Both in theory and in practice, public health is a field dedicated to protecting the general population from potentially harmful actions and/or substances produced by any particular person, agency, or environment. In my opinion, an ideal chemical policy would proactively (as opposed to reactively, as in current chemical policies) discern whether an environmental health risk is posed by the introduction of a chemical into the environment for common use. As we've discussed throughout the previous few modules, it seems that we often take an approach to regulate production and/or distribution of a toxin based on the harm that it has done to individuals. However, oftentimes damage has already been done to innocent individuals coming in contact with the toxin. Chemicals should be thoroughly tested and discussed throughout the scientific community to discern whether they should be used. An ideal chemical policy would require rigorous and thorough testing of all chemicals before their introduction into the environment.
Totally agree, the population has to be hurt prior to any actual change being implemented ot regulate a specific chemical. We need a better way to prevent harm to the population.
ReplyDeleteHi Adam! I like your passion behind your chemical policy - the counter argument would be how would you know what the effects are of each chemical if they aren't researched or results aren't gathered w/ the environment / health effects? Is there a proposition to having industries develop chemicals, but also track how it becomes toxic and at one point do chemicals get pulled off the shelf/ out of production? just some thought!
ReplyDelete