RISK ASSESSMENT - THE DEFAULT CONSERVATISM CONTROVERSY

被引:7
作者
BARNARD, RC
机构
[1] Cleary Gottlieb Steen and Hamilton, Washington, DC 20036
关键词
D O I
10.1006/rtph.1995.1058
中图分类号
DF [法律]; D9 [法律]; R [医药、卫生];
学科分类号
0301 ; 10 ;
摘要
EPA cancer risk assessment rests heavily on defaults. Defaults are a reduction of science to generic principles selected as a policy matter on the basis of ''conservatism'' for use in risk assessment. Conservatism is understood to mean a choice to avoid underestimating risk. The recent report of the National Academy of Sciences (1994) has turned the spotlight on the controversy regarding the use of generic principles as defaults and whether conservatism is the appropriate value criterion for their selection. Defaults had their origin in the early 1970s and the debate has continued regarding the scientific basis for the defaults and whether a conservatism, a value that the NAS said is ''beyond science,'' is appropriate as a basis for the policy choices. This paper briefly examines the CAPRA recommendations to reduce the reliance on defaults, the history of the default conservatism controversy, and EPA's initial draft response to the CAPRA recommendations. (C) 1995 Academie Press, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:431 / 438
页数:8
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
ANDERSON E, 1984, USE RISK ASSESSMENT
[3]  
GOLDMAN LR, 1994, RISK ASSESSMENT REGU
[4]  
GRAMM WL, 1986, COMMUNICATION AUG
[5]  
1984, FED REGISTER, V49, P46294
[6]  
1994, DRAFT REV GUIDELINES
[7]  
1991, EPA625391019F
[8]  
1977, J NATL CANCER I, V38, P461
[9]  
1986, FED REGISTER, V51, P33992
[10]  
1976, FED REGISTER, V41, P21402