Considering risk assessment up close: The case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy

Health, Risk and Society

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 255-275

  Cummings, Louise ^a  

^a NOTTINGHAM TRENT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Analogical argument; Argument from ignorance; Bovine spongiform encephalopathy; BSE; Heuristics; Informal fallacy; Public health; Reasoning; Risk; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; ARTICLE; BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY; CATTLE; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; FISHERY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; NEUROSURGERY; NONHUMAN; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC HEALTH; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCRAPIE; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 79953851738     PISSN: 13698575     EISSN: 14698331     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13698575.2011.558623     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Barke, R.P., and Jenkins-Smith, H.C., 1993. Politics and scientific expertise: Scientists, risk perception, and nuclear waste policy. Risk Analysis, 13, 425-439.
2. Battersby, M., 2006. Applied epistemology and argumentation in epidemiology. Informal Logic, 26, 41-62.
3. Bernoulli, C., et al., 1977. Danger of accidental person-to-person transmission of Creutzfeldt- Jakob disease by surgery. Lancet, 19771, 478-479.
4. Blendon, R.J., et al., 2004. The public's response to severe acute respiratory syndrome in Toronto and the United States. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 38, 925-931.
5. BSE, Inquiry., 2000a. Volume 1: Findings and conclusions. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
6. BSE Inquiry., 2000b. Volume 2: Science. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
7. BSE Inquiry., 2000c. Volume 4: The Southwood Working Party, 1988-1989. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
8. BSE Inquiry., 2000d. Volume 6: Human health, 1989-1996. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
9. BSE, Inquiry., 2000e. Volume 7: Medicines and cosmetics. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
10. BSE Inquiry., 2000f. Volume 11: Scientists after Southwood. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
11. Carlo, G.L., et al., 1992. The interplay of science, values, and experiences among scientists asked to evaluate the hazards of dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke. Risk Analysis, 12, 37-43.
12. Cummings, L., 2002. Reasoning under uncertainty: The role of two informal fallacies in an emerging scientific inquiry. Informal Logic, 22, 113-136.
13. Cummings, L., 2004. Analogical reasoning as a tool of epidemiological investigation. Argumentation, 18, 427-444.
14. Cummings, L., 2005. Giving science a bad name: Politically and commercially motivated fallacies in BSE inquiry. Argumentation, 19, 123-143.
15. Cummings, L., 2009. Emerging infectious diseases: Coping with uncertainty. Argumentation, 23,171-188.
16. Cummings, L., 2010. Rethinking the BSE crisis: A study of scientific reasoning under uncertainty. Dordrecht: Springer.
17. Finocchiaro, M.A., 1980. Galileo and the art of reasoning: Rhetorical foundations of logic and scientific method. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
18. Govier, T., 1987. Problems in argument analysis and evaluation. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
19. Green, J.M., et al., 2005. Public understanding of food risks in four European countries: A qualitative study. European Journal of Public Health, 15, 523-527.
20. Johnson, B.B., 2005. Testing and expanding a model of cognitive processing of risk information. Risk Analysis, 25, 631-650.
21. Johnson, R.H., and Blair, J.A., 1994. Logical self-defense. New York: McGraw-Hill.
22. Liao, Q., et al., 2009. Avian influenza risk perception and live poultry purchase in Guangzhou, China. Risk Analysis, 29, 416-424.
23. Nicol, A.-M., et al., 2008. Communicating the risks of a new, emerging pathogen: The case of Cryptococcus gattii. Risk Analysis, 28, 373-386.
24. Silva, C.L., Jenkins-Smith, H.C., and Barke, R.P., 2007. Reconciling scientists' beliefs about radiation risks and social norms: Explaining preferred radiation protection standards. Risk Analysis, 27, 755-773.
25. Smithson, M., 2008. Psychology's ambivalent view of uncertainty. In: G. Bammer and M. Smithson, eds. Uncertainty and risk: Multidisciplinary perspectives. London: Earthscan, 205-217.
26. Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee., 2005. Eighty-seventh SEAC meeting. Minutes of meeting held on 21 April 2005.
27. Thadani, V., et al., 1988. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease probably acquired from a cadaveric dura mater graft. Case report. Journal of Neurosurgery, 69, 766-769.
28. Tindale, C.W., 2007. Fallacies and argument appraisal. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29. Todd, P.M., and Gigerenzer, G., 2000. Simple heuristics that make us smart. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 727-741.
30. Trumbo, C.W., 2002. Information processing and risk perception: An adaptation of the heuristic-systematic model. Journal of Communication, 52, 367-382.
31. Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D., 1974. Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
32. Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D., 2004. Belief in the law of small numbers. In: E. Shafir, ed. Preference, belief and similarity: Selected writings by Amos Tversky. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 193-202.
33. Walton, D.N., 1992. Plausible argument in everyday conversation. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
34. Walton, D.N., 2006. Fundamentals of critical argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Will, R.G., 1993. Epidemiology of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. British Medical Bulletin, 49, 960-970.
36. Wilson, C., et al., 2004. Reactions to genetically modified food crops and how perception of risks and benefits influences consumers' information gathering. Risk Analysis, 24, 1311-1321.
37. Woods, J., and Walton, D.N., 1978. The fallacy of 'ad ignorantiam'. Dialectica, 32, 87-99.
38. nd ed. Toronto: Prentice Hall.