By Ruthann Rudel and Dick Clapp  Two recent papers by Ruthann
Rudel and Julia Brody published in the journal Cancer compiled a
list of 216 chemicals shown to cause mammary gland tumors in
animal studies and presented a comprehensive state-of-the-
science review of environmental factors in breast cancer.  When
such important studies are published, it’s typical for the
chemical industry or its surrogates to attack them. In this
case, Elizabeth Whelan, president of the industry-backed
American Council on Science and Health, fired off a response
that questioned whether findings from animal cancer studies are
relevant to human cancer risk.  Like many who discount current
animal cancer studies, though, Whelan didn’t call for something
better; instead, she suggested that better peer review  would
have kept these papers out of the scientific literature.  Of
course, these two papers had already been through a rigorous
peer-review process involving scientists knowledgeable about
cancer.  Presumably these scientists were