|
Ruth,
Do you (or anyone else) have an
estimate of the amount of money and/or other resources that may have been
needlessly squandered in pursuit of the "precautionary principle". Also, if
these wasted resources had been productively expended toward solution of real
problems, how many lives could have been saved?
Jerry
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 6:25
AM
Subject: Re: The Precautionary
Principle
The
so-called "precautionary principle" got elevated to the status of
"principle" after about 20 years of making "conservative" estimates of
environmental and health damage -- overestimating damage -- in the absence
of
good data for actually assessing such damage. The good old LNT is
an example
of its application. The application has led to enormous
expenditures of
resources to mitigate putative small risks. It's
applied in virtually every
environmental assessment that involves
radioactive materials.
Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.
ruthweiner@aol.com
|