Jenny Pronczuk de Garbino: A Global Champion for Children’s Health

A New Day for Global Environmental Health

In this issue of Environmental Health Perspectives, Feingold et al. (2010) propose a unique step forward for toxicology: incorporating infectious disease agents and theory into the toxicological paradigm. The fields of infectious disease and toxicology intersect on many different levels. First, they can act concurrently, as when global bands of various tropical diseases widen due to increased atmospheric temperatures. For example, in A Human Health Perspective on Climate Change, the Interagency Working Group on Climate Change and Health (2010) identified health effects from climate change, as well as the health benefits from mitigating climate change. These various health effects range from respiratory and cardiovascular disease, to developmental and neurological disorders, to food- and waterborne illness, and vectorborne and zoonotic disease. It is increasingly clear that climate change—a marquee issue in the field of environmental health—and infectious disease are linked. Second, the two fields can also act antagonistically: For example, the newly renewed appeals for global use of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) to combat malaria will pit the well-known hazardous effects of DDT against the scourge of malaria. In many countries DDT has been banned for agricultural use; it is considered a Class II or “moderately hazardous” pesticide by the World Health Organization (International Programme on Chemical Safety 2005), and its use is strictly limited by the 2001 Stockholm Convention. However, use of DDT is still permitted for vector control. This balance of risks and benefits is a conundrum for scientists and policy makers, but it reveals the serious issues raised when infectious disease and environmental health interests clash. Third, these two disciplines can act synergistically, as in the interactions between hepatitis B and aflatoxin in hepatic cancer. Both hepatitis B and aflatoxin are independent factors in liver cancer. However, when combined, they act powerfully to raise the risk of hepatic cancer up to 60 times that of unexposed individuals (Groopman et al. 2005). This National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)-funded research is a primary example of the interaction between environmental health and infectious disease and can serve as a model for future research efforts. Supression of the immune response by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) was first shown in mice and nonhuman primates. Recently, in another example of concurrent interaction, NIEHS-funded studies led by Philippe Grandjean have shown that perinatal and developmental exposure to PCBs adversely impact immune responses to childhood vaccinations (Heilmann et al. 2006, 2010). We have an opportunity at the NIEHS to embrace this new paradigm. As we have shown with our investment in research into the aflatoxin–hepatitis B and PCB–vaccine interactions, the NIEHS has a track record that could promote a wider interest in this field of inquiry. Ideas like these are supported not only at the institute level but also throughout the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Recently, NIH director Francis Collins (2010b) wrote, “NIH can play a major role in ramping up the discovery of novel targets in both pathogen and host and work to facilitate advances in prevention . . . .” Collins (2010a) also wrote, “the best outcomes are generally when you don’t have walls between parts of the organization that prevent people from learning from each other.” A recent presentation at the NIEHS outlined a vision for the institute that included the infectious disease and environmental health intersection within the context of the rapid evolution in the field of environmental health, specifically in epigenetics. As we recognize that our old assumptions about toxicants and how they affect our bodies are being changed by modern science (e.g., exposure effects are not only dose dependent but are also affected by both time and context), the field of environmental health is moving fast and the NIEHS needs to be at the front with innovative, bold ideas so we can participate and lead with the best science possible. The idea of incorporating infectious disease into the toxicological paradigm is exactly the kind of pioneering concept that can take environmental health to the next level. The NIEHS Office of the Director will be working with division leaders to develop an initiative on infectious disease and environmental health—to incorporate infectious disease into the toxicological paradigm. We look forward to the possibilities to strengthen the field of environmental health science.

Measuring Partnership Activities: Partnerships in Environmental Public Health Evaluation Metrics Manual

NIEHS Supports Partnerships in Environmental Public Health Linda S. Birnbaum, PhD I would like to start by thanking the journal for inviting me to write an editorial to accompany Dr. Juliana van Olphen and her colleagues’ thoughtful evaluation that focuses on the important topic of community health partnerships.1 As the new director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Toxicology Program, I am pleased to take on this role during a time when both the environment and health are top priorities for our country. I am a big supporter of community-based participatory research (CBPR) that ensures community members have an active role in planning, implementing, translating and disseminating research that addresses local environmental health concerns. NIEHS has been a long-standing leader in fostering partnerships between community groups and researchers to better understand environmental causes of disease. Our commitment is demonstrated in a number of ways. For example, NIEHS, in cooperation with the National Cancer Institute, requires that a Community Outreach and Translation Core (COTC) is established in each of our four Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Centers—one of which was the subject of Dr. van Olphen’s independent analysis published in this issue. COTCs conduct essential work to ensure that the views and concerns of the breast cancer advocacy community are heard and that the research findings are disseminated to the public. Developing educational materials for children and adults about breast cancer and the environment, holding public awareness forums and town meetings, and exploring areas of concern or interest to the community are all essential activities led by the COTC to create community participation in environmental health issues such as breast cancer. What van Olphen’s article demonstrates is that COTCs can further advance and promote CBPR principles within research-intensive Centers. NIEHS grantees employing CBPR approaches are contributing to our understanding about breast cancer and the environment. There is a growing body of literature showing that early-life exposures to endocrine disruptors—particularly during gestation and childhood, but also continuing through puberty, first childbirth, and breastfeeding—are critical to later-life breast cancer risk. As researchers learn more about what causes and how to prevent breast cancer, grantees such as those we support through our environmental justice program are spreading the word and empowering communities to take action. Breast cancer advocates in two communities that differ in racial/ethnic and economic character are working in partnership with researchers to assess household exposures to endocrine disrupting compounds, and to develop communication tools for reporting results to affected individuals and communities.2 These research findings are being used by community groups and advocates to affect public health and lead to policy changes. Congress recently recognized the contributions of NIEHS and the National Institutes of Health as a whole for their outstanding work in the breast cancer and environment area, when it passed the “Breast Cancer and Environment Research Act of 2008.”3 The Act looks to NIH to take a lead role in defining the future research agenda for collaborative research efforts related to breast cancer and the environment. NIEHS’ leadership role in translating research on breast cancer and the environment is the outgrowth of the Institute’s commitment to CBPR approaches that promote having the community actively involved in shaping and conducting research and intervention strategies. Since 1995, through its CBPR activities, the Institute has supported principles that have been developed and shared by leaders in the field such as those developed by Barbara Israel et al. 4 and Lawrence Green et al.5 Principles that call for building on the strengths and resources within the community; focusing on the local relevance of public health problems; and disseminating results to all partners are endorsed by NIEHS and are evident in work supported by NIEHS. Recognizing the [End Page 195] continuum of CBPR, the Institute promotes these principles throughout a variety of programs from traditional outreach and education efforts to more complex biomedical, hypothesis-driven research questions that address environmental justice and health disparities issues. To build upon our past accomplishments and to progress our research agenda in this area, we recently sought input from research grantees and members of advocacy...

Over the years, Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) has emerged as one of the leading journals in the environmental health sciences. It can be argued that one reason for EHP’s standing in the field of environmental health is its credibility as an unbiased source of news and research. With the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)—the journal’s parent agency—under new direction, we felt it was important to assure our readership that we greatly value the journal’s trustworthy reputation and that we are committed to maintaining its credibility as a high-quality, independent, peer-reviewed publication. The mission of EHP is to serve as a forum for the discussion of the interrelationships between the environment and human health by publishing in a balanced and objective manner the best peer-reviewed research and the most current and credible news in the field. EHP does this by maintaining a strict separation from advocacy and nonprofit groups, industry, and government agencies, including the NIEHS. In reference to the ability of the journal to report scientific findings independent of influence from some segments of the industrial sector, U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich remarked in a congressional hearing (House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy 2007) that “EHP alone is a pillar of truth.” In June 2007, a roundtable meeting (Listening Session and Roundtable Discussion on Environmental Health Perspectives) was held in Bethesda, Maryland, to consider the future of the journal. Participants included representatives from the environmental health sciences, journal subscribers, academics, and publishers. As part of the discussion, the participants were asked to identify threats that could weaken the journal in the future. One of these threats was the potential for the director of the NIEHS to influence, or be perceived to influence, the journal content. Because EHP receives considerable support for personnel and publication costs from the institute and because the journal and its staff are subject to the same organizational rules and regulations as other federal employees, it is logical to be concerned that the NIEHS director might exercise control over journal operations and publication decisions. The roundtable participants further noted that the potential problem for EHP is not so much that of biased editorializing, but of editorial self-censorship—that is, trying not to offend the powers that be, especially among staff who have been long-term government employees. In the minds of the participants, editors working within a government context may be less likely to act and write provocatively, even though it is the role of editorials, news, and research papers to provoke thought and stimulate discussion. In fact, the NIEHS director makes no attempt to sway editors or writers, or to influence the peer-review process. In our view, editorial independence is an absolute necessity for producing a successful scientific journal. An EHP editorial published in January 2008 noted that the content, scope, and direction of the journal would not be influenced by NIEHS leadership and that the editor-in-chief would be given full responsibility for directing and managing all aspects of the publication process (Tilson 2008). Accordingly, editorial decisions about which papers are accepted or rejected, the layout of the publication, and content of the news and editorials would not be subject to approval by NIEHS management. This policy still stands. We acknowledge and believe it is in the best interest of the NIEHS to support a prominent journal dedicated to stimulating new ideas and publishing research that sustains and develops themes relevant to the mission of the institute but that is not influenced by the institute. It is in the best interest of the institute to ensure that the message of the journal is viewed as fair and balanced to all sides of a question and that the journal is dedicated to publishing the best peer-review work in the discipline of environmental health sciences. At issue are the credibility and scientific integrity of both EHP and the NIEHS. A high degree of credibility and scientific integrity is necessary to maintain the trust of Congress and the public, which are the ultimate consumers and supporters of environmental health science research.

Leading the World’s Premier Environmental Health Organization: A Message from Linda Birnbaum

In the April 2008 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), Drew et al. (2008) noted that global environmental health has evolved as a high priority for the entire environmental health community. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) has invested considerable time and resources in conjunction with other U.S.-based and international organizations to study issues relevant to global environmental health. The NIEHS 2006–2011 Strategic Plan (NIEHS 2006), for example, puts a high priority on global environmental health research, capacity-building training, and international partnerships. If “global environmental health research” is defined as research conducted outside the United States on foreign populations or environmental samples, then the NIEHS has funded 57 global environmental health research projects in 37 countries at an estimated cost of $30 million between 2005 and 2007 (Drew et al. 2008). The NIEHS has contributed in other ways to the study of global environmental health, including support for intramural researchers involved in collaborations with foreign countries, training of foreign scientists, and support for scientific conferences and meetings to build capacity in other countries (Suk 2008). The NIEHS also recently sponsored a workshop to consider potential actions and activities related to the human health effects of climate change—perhaps the quintessential global environmental health issue (Hrynkow 2008). As noted by Suk (2008), EHP supports global environmental health research through its policy of open access and commitment to dissemination of research and information to the developing world. Approximately 13% of research articles published in EHP from 1999 through 2008 were related to global environmental health using the definition of Drew et al. (2008). Many of those papers originated in developing countries such as China, Bangladesh, and India. A recent annual update of EHP’s activities (Tilson 2009) described several initiatives undertaken in 2008 to restore and expand the journal’s commitment to global environmental health issues. These include renewed support for a Chinese-language edition of EHP published by the Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention and for partnerships with other environmental and public health journals such as Mali Medical, Cienca y Trabajo, Ciencia & Saude Coletiva, Salud Publica de Mexico, and the Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine. EHP is committed to pursuing additional partner ships with other foreign journals in 2009. Another approach to promoting interchange and dialogue with the non-U.S. environmental health research community is to identify issues and topics of interest to this audience and make that information available to the larger international environmental health science community. To that end, EHP is pleased this month to publish editorials by Haidong Kan and his colleagues from Fudan University, Shanghai, China (Kan et al. 2009), and Aiguo Wang and Xuemin Chen of the Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Wang and Chen 2009). Kan et al. discuss the health impact of outdoor pollution in China, and Wang and Chen discuss the funding of basic research in China. Their editorials have been adapted from editorials originally published in Chinese. We hope these editorials will provide a window into the concerns and priorities of researchers in China.

On 1 November 2016 the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) will celebrate its 50th anniversary, five decades after the U.S. Surgeon General announced the establishment of the Division of Environmental Health Sciences at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Today, from its home in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, the NIEHS funds more than $750 million in research each year to discover how the environment influences human health and disease. It is my honor and privilege to serve as the NIEHS director during this significant milestone in the institute’s history, and I see it as an opportunity to highlight the improvements to public health that have resulted from environmental science research. I also want to bring together health researchers supported by the NIEHS, and the NIH as a whole, for networking and collaboration. I’m really excited about all the scientific and public outreach activities we’ve planned for the 2016 anniversary year. This month the NIEHS will hold an oral history event featuring alumni and retirees who will share their reflections on scientific progress, professional experiences, and personal memories at the institute. We’ll also initiate a time capsule and begin collecting nominations for items to fill it so that we can share our 2016 NIEHS research and culture with future staff and science historians. We’ll host several distinguished lectures at the NIEHS and hear from top scientists, including Gina Turrigiano, Gerard Karsenty, Myles Brown, and Jeff Gordon. All these lectures will be open to the public and webcast live from our website at http://www.niehs.nih.gov. The NIEHS will partner with the Society of Toxicology in July for a day-long symposium on technological advances, and with the Endocrine Society in September for a three-day workshop on endocrine disruptor research. A Women’s Health Awareness event at North Carolina Central University, a public forum at the Research Triangle Foundation, and a Science in the Cinema program at Marbles Kids Museum in downtown Raleigh are just a few ways the NIEHS will engage the communities surrounding Research Triangle Park to share information about environmental health and the value of our research. On the anniversary day of 1 November 2016, hundreds of research partners, grantees, and public health officials will join institute staff and alumni for a very special program celebrating the history, scientific advances, and public health contributions resulting from the unique and prevention-focused research supported by the NIEHS. Finally, in December, for the first time ever we’ll bring together at once all our grant-funded research center directors and their key scientific staff from across the United States for a lively exchange of research findings, methods, and community engagement practices. A full calendar of events is posted on the NIEHS website, and I hope our friends and partners will plan to join us often. We’ll also be posting fun and interesting photos and recordings from the past 50 years. We hope you’ll take the opportunity in 2016 to tell someone you know about the NIEHS and what it has meant to you. I’d love to hear your stories, and I’ll add them to my own, which began 36 years ago when I started my federal research career as a senior staff fellow at the NIEHS.

Development of methods of male contraception: impact of the World Health Organization Task Force

In 1997, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) established the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), an ad hoc federal interagency committee to address the growing need for obtaining regulatory acceptance of new toxicological test methods. The thought was that simultaneous agency evaluation of new methods that addressed the 3Rs (reduction, refinement, and replacement) of animal testing by an interagency group could greatly speed up and harmonize the cross-agency acceptance and adoption of new methods into federal toxicity testing guidelines. This activity was codified into law in 2000 by passage of the ICCVAM Authorization Act (2000). The Act specified 15 agencies (such as the Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Department of Transportation, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and U.S. Department of Agriculture) that would constitute ICCVAM. The Act also prescribed specific duties intended to facilitate review and acceptance of test methods, established an external scientific advisory committee, and required the director of the NIEHS to establish ICCVAM under the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), which currently exists as a functional unit within the Division of the NTP at the NIEHS. Over the past 15 years, ICCVAM has successfully evaluated and recommended numerous alternative test methods for regulatory use (NTP 2012). However, the lack of implementation of ICCVAM-recommended methods has been an area of increasing concern. The NIEHS has worked proactively with our ICCVAM partners to identify promising methods, encouraged and aided test developers in building a case for validating their methods, sometimes provided financial support through competitive Small Business Innovation Grants, and held workshops and engaged our federal and international partners to promote acceptance and use of test methods in specific areas of toxicology (e.g., ocular toxicity and skin sensitization). Even so, regulatory use of alternative methods has still lagged behind. Critics have repeatedly pointed out that alternative test methods have not been accepted for regulatory decision making and that the expectations for real reductions in animal use in toxicology testing have always outpaced the documented progress. It has become clear that it is time to change our approach. The NIEHS is beginning to move forward with a different philosophy toward ICCVAM. Rather than the NIEHS directing the activities of ICCVAM through NICEATM, the interagency agenda will now be driven by the partner regulatory agencies—the agencies that will ultimately implement the ICCVAM-recommended methods. Regulatory agencies are required by statute to use toxicology test information for a variety of purposes, including labeling and registration, and these requirements are not uniform. The ICCVAM Authorization Act acknowledges that some alternative test methods promoted by ICCVAM, while deemed valid, may not meet specific needs of a regulatory agency. With ICCVAM regulatory agencies taking ownership of the process, there should be a better match between the alternative test methods validated and the tests required to meet regulatory guidelines. Toxicology testing is shifting from a primary focus on adverse phenotypic observations in animals to mechanism-based biological outcomes in vitro, and the NIEHS is embracing this paradigm shift through its participation in the multiagency Tox21 consortium (Collins et al. 2008). NICEATM will expand its scope and concentrate its resources on providing bioinformatic and computational toxicology support to NIEHS Tox21 projects. With its purpose of transforming toxicology by shifting from in vivo animal studies to in vitro assays, in vivo assays in lower organisms, and computational modeling for toxicity assessments, Tox21 has the real potential to result in dramatic changes in the numbers and types of organisms used for toxicology testing. A stronger interface of NICEATM with Tox21 will better position ICCVAM for addressing how data from these new methods can be integrated into the existing regulatory framework. We express our deep appreciation to William S. Stokes, who has served as the director of NICEATM since its inception. In December 2012, he retired from the Public Health Service after 33 years of dedicated federal service. His vision, persistence, and direction have been key to bringing NICEATM, ICCVAM, and the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods (ICATM) to their current stage of maturity. We are pleased that Warren Casey, who has served as deputy director of NICEATM, will now serve as the acting director. He is uniquely qualified for this role, having worked in the areas of toxicogenomics, mechanistic toxicology, and biomarker development in the pharmaceutical industry prior to joining the NIEHS. We look forward to this new approach to promoting the 3Rs—an approach that will be driven by regulatory agency needs while remaining responsive to the test method development community.

<i>EHP</i> Update

Translational research in environmental health sciences

Protection of workers and consumers demands that safety testing accurately detects chemicals and products that can cause injury or disease. Chemicals make our lives more comfortable, but accidental and improper exposures to chemical substances continue to have a significant public health impact. According to the Institute of Medicine (2004), more than 4 million poisonings occur annually in the United States, and poisonings are the second leading cause of injury-related deaths, exceeded only by automobile accidents. Common household products such as household cleaners cause about 125,000 eye injuries each year. Skin diseases, injuries, and disorders, including contact dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis from chemicals, are the most common category of occupational illness. Sixteen years ago the National Institutes of Health (NIH)Revitalization Act (1993) was signed into law with a little-noticed directive to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to develop a process to achieve regulatory acceptance of scientifically valid alternatives to animal-based safety testing. That directive gave rise to an interagency effort that has become increasingly effective in identifying, evaluating, and validating new test methods, including alternative methods, that reduce, refine, and replace animal testing—commonly referred to as “the 3Rs.” The NIEHS, along with 14 other U.S. Federal agencies, collectively known as the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM 2009b; ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000), has made important and substantial progress benefiting both public health and animal welfare. ICCVAM’s focused efforts have resulted in approved alternative test methods for many types of product safety testing, including the four most commonly conducted safety tests: acute oral toxicity, dermal irritation/corrosion, ocular irritation/corrosion, and allergic contact dermatitis. The first test method evaluated and recommended by ICCVAM was a mechanism-based assay for allergic contact dermatitis testing that uses fewer animals and eliminates pain and distress compared to the traditional assay. The comprehensive ICCVAM evaluation served a key role in achieving rapid international acceptance and widespread use of this alternative method. Since that time, ICCVAM has contributed to the national and/or international regulatory acceptance of 27 alternative safety testing methods, including 17 that do not use live animals (ICCVAM 2009b). In April 2009, an ICCVAM initiative fostered an international agreement between the United States, Canada, Japan, and the European Union that is expected to further reduce animal use in product toxicity testing worldwide (Hood 2009; ICCVAM 2009a; NIEHS 2009). The agreement involves globally coordinated, high quality validation studies and peer reviews executed using a transparent process that should speed the international adoption of alternative toxicity testing methods. In the United States, federal law requires that new test methods must be determined to be valid for their proposed regulatory use before their adoption by regulatory agencies (ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000). The law also stipulates that the new alternative test methods must provide equivalent or improved protection compared to existing methods. ICCVAM’s comprehensive scientific evaluations address these legal requirements, expediting acceptance of new test methods, and fulfilling a vital role in assisting agencies in meeting regulatory acceptance requirements. Promoting the use of accepted alternative methods has—and will continue to have—a huge positive impact on animal welfare. Thanks to the work done by ICCVAM and other organizations, animals are no longer required for many testing scenarios and the number of animals required for safety tests has been dramatically reduced. Where animals must still be used, many test methods have now been refined to significantly reduce or avoid most pain and distress. Most importantly, ICCVAM’s careful evaluation of the usefulness and limitations of these alternative methods will ensure that their proper use will in fact continue to support equal or better protection of people, animals, and the environment. Some 50 years ago in a book titled The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, two British scholars named William Russell and Rex Burch described the concept of the 3Rs as a way to advance animal welfare (Russell and Birch 1959). They would undoubtedly be pleased to learn of the progress forged by ICCVAM.

Environmental Health Insights into the 2010 Deepwater Horizon (BP) Oil Blowout

Vol. 122, No. 4 EditorialOpen AccessLetter from the Editor-in-Chief Hugh A. Tilson Hugh A. Tilson Search for more papers by this author Published:1 April 2014https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408430Cited by:3View Article in:中文版AboutSectionsPDF ToolsDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InReddit The first day of August 2014 will be a big day for me. I have decided to retire after nearly 40 years of federal service, and Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) will need a new editor-in-chief. It has been a real privilege to lead this important scientific journal since 2008. I believe in EHP, the science it supports, and the communities it serves, and I am proud to have had a part in the journal’s continued success and growing impact.In my inaugural editorial as editor-in-chief (Tilson 2008), I wrote that EHP must adhere to the principles of independence, transparency, and balance and be prepared to recognize emerging themes in order to attract a wider audience and have an impact on the field. Adherence to these standards has served the journal well. In 6 years, the journal’s impact factor increased from 5.86 to 7.26. EHP is one of the top-ranked journals in Public, Environmental, and Occupational Health and in Environmental Sciences. The journal receives nearly 1,500 research manuscripts each year and has an acceptance rate of 15%. We have more than 40 internationally recognized members of the Board of Associate Editors and more than 100 active members of the Editorial Review Board. The journal routinely publishes highly recognized news articles on a variety of emerging topics in environmental health research. In collaboration with the Shanghai Center for Disease Control and Prevention, we also publish news and other articles in a bimonthly issue of EHP Chinese Edition. The journal established and cultivated a thriving social media presence on Facebook and Twitter, and updated its format to provide easy access on personal communication devices. In 2013, EHP was one of the first environmental health journals to publish exclusively online, with the entire journal available electronically and free of charge.I thank the leadership of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) for providing continuous and enthusiastic support and for making good on its commitment to editorial independence and unfettered scientific peer review. The EHP staff members also deserve my gratitude and thanks. They are of some of the most dedicated and passionate individuals I have ever known. I believe that the articles and news we published have made a significant contribution to improving human health and have provided the best available information for decision makers and policy makers worldwide. I am confident that my successor will find the NIEHS and the EHP staff eager to carry on this tradition of excellence.The NIEHS is organizing a search committee to recruit my replacement. I have agreed to assist with the transition and, if necessary, will happily work as a volunteer until a new editor-in-chief is named. In the meantime, EHP will continue to receive manuscripts and publish research and news stories each month. Keep sending us your science, and by all means, keep reading EHP !The author declares he has no actual or potential competing financial interests.ReferenceTilson HA. 2008. Building on a firm foundation. [Editorial]Environ Health Perspect 116:A12; doi:10.1289/ehp.1113118197275. Link, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited by Feng Q, Liu S, Mao Z, Xu J, Wang Z and Le X (2016) Highlights and new Editorial Advisory Board members of the Journal of Environmental Sciences, Journal of Environmental Sciences, 10.1016/j.jes.2016.08.003, 47, (1-6), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2016. van der Kamp J and Bachmann T (2015) Health-Related External Cost Assessment in Europe: Methodological Developments from ExternE to the 2013 Clean Air Policy Package, Environmental Science & Technology, 10.1021/es5054607, 49:5, (2929-2938), Online publication date: 3-Mar-2015. Birnbaum L and Woychik R (2014) Retirement of Hugh A. Tilson, Environmental Health Perspectives, 122:8, (A202-A202), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2014. Vol. 122, No. 4 April 2014Metrics About Article Metrics Publication History Originally published1 April 2014Published in print1 April 2014 Financial disclosuresPDF download License information EHP is an open-access journal published with support from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. All content is public domain unless otherwise noted. Note to readers with disabilities EHP strives to ensure that all journal content is accessible to all readers. However, some figures and Supplemental Material published in EHP articles may not conform to 508 standards due to the complexity of the information being presented. If you need assistance accessing journal content, please contact [email protected]. Our staff will work with you to assess and meet your accessibility needs within 3 working days.