Differing perspectives on the use of scientific evidence and the precautionary principle

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[J. Burger]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2003
Enthalten in:
Pure and Applied Chemistry, 75/11-12(2003-01-01), 2543-2545
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 378862111
LEADER caa a22 4500
001 378862111
003 CHVBK
005 20180305123349.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 161128e20030101xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.1351/pac200375112543  |2 doi 
035 |a (NATIONALLICENCE)gruyter-10.1351/pac200375112543 
100 1 |a Burger  |D J.  |u Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, and Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Division of Life Sciences, Cell Biology and Neurosciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA 
245 1 0 |a Differing perspectives on the use of scientific evidence and the precautionary principle  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [J. Burger] 
520 3 |a Different governments and agencies are approaching the use of scientific evidence, weight of evidence, and the precautionary principle in different ways. The European community has used the precautionary principle in situations where the consequences are great, data are unavailable or will be costly (in terms of money and time) to obtain, or data are difficult or impossible to obtain. Other countries, such as the United States, have a risk assessment process that has built-in safety or uncertainty factors which are themselves precautionary. Risk management decisions can be made on the basis of adequate studies, risk assessment, weight-of-evidence approaches, and the application of the precautionary principle. While weight of evidence has been used in the United States for increased research funding and regulator action with respect to some chemicals that are hormonally active, the European community has applied the precautionary principle. 
540 |a © 2013 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston 
773 0 |t Pure and Applied Chemistry  |d De Gruyter  |g 75/11-12(2003-01-01), 2543-2545  |x 0033-4545  |q 75:11-12<2543  |1 2003  |2 75  |o pac 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1351/pac200375112543  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
908 |D 1  |a research article  |2 jats 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 856  |E 40  |u https://doi.org/10.1351/pac200375112543  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 100  |E 1-  |a Burger  |D J.  |u Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, and Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Division of Life Sciences, Cell Biology and Neurosciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 773  |E 0-  |t Pure and Applied Chemistry  |d De Gruyter  |g 75/11-12(2003-01-01), 2543-2545  |x 0033-4545  |q 75:11-12<2543  |1 2003  |2 75  |o pac 
900 7 |b CC0  |u http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0  |2 nationallicence 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
949 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |F NATIONALLICENCE  |b NL-gruyter