Advertisement
AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow purchase articles
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Get other permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jamieson, D.
Right arrow Articles by Wartenberg, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jamieson, D.
Right arrow Articles by Wartenberg, D.
Related Collections
Right arrow Prevention
Right arrow Other Environment
September 2001, Vol 91, No. 9 | American Journal of Public Health 1355-1358
© 2001 American Public Health Association


THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE AND PUBLIC HEALTH

The Precautionary Principle and Electric and Magnetic Fields

Dale Jamieson, PhD and Daniel Wartenberg, PhD

At the time this editorial was written, Dale Jamieson was with the University Center for Human Values, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. Daniel Wartenberg is with the Department of Environmental and Community Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Piscataway.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Dale Jamieson, PhD, Environmental and Technology Studies, Carleton College, 1 North College St, Northfield, MN 55057 (e-mail: djamieso{at}carleton.edu).

Current environmental regulation represents a paternalistic policy, more concerned to avoid false positives 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 approaches 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.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
AJPHHome page
B. D. Goldstein
The Precautionary Principle Also Applies to Public Health Actions
Am J Public Health, September 1, 2001; 91(9): 1358 - 1361.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Public Health Association