyrifos, perfluorooctanoic acid, bisphenol A, N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide, benzo-[a]-pyrene, fludioxonil, malathion, triclosan, and caffeine. Illustrations of ...

AbstractRegulatory hazard and risk assessment of endocrine-active substances currently specifies four modes of action: interference with sex hormone (oestrogen, androgen) pathways, steroidogenesis, and thyroid hormone signalling. This does not encompass the full complexity of the endocrine system and its extended interfaces with environmental pollutants that can potentially disrupt the carefully maintained balance. Here we take the retinoid signalling pathway as a European case study for both, under- and unregulated endocrine pathways and outline the different levels of interference, discuss their adversity, and indicate crosstalk to other signalling pathways. Retinoid compounds already exist in drinking water sources, occur naturally in cyanobacterial blooms and/or enter surface waters via wastewater discharge, where they pose a potential hazard to the environment and human health - a situation that can be expected to worsen due to water shortages induced by climate-change and population growth. We briefly review relevant aspects of current endocrine disruptor (ED) testing for regulatory purposes and then expand upon the needs for inclusion of disruption of retinoid signalling in (ED) regulatory safety assessment contributing to adverse health outcomes that include cognitive function and neurological disease. An overview of developmental effects of retinoid signalling disruption across species highlights critical processes and potential crosstalk with other signalling pathways. A focused weight of evidence-based evaluation of the biologically plausible associations between neurological disorders and altered retinoid signalling highlights the evidence gaps. We show that monitoring only a limited number of anthropogenic priority chemicals in water is insufficient to address the environmental risks of retinoid signalling disruption. To comprehensively assess impacts on the endpoints, processes, and pathways of the endocrine system that are most vulnerable to chemical interference we need further investigation of the true mixture composition in environmental matrices. On a weight of evidence-basis this information can then be integrated into a reliable, inclusive, quantitative approach that ultimately accommodates all the critical pathways. By focusing on the retinoid signalling pathway, we intend to improve the scope and relevance of an integrated approach for the risk assessment of endocrine disruptors.

Endocrine disruption is a specific form of toxicity, where natural and/or anthropogenic chemicals, known as "endocrine disruptors" (EDs), trigger adverse health effects by disrupting the endogenous hormone system. There is need to harmonize guidance on the regulation of EDs, but this has been hampered by what appeared as a lack of consensus among scientists. This publication provides summary information about a consensus reached by a group of world-leading scientists that can serve as the basis for the development of ED criteria in relevant EU legislation. Twenty-three international scientists from different disciplines discussed principles and open questions on ED identification as outlined in a draft consensus paper at an expert meeting hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin, Germany on 11-12 April 2016. Participants reached a consensus regarding scientific principles for the identification of EDs. The paper discusses the consensus reached on background, definition of an ED and related concepts, sources of uncertainty, scientific principles important for ED identification, and research needs. It highlights the difficulty in retrospectively reconstructing ED exposure, insufficient range of validated test systems for EDs, and some issues impacting on the evaluation of the risk from EDs, such as non-monotonic dose-response and thresholds, modes of action, and exposure assessment. This report provides the consensus statement on EDs agreed among all participating scientists. The meeting facilitated a productive debate and reduced a number of differences in views. It is expected that the consensus reached will serve as an important basis for the development of regulatory ED criteria.

Endocrine disruption is a specific form of toxicity, where natural and/or anthropogenic chemicals, known as "endocrine disruptors" (EDs), trigger adverse health effects by disrupting the endogenous hormone system. There is need to harmonize guidance on the regulation of EDs, but this has been hampered by what appeared as a lack of consensus among scientists. This publication provides summary information about a consensus reached by a group of world-leading scientists that can serve as the basis for the development of ED criteria in relevant EU legislation. Twenty-three international scientists from different disciplines discussed principles and open questions on ED identification as outlined in a draft consensus paper at an expert meeting hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin, Germany on 11–12 April 2016. Participants reached a consensus regarding scientific principles for the identification of EDs. The paper discusses the consensus reached on background, definition of an ED and related concepts, sources of uncertainty, scientific principles important for ED identification, and research needs. It highlights the difficulty in retrospectively reconstructing ED exposure, insufficient range of validated test systems for EDs, and some issues impacting on the evaluation of the risk from EDs, such as non-monotonic dose–response and thresholds, modes of action, and exposure assessment. This report provides the consensus statement on EDs agreed among all participating scientists. The meeting facilitated a productive debate and reduced a number of differences in views. It is expected that the consensus reached will serve as an important basis for the development of regulatory ED criteria.

Endocrine disruption is a specific form of toxicity, where natural and/or anthropogenic chemicals, known as "endocrine disruptors" (EDs), trigger adverse health effects by disrupting the endogenous hormone system. There is need to harmonize guidance on the regulation of EDs, but this has been hampered by what appeared as a lack of consensus among scientists. This publication provides summary information about a consensus reached by a group of world-leading scientists that can serve as the basis for the development of ED criteria in relevant EU legislation. Twenty-three international scientists from different disciplines discussed principles and open questions on ED identification as outlined in a draft consensus paper at an expert meeting hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin, Germany on 11-12 April 2016. Participants reached a consensus regarding scientific principles for the identification of EDs. The paper discusses the consensus reached on background, definition of an ED and related concepts, sources of uncertainty, scientific principles important for ED identification, and research needs. It highlights the difficulty in retrospectively reconstructing ED exposure, insufficient range of validated test systems for EDs, and some issues impacting on the evaluation of the risk from EDs, such as non-monotonic dose-response and thresholds, modes of action, and exposure assessment. This report provides the consensus statement on EDs agreed among all participating scientists. The meeting facilitated a productive debate and reduced a number of differences in views. It is expected that the consensus reached will serve as an important basis for the development of regulatory ED criteria.

Endocrine disruption is a specific form of toxicity, where natural and/or anthropogenic chemicals, known as "endocrine disruptors" (EDs), trigger adverse health effects by disrupting the endogenous hormone system. There is need to harmonize guidance on the regulation of EDs, but this has been hampered by what appeared as a lack of consensus among scientists. This publication provides summary information about a consensus reached by a group of world-leading scientists that can serve as the basis for the development of ED criteria in relevant EU legislation. Twenty-three international scientists from different disciplines discussed principles and open questions on ED identification as outlined in a draft consensus paper at an expert meeting hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin, Germany on 11–12 April 2016. Participants reached a consensus regarding scientific principles for the identification of EDs. The paper discusses the consensus reached on background, definition of an ED and related concepts, sources of uncertainty, scientific principles important for ED identification, and research needs. It highlights the difficulty in retrospectively reconstructing ED exposure, insufficient range of validated test systems for EDs, and some issues impacting on the evaluation of the risk from EDs, such as non-monotonic dose–response and thresholds, modes of action, and exposure assessment. This report provides the consensus statement on EDs agreed among all participating scientists. The meeting facilitated a productive debate and reduced a number of differences in views. It is expected that the consensus reached will serve as an important basis for the development of regulatory ED criteria.