Precaution and cholera: A response to tickner and Gouveia-Vigeant

Risk Analysis

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 1013-1019

  Hanekamp, J C ^a  

^a Science Department   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; PHTHALIC ACID;

CHLORINATION; CHOLERA; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NONHUMAN; NOTE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENCE;

CHOLERA; DISEASE OUTBREAKS; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; HUMANS; PERU; RESEARCH DESIGN; WATER PURIFICATION;

EID: 33748433955     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00796.x     Document Type: Note

References (51)

1. Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle. (2000). Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.
2. Hanekamp, J. C., Verstegen, S. W., & Vera-Navas, G. (2005). The historical roots of precautionary thinking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(4), 295-310.
3. The hormetic dose-response discussion raises serious issues with the linear non-threshold (LNT) dose-response extrapolation traditionally held in this field. See, e.g., Calabrese, E. J. (2005). Historical blunders: How toxicology got the dose-response relationship half right. Cellular and Molecular Biology, 51, 643-654.
4. Stenmark, M. (2004). How to Relate Science and Religion. A Multidimensional Model. Cambridge: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (Religion, here, is in the wider context referred to as worldviews.)
5. Jovarsky, D. (1970). The Lysenko Affair. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. See for initial work on the sociology of knowledge: Fleck, L. (1935). Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissen-schaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv. Basel: Benno Schwabe & C.
8. This rather unknown book has been given attention by Kuhn, who himself became famous for his work on the philosophy of science. Fleck's work is translated: Fleck, L. (1979). Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9. Weber, M. (1949). On the Methodology of the Social Sciences. New York: Free Press.
10. Derived from Stenmark, note 4.
11. Lakatos, I. (1978). Mathematics, Science and Epistemology: Philosophical Papers. Volume 2. J. Worall & G. Currie (Eds.) (p. 258). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. See note 4.
13. Appeal to authority: a proposition is held to be true because it is held by persons regarded to be authoritative in a specific field. Appeal to consequences: the author points to the disagreeable consequences of holding a particular belief in order to show that this belief is false. Appeal to force: the reader is told that unpleasant consequences will follow if he or she does not agree with the author. Appeal to popularity: a proposition is held to be true because it is widely held to be true or is held to be true by some sector of the population (e.g., upper class).
14. See further Weinberg, A. M. (1972). Science and trans-science. Minerva, 10, 209-222.
15. See note 4.
16. Bramwell, A. (1989). Ecology in the 20th Century. A History. London: Yale University Press.
17. Bramwell, A. (1994). The Fading of the Greens. The Decline of Environmental Politics in the West. London: Yale University Press.
18. See note 2.
19. Bourke, J. (2005). Fear. A Cultural History. UK: Virago Press.
20. See also Furedi, F. (2002). Culture of Fear. Risk-Taking and the Morality of Low Expectations. UK: Continuum.
21. Veldman, M. (1994). Fantasy, the Bomb and the Greening of Britain. Romantic Protest, 1945-1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. See note 2.
23. Grübler, A. (1998). Technology and Global Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. See note 2.
25. The scientific method employed by most scientists comprises, put succinctly and oversimplified, the formation of a hypothesis followed by verification. Three evaluative criteria can subsequently be put forward: (i) any hypothesis must include all available data (integrity); (ii) the scope of the hypothesis must be no more complex than the coherent inclusion of all data requires (simplicity); (iii) the hypothesis must make sense of the available data and outperform competing hypotheses (explicatory power).
26. See, e.g., Gori, G. B. (1996). Science, imaginable risks, and public policy: Anatomy of a mirage. Regulatory Pharmacology and Toxicology, 23, 304-311.
27. Gori, G. B. (2001). The costly illusion of regulating unknowable risks. Regulatory Pharmacology and Toxicology, 34, 205-212.
28. Bezoen, A., Van Haren, & W., Hanekamp, J. C. (1999). Emergence of a Debate: AGPs and Public Health. Human Health and Antibiotic Growth Promoters: Reassessing the Risk. Amsterdam: HAN.
29. Phillips, I., Casewell, M., Cox, T., De Groot, B., Friis, C., Jones, R., Nightingale, C., Preston, R., & Waddell, J. (2004). Does the use of antibiotics in food animals pose a risk to human health? A critical review of published data. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 53, 28-52.
30. Cox Jr., L. A., & Popken, D. A. (2004). Quantifying human health risks from virginiamycin used in chickens. Risk Analysis, 24(1), 271-288.
31. Forrester, I., & Hanekamp, J. C. (2005). Precaution, science and jurisprudence: A test case. Journal of Risk Research, accepted for publication.
32. SCAN. (1996). Report of the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition (SCAN) on the Possible Risk for Humans of the Use of Avoparcin as a Feed Additive, 21 May 1996. Luxembourg: Office for EC Publications.
33. SCAN. (1998). Opinion of the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition (SCAN) on the Immediate and Longer-Term Risk to the Value of Streptogramins in Human Medicine Posed by the Use of Virginiamycin as an Animal Growth Promoter, 10 July 1998. Luxembourg: Office for EC Publications.
34. Christoforou, T. (2004). The regulation of genetically modified organisms in the European Union: The interplay of science, law and politics. Common Market Law Review, 41, 637-709.
35. Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2001). Better negative than positive? Evidence of a bias for negative information about possible health dangers. Risk Analysis, 21(1), 199-206.
36. See for an explanation of negative bias: Taylor, S. E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization- minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 67-85.
37. Casewell, M., Friis, C., Marco, E., McMullin, P., & Phillips, I. (2003). The European ban on growth-promoting antibiotics and emerging consequences for human and animal health. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 52, 159-161.
38. Durodié, B. (2003). The true cost of precautionary chemicals regulation. Risk Analysis, 23(2), 389-398.
39. Bergkamp, L., & Hanekamp, J. C. (2003). The draft REACH regime: Costs and benefits of precautionary chemical regulation. Environmental Liability, 5, 167-180.
40. Babich, M. A., Chen, S.-B., Greene, M. A., Kiss, C. T., Porter, W. K., Smith, T. P., Wind, M. L., & Zamula, W. W. (2004). Risk assessment of oral exposure to diisononyl phthalate from children's products. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 40, 151-167.
41. European Commission - Joint Research Centre Institute for Health and Consumer Protection European Chemicals Bureau (ECB). (2003). European Union Risk Assessment Report 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic Acid, di-C8-10-Branched Alkyl Esters, C9-Rich and di-"Isononyl" Phthalate (DINP). Brussels: Publications Office.
42. Barnard, R. C. (1994). Scientific method and risk assessment. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 19, 211-218.
43. Hanekamp, J. C., Frapporti, G., & Olieman, K. (2003). Chloramphenicol, food safety and precautionary thinking in Europe. Environmental Liability, 6, 209-221.
44. Hanekamp, J. C., & Kwakman, J. (2004). Beyond zero-tolerance: A novel and global outlook on foodsafety and residues of pharmacological active substances in foodstuffs of animal origin. Environmental Liability, 1, 33-39.
45. See Calabrese, E. J., & Baldwin, L. A. (2003). Toxicology rethinks its central belief. Hormesis demands a reappraisal of the way risks are assessed. Nature, 421, 691-692.
46. Calabrese, E. J. (2004). Hormesis - basic, generalizable, central to toxicology and a method to improve the risk-assessment process. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 10, 466-467.
47. Rozman, K. K., & Doul, J. (2003). Scientific foundations of hormesis. Part 2. Maturation, strengths, limitations, and possible applications in toxicology, pharmacology, and epidemiology. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 33 (3 & 4), 451-462.
48. Raffensperger, C., & Tickner, J. (Eds.). (1999). Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Washington DC: Island Press.
49. Latour, B. (1993). We Have Never Been Modern (p. 1). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
50. Hence, there should be no room for scepticism, nor should there be any room for scientism. Scientism is the view that science alone is capable of resolving genuine human problems, whereby all areas of human life can be reduced to science. See Stenmark, M. (2001). Scientism. Science, Ethics and Religion. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
51. See also Haack, S. (2003). Defending Science Within Reason. Between Scientism and Cynicism. New York: Prometheus Books.