Precautionary Approach vs. Acceptable Risk

Risk Assessment: allowable risk of human activity

Precautionary Principle

Taking stock of big environmental and health problems (Peter Montague) 1. Public health is in decline. Rise of chronic disorders (cancers, asthma, birth defects, attention deficit disorder). > half of all Americans U.S. is #1 in health care spending, but 41 st in infant mortality. Huge racial disparities in public health. The urban poor suffer the most: worst health problems.

Taking stock of big environmental and health problems (Peter Montague) 2. Human technologies are destroying the inhabitability of the earth Dangerous, potent industrial chemicals  increase in number (100,000 chemicals in commerce, 750 new ones/year) Diet and environment of grandparents may be causing your cancer today  inheritable diseases can be caused without genetic mutations. Epigenetics: responsibility in genetics and medicine.

Taking stock of big environmental and health problems (Peter Montague) fetal programming: many adult diseases are due to fetal/infant low level exposures. electromagnetic fields: harming our health. nuclear power creates nuclear arms race  proliferation. Genetically modified crops are unmanageable and out of control.  potential contamination of food crops with pharma drugs. Synthetic biology: creating new life forms, including viruses.

Taking stock of big environmental and health problems (Peter Montague) Nanotechnology: hazards of nano-particles ignored  100s of new nanotech commercial products already. rapid, unchecked innovation demonstrates our growing ignorance. Ever more complex systems, we can’t keep up our understanding of it all. 750 new chemicals per year, nearly all untested for effects on humans and environment.

Reasons for Precaution (Peter Montague) Risk-based approach has harmed many, many people and damaged environment. toxic lead: a least harmful alternative known already in : risk assessment was used to justify toxic lead uses in paint. “Safe” level reduced from 80 micrograms/deciliter to 60 to 40 to 20 to 10 and now to 2. Risk-based approach: How much harm is acceptable? Precautionary approach: How much harm can we avoid?

Reasons for Precaution (Peter Montague) 4 kinds of precautionary action: 1. Set and state our goals: a healthy environment, justice, democracy. 2. Assess available alternatives for achieving the goals. 3. Gather and consider complete and accurate information.  proponent of new technology must bear the burden of proof. 4. Involve all affected parties in decisions, and give them all the information.

Reasons for Precaution (Peter Montague) Obstacles to Precaution: Refusal of decision-makers to consider all available information, on all possible health impacts. Need not just scientific information; also need historical, spiritual, cultural, local knowledge, emotions and values.

14 Arguments for Precaution (Peter Montague) 1. Past practices have failed us. E.g. chronic diseases are increasing. 2. The world is now full. Humans use 40% of all biological activity. We’ve exceeded earth’s capacity to assimilate waste. Current ways of making decisions have evolved from “empty” world to a “full” world. 3. Early warnings. We’re flying blind, so look for early evidence (e.g. lead in paint) and act on it.

14 Arguments for Precaution (Peter Montague) 4. Benefit of the doubt. If uncertain about our actions, side with public health and environment. 5. Natural rights. Right to clean, healthy environment; responsibility to anticipate harm. 6. Responsibility for our behavior – prevent impending harm. 7. Our role as trustees. We are responsible to preserve the world, through least-harmful alternatives.

14 Arguments for Precaution (Peter Montague) 8. Local precedents. San Francisco precautionary approach/ordinance. Federal level, precautionary approach: FDA, drug testing before marketing. Europe: REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization of Chemicals: no data, no market. Pre-market testing  the wave of the future. 9. Public decision-making process. 10. Redefining role of government decisionmakers. No longer enough to say: Is it legal? Is it safe? Must now say: Is it necessary?

14 Arguments for Precaution (Peter Montague) 11. Religious. We have a religious duty to protect the earth from harm. 12. Economic arguments. Corporations compelled by law to deliver a profit to investors  externalizes costs (onto workers, environment). Insurance companies do precaution (anticipate harm, share costs). Precaution stimulates innovation. Waste demonstrates failure of design. 13. Medical. Medical practitioners take preventive action all the time to avert harm. 14. Media. Reporters need to ask the questions: What alternatives were considered? How much harm is preventable?

Contradictions of Capitalism First Contradiction: labor relation, wage labor. Demand for higher wages, pressure to keep wages low (competition). Second Contradiction: tendency to undermine the conditions of production: health, environment, urban space, quality of life. Capitalist system expands and grows  will undermine itself without government regulation. EPA, OSHA, periods of social reform (the New Deal, Great Society, Progressive Era)  keep capitalism from undermining itself. Negative externalities  tendency for businesses (and government, e.g. military) to externalize costs onto society (e.g. pollution, cancer, etc.)