Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Can we reverse the burden of proof?

S O Hansson1

  • 1Uppsala University, Department of Philosophy, Sweden. filsoh@strix.udac.uu.se

Toxicology Letters
|February 7, 1997
PubMed
Summary

Reversing the burden of proof in chemical regulation, making substances presumed hazardous until proven safe, is desirable. While a full reversal is impractical due to toxicological knowledge structures, significant progress towards this goal is achievable and recommended.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Reply to the comment from C Fiori and D Martinez on my article 'homoeopathy and consumers' right to know'.

Journal of internal medicine·2013
Same author

Homoeopathy and consumers' right to know.

Journal of internal medicine·2013
Same author

Bodily rights and property rights.

Journal of medical ethics·2006
Same author

Epistemic paternalism in public health.

Journal of medical ethics·2005
Same author

Implant ethics.

Journal of medical ethics·2005
Same author

Extended antipaternalism.

Journal of medical ethics·2005

Area of Science:

  • Environmental Toxicology
  • Chemical Risk Assessment
  • Regulatory Science

Background:

  • Current chemical regulation often places the burden of proof on regulatory bodies to demonstrate harm.
  • This approach can be inefficient and may not adequately protect public health from hazardous substances.
  • The ideal regulatory framework would presume hazard until safety is proven.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore the feasibility and desirability of reversing the burden of proof in chemical substance regulation.
  • To identify practical steps towards a hazard-based presumption in chemical safety assessment.
  • To discuss the implications of shifting the regulatory paradigm in toxicology.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of regulatory frameworks.
  • Review of toxicological knowledge structures and their impact on burden of proof.
  • Discussion of policy implications and potential implementation strategies.

Main Results:

  • A complete reversal of the burden of proof is currently impracticable due to the complexity of toxicological data generation and interpretation.
  • However, significant steps can be taken to move towards a system where substances are presumed hazardous.
  • These steps involve proactive hazard identification and data requirements.

Conclusions:

  • Shifting towards a reversed burden of proof in chemical regulation is a desirable goal for enhanced public health and environmental protection.
  • While a full reversal faces practical challenges, incremental changes can create a more precautionary regulatory environment.
  • Further research and policy development are needed to implement these progressive steps.

Related Experiment Videos