Reply to the ‘Comment on “Why there is no evidence that pyridine killed the English crabs”’ by A. Peters, Environ. Sci.: Adv., 2025, 4, DOI: 10.1039/D4VA00420E

Abstract

We highlight that the commentary by Peters which uses a CREED/CRED risk assessment framework supports the previous government reports that rejected the pyridine hypothesis and considers the previous evidence as unreliable. This reaffirms our conclusions that pyridine didn't kill the Teesside crabs.

Graphical abstract: Reply to the ‘Comment on “Why there is no evidence that pyridine killed the English crabs”’ by A. Peters, Environ. Sci.: Adv., 2025, 4, DOI: 10.1039/D4VA00420E

Associated articles

Article information

Article type
Comment
Submitted
01 Sep 2025
Accepted
19 Sep 2025
First published
29 Oct 2025
This article is Open Access
Creative Commons BY license

Environ. Sci.: Adv., 2025, Advance Article

Reply to the ‘Comment on “Why there is no evidence that pyridine killed the English crabs”’ by A. Peters, Environ. Sci.: Adv., 2025, 4, DOI: 10.1039/D4VA00420E

A. T. Ford, M. F. Fitzsimons and C. Halsall, Environ. Sci.: Adv., 2025, Advance Article , DOI: 10.1039/D5VA00302D

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence. You can use material from this article in other publications without requesting further permissions from the RSC, provided that the correct acknowledgement is given.

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content.

Social activity

Spotlight

Advertisements