Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 101, Issue 5, pp 396–398 | Cite as

A Canadian Framework for Applying the Precautionary Principle to Public Health Issues

  • Erica WeirEmail author
  • Richard Schabas
  • Kumanan Wilson
  • Chris Mackie
Commentary
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

The precautionary principle has influenced environmental and public health policy. It essentially states that complete evidence of a potential risk is not required before action is taken to mitigate the effects of the potential risk. The application of precaution to public health issues is not straightforward and could paradoxically cause harm to the public’s health when applied inappropriately. To avoid this, we propose a framework for applying the precautionary principle to potential public health risks. The framework consists of ten guiding questions to help establish whether a proposed application of the precautionary principle on a public health matter is based on adequacy of the evidence of causation, severity of harm and acceptability of the precautionary measures.

Key words

Public health policy precautionary principle risk assessment causation evidence-based decision making 

Résumé

Le principe de précaution, qui influence les politiques environnementales et sanitaires, dit essentiellement qu’un risque potentiel n’a pas besoin d’être entièrement prouvé pour que l’on prenne des mesures afin d’en atténuer les effets. L’application de ce principe aux problèmes de santé publique n’est pas simple et pourrait paradoxalement porter préjudice à la santé du public si elle est faite de façon inappropriée. Pour éviter ceci, nous proposons un cadre d’application du principe de précaution à des risques possibles pour la santé publique. Ce cadre comporte 10 questions indicatives en vue d’établir si une application proposée du principe de précaution à une question de santé publique repose sur des preuves suffisantes de causalité, de gravité des préjudices et d’acceptabilité des mesures de précaution.

Mots clés

principe de précaution évaluation du risque causalité prise de décision scientifiquement fondée 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    United Nations. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. 1992.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Treaty Establishing the European Community, February 7, 1992, reprinted in 31 ILM 247 art 130r(2) (1992).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kriebel D, Tickner J. The precautionary principle and public health. Reenergizing public health through precaution. Am J Public Health 2001;91:1351–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    American Public Health Association Policy Statement #200011: The Precautionary Principle and Children’s Health. Available at: https://doi.org/www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=216 (Accessed July 29, 2010).
  5. 5.
    Final Report. Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System in Canada. Public Works and Government Services Canada, 1997. Available at: https://doi.org/www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/activit/com/krever-eng.php (Accessed July 29, 2010).
  6. 6.
    The Honourable Mr. Justice Archie Campbell. The SARS Commission, Final Report. Commission to Investigate the Introduction and Spread of SARS in Ontario. Available at: https://doi.org/www.health.gov.on.ca/english/public/pub/ministry_reports/campbell06/online_rep/index.html (Accessed July 29, 2010).
  7. 7.
    Sandin P, Peterson M, Hansson SO, Ruden C, Juthe A. Five charges against the precautionary principle. J Risk Research 2002;5(4):287–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilson K, Wilson M, Graham I, Hebert P. The application of the precautionary principle to the health sector: Lessons learned from decisions concerning variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and the blood supply. Transfusion Med Rev 2002;17:89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Swerdlow D, Mintz E, Rodriguez M, Tejada E, Ocampo C, Espejo L, et al. Waterborne transmission of epidemic cholera in Trujillo, Peru: Lessons for a continent at risk. Lancet 1992;340:20–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bohannon J. Food aid: Zambia rejects GM corn on scientists’ advice. Science 2002;298:1153–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wingspread Conference Participants. Wingspread statement on the Precautionary Principle. Wingspread Conference. Racine, Wisconsin, 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beloin V, Gagnon F. Public Policies Guided by the Precautionary Principle. National Collaborating Center for Healthy Public Policy, 2008. Available at: https://doi.org/www.ncchpp.ca/docs/VBeloinAnC_MEP.pdf (Accessed July 29, 2010).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hill AB. The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 1965;58:295–300.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wilson K. Risk, causation and precaution: Understanding policy-making regarding public health risks. In: Bailey T, Caulfield T, Ries N (Eds.), Public Health Law and Policy in Canada. Markham, ON: Butterworth Press, 2005.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    EU communication on precautionary principle. Brussels, February 2, 2000. Available at: https://doi.org/www.gdrc.org/u-gov/precaution-4.html (Accessed July 29, 2010).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erica Weir
    • 1
    Email author
  • Richard Schabas
    • 2
  • Kumanan Wilson
    • 3
  • Chris Mackie
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of Epidemiology, Dalla Lana School of Public HealthUniversity of Toronto, Community and Health Services, Regional Municipality of YorkNewmarketCanada
  2. 2.Department of Community Health and EpidemiologyQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  3. 3.Department of Medicine and Canada Research Chair in public health policyUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  4. 4.Department of Clinical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations