The legal failure to prevent subclinical developmental toxicity.
Department of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA. carl.cranor@ucr.edu
Legal systems appear to function poorly to identify and prevent subclinical developmental toxic effects in children that can lead to long-term harm. In the USA, the vast majority of substances enter commerce without any legally required testing (under so-called 'post-market' laws). In 1984, less than 20% of all substances had been subject to pre-market testing and there has been little change since. Once substances are suspected of contributing to harm, an administration agency has the burden to show risks or harms and their causes, an increasingly difficult demonstration. Post-market laws tend to produce no data prior to exposures and any protections result after some harm may have occurred. Pre-market screening laws such as the US Toxic Substances Control Act provide little data or protection. Pre-market testing and approval laws, analogous to US drug and pesticide laws, offer better approaches for identifying and eliminating toxicants before they result in harm, but do not apply to many products and rarely include concerns for developmental toxicity. The Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals legislation in the European Union has greater promise for the identification of new or existing toxicants. However, the potential for serious, subtle subclinical developmental effects provides reasons to pursue a more precautionary approach to identifying potential toxicants and forestalling harms. This paper sketches a more robust precautionary law and a more substantial departure from existing laws that would treat chemical invasions as trespasses. The scientific community can assist legal efforts by credibly publicizing the seriousness of subclinical developmental effects.
PMID: 18226082 [PubMed - in process]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18226082?dopt=AbstractPlus
