Conducting evaluations of evidence that are transparent, timely and can lead to health-protective actions
-
Published:2022-12-05
Issue:1
Volume:21
Page:
-
ISSN:1476-069X
-
Container-title:Environmental Health
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Environ Health
Author:
Chartres Nicholas,Sass Jennifer B.,Gee David,Bălan Simona A.,Birnbaum Linda,Cogliano Vincent James,Cooper Courtney,Fedinick Kristi Pullen,Harrison Roy M.,Kolossa-Gehring Marike,Mandrioli Daniele,Mitchell Mark A.,Norris Susan L.,Portier Christopher J.,Straif Kurt,Vermeire Theo
Abstract
Abstract
Background
In February 2021, over one hundred scientists and policy experts participated in a web-based Workshop to discuss the ways that divergent evaluations of evidence and scientific uncertainties are used to delay timely protection of human health and the environment from exposures to hazardous agents. The Workshop arose from a previous workshop organized by the European Environment Agency (EEA) in 2008 and which also drew on case studies from the EEA reports on ‘Late Lessons from Early Warnings’ (2001, 2013). These reports documented dozens of hazardous agents including many chemicals, for which risk reduction measures were delayed for decades after scientists and others had issued early and later warnings about the harm likely to be caused by those agents.
Results
Workshop participants used recent case studies including Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), Extremely Low Frequency – Electrical Magnetic Fields (ELF-EMF fields), glyphosate, and Bisphenol A (BPA) to explore myriad reasons for divergent outcomes of evaluations, which has led to delayed and inadequate protection of the public’s health. Strategies to overcome these barriers must, therefore, at a minimum include approaches that 1) Make better use of existing data and information, 2) Ensure timeliness, 3) Increase transparency, consistency and minimize bias in evidence evaluations, and 4) Minimize the influence of financial conflicts of interest.
Conclusion
The recommendations should enhance the production of “actionable evidence,” that is, reliable evaluations of the scientific evidence to support timely actions to protect health and environments from exposures to hazardous agents. The recommendations are applicable to policy and regulatory settings at the local, state, federal and international levels.
Funder
JPB Foundation Passport Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference170 articles.
1. Natural Resources Defense Council, UCSF Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, Milkin Institute School of Public Health. Proceedings of the workshop on conducting evaluations of evidence that are transparent, timely and lead to health-protective actions. 2021. https://prhe.ucsf.edu/sites/g/files/tkssra341/f/wysiwyg/proceedings_final_05_10.pdf. Accessed 3 Aug 2021. 2. Macgarvin M, Lambert B, Infante P, Greenberg M, Gee D, Koppe J, et al. Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896–2000. Denmark: European Environment Agency; 2001. 3. Aerts J, Albin M, Andersen Ms, Aslaksen J, Baun A, Belchior C, et al. Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation. Denmark: European Environment Agency; 2013. 4. Mohai P, Saha R. Which Came First, People Or Pollution? A Review Of Theory And Evidence From Longitudinal Environmental Justice Studies. Environ Res Lett. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/125011. 5. Pullen Fedinick K, Yiliqi I, Lam Y, Lennett D, Singla V, Rotkin-Ellman M, et al. A cumulative framework for identifying overburdened populations under the toxic substances control act: formaldehyde case study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116002.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|