Public health and evidence-informed policy-making: The case of a commonly used herbicide.

Discussion Drawing conclusions on the causation of adverse health effects by environmental chemicals can have important societal consequences, leading to policy-making which can control, limit or even prevent the exposure to the pollutant through regulation and litigation. There are critical lessons to be learned from the Monsanto saga. The whole process of evidence-informed policy-making is under threat. The case of glyphosyte is by no means over; further research is needed to cover the knowledge gaps, but this should be done independently and with full transparency. The IARC Monographs provide the scientific evaluation of the evidence based on comprehensive review of the scientific literature, but it remains the responsibility of individual governments and other international organizations to recommend, if any, regulations, legislation and other public health interventions. The IARC Monographs evaluate the hazard, but the societal decisions take also other factors into account while making the risk management decisions. The risk management philosophies for pesticides in various countries are different - in the EU, for example, the hazards (inherent properties) are emphasized while, in the US, the utilitarian acceptable risk approach prevails. The active ingredients for pesticide formulations are under constant development. Sometimes the dominant role of one ingredient may have a damping effect in the innovation paths. This seems to have been the case with the weed-killing c...
Source: Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health - Category: Occupational Health Authors: Tags: Scand J Work Environ Health Source Type: research