The 131st Annual Meeting (November 15-19, 2003) of APHA |
Raymond Richard Neutra, MD DrPH, Envrionmental Epidemiologist, Albany California, 956 Evelyn Ave, Albany, CA 94706, 510 622 4905, rneutra@dhs.ca.gov
While the current formulations of the so-called “Precautionary Principle” have been criticized for not being a principle at all and for being too vague, I believe that they can be viewed as recommending the principle of “Sufficient Certainty” and strategies that promote democracy, transparency and foresight. The Sufficient Certainty Principle states that: ”The suitable degree of scientific certainty required by governments to pass from inactivity to requiring precautionary planning or cheap or expensive protective actions should not be fixed but should depend on the severity, magnitude, irreversibility and unfairness of the health or environmental threat.” I present arguments for establishing (1) an unbiased entity to determine what threats rise above a threshold requiring evaluation, (2) an entity for foresightful exploration of alternatives to the threatening course of action, (3) an entity for overseeing transparent policy relevant research and risk evaluation and (4) transparent democratic regulatory procedures for choosing between the explored options. I argue that health agencies have a role in the first three but not the fourth strategy. Health agencies can also help focus attention on available options for voluntary actions by individuals and institutions.
Learning Objectives:
Related Web page: www.dhs.ca.gov/ehib/emf
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.