The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields.
Current environmental regulation represents a paternalistic policy, more concerned to avoid false postives than false negatives, limiting opportunities for individuals to make choices between risk-avoidance and risk-taking alternatives. For example, many exposures to magnetic fields could be reduced at little or no cost but are not considered seriously, owing to the uncertainty of risk and the concern to avoid false positives. Even though precautionary ap proaches that focus on avoiding false negatives often do not lead to adverse economic consequences or irrational choices, such approaches usually are not taken. The value of autonomy and the proper role of governmental paternalism with respect to environmental policy need to be considered more carefully in environmental decision making.
Jamieson
D
D
University Center for Human Values, Princeton University, NJ, USA. djamieso@carleton.edu
Wartenberg
D
D
D015982:Bias; D002648:Child; D003659:Decision Making, Organizational; D004574:Electromagnetic Fields / Q000009:adverse effects*; D004782:Environmental Health; D005060:Europe; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D014943:Global Health; D006291:Health Policy; D006801:Humans; D007938:Leukemia / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology* / Q000517:prevention & control; D009381:Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology* / Q000517:prevention & control; D010686:Philosophy, Medical; D011322:Primary Prevention / Q000379:methods; D015980:Public Health Practice; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012309:Risk-Taking; D014481:United States