Risk, Hazard and the Precautionary Principle: Why Europe Gets Crop Biotechnology and Chemical Regulation So Wrong

David Zaruk, Founder of GreenFacts, Environmental-Health Risk Governance Analyst, Professor at Odisee University College

This is the first article in a three-part series on risk and hazard:

• Part I: Risk, Hazard and the Precautionary Principle: Why Europe Gets Crop Biotechnology and Chemical Regulation So Wrong
• Part II: Precautionary Politics: Europe Moves Backward into a Fear-Based ‘Dark Ages’ in Regulating Agriculture and Cancer Risks
• Part III: In the Battle to Regulate GMOS, Gene Editing and Other New Breeding Techniques, Who Has ‘Hazard Blood’ on Their Hands?

Why is Europe seemingly so confused when it comes to understanding the differences between chemicals and technologies posing manageable hazards versus those that threaten us with unacceptable risks? It’s a conundrum that perhaps only a child can fully appreciate.

I was recently discussing the concept of safety, dangers and risks with a seven-year-old boy who wanted to cross the street to join his friends in a playground.

“Cars can be dangerous,” I advised him. “Please stay away from the streets when playing.”
It seemed like common sense advice. A hazard (like a car) is only a risk if we are involved in a crash or it hits us while moving..........To Read More....

My Take - I look forward to the rest of David Zaruk's series because it's apparent far too many suffer from what John Adams, professor of risk at University College London, calls "the modern disease of compulsive risk assessment psychosis - otherwise known as crap.”