Conference,
The Precautionary Principle in Health Environmental and EMF
(2013)
Abstract
Although an evidence-based approach should guide the actions of environmental health, there are
many cases where adequate information is missing. In such a circumstance, a precautionary approach
should be applied recognizing the absence of information and should not be used as a reason for
postponing preventive measures. A precautionary approach has always been part of good public health
practices. Recently there has been a considerable debate about what this principle means and how this
should be applied. However the overall purpose of the precautionary principle is to apply preventive
measures when the nature and extent of the risk is not firmly established. What action or actions are
appropriate will depend on the severity of the harm the agent could cause and the degree of
uncertainty about the existence of the risk. Uncertainty by itself is not sufficient to justify
precautionary measures. Precautionary measures are warranted when there is a reasonable evidence of
the presence of a risk but certainly not when the evidence for the presence of a risk is very weak.
Health risk assessment needs to be explicit about the uncertainties. A review of the evidence
for and against the existence of a risk is critical before considering any precautionary measures.
Looking for methodological difficulties and identifying information could reduce uncertainty and also
assist in setting priorities for research and monitoring
There are numerous definitions of the precautionary principle with no single definition agreed;
In 1992, the Rio Declaration on the Environment (United Conference on Environmental and
Development) established 27 principles to underpin sustainable development among which: The
Principle 15 captures the essence of the requirements and introduces cost-effectiveness:
"In order to protect the environment, the precautionary principle approach shall be widely
applied by the States according to their capabilities where there are threats of serious or irreversible
damage; lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective
measures to prevent environmental degradation."
The cost-effective component of this principle can be neglected by protagonist, leading to conflict
between stakeholders about the appropriate response to an issue. This definition was initially
established for environmental issues. If one wants to extend its application to public health issues, one
has to consider not only the cost but all potentially negative effects on the public that the preventive
measures can induce.
Nevertheless, proponents of environmental modification need to be able to demonstrate that,
to a very high degree of probability, a project will not cause significant harm, either to the
environment or to health.
In the development of standards and guidelines, it is common for government policy to be
defined not in terms of precautionary principle, but on a science-based conservative approach which
underpins risk assessment and risk management regimes.
