Expert cites importance of toxic-free environment

Expert cites importance of toxic-free environment
Nation
Written by Jonathan Mayuga / Correspondent
Monday, 16 November 2009 21:06
A VISITING US expert on Monday underscored the importance of applying the “precautionary principle” (PP) to ensure a toxic-free and life-sustaining environment to protect people and the environment from harm.

Paul Connett, a specialist on environmental chemistry and toxicology who has gone to 52 countries promoting zero waste and chemical safety, told participants to a seminar on toxicology at the Occupational Safety and Health Center in Quezon City that precautionary measures should be taken whenever an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health “even if some cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.”

Connett is promoting the Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle that was drafted and finalized at a conference from January 23 to 25, 1998, at the Wingspread Conference Center, Racine, Wisconsin, by 32 authors, mostly academicians, scientists and public-interest activists.

Since 1983, Connett taught chemistry at Saint Lawrence University in Canton, New York, where he specialized in environmental chemistry and toxicology.  He retired from teaching in May 2006.

The statement listed four central components of the Precautionary Principle:

· Taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty;

· Shifting burdens onto proponents of potentially harmful activities;

· Exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions; and

· Increasing public participation in decision-making.

“The PP posits the notion that when there is reasonable doubt on the safety of substance or practice, we should err on the side of caution,” Connett said.

Organized by the waste-and-pollution watchdog EcoWaste Coalition, Connett’s call bolstered the group’s campaign in the Philippines against toxic harm by urging the government to put in place mechanisms that will effectively prevent toxic pollution, starting with proper disposal of harmful chemical substances, Manny Calonzo, the group’s president, said.

Connett presented his seven-point criteria to assist citizens in justifying the citation of Precautionary Principle as a reason for rejecting a proposed activity.

Connett said these “trigger criteria” will help citizens employ the Precautionary Principle in a more disciplined way and thus avoid the criticisms leveled at the principle by supporters of  technological and industrial activities regardless of their costs to human health and the environment.

These criteria include an assessment whether (1) the evidence of harm plausible; (2) the evidence is supported by a number of peer-reviewed published studies; (3) the harm is real and/or serious; (4) the effects are reversible; (5) the evidence that the benefit being sought is real and significant; (6) how significant are the consequences if the practice is halted; and (7) the cost-effective alternatives to the practice.

He cited an examination of case studies on the incineration of domestic waste and the fluoridation of drinking water, and explored the responses to each of the trigger criteria. In the Philippines, clamor to ban waste incineration succeeded after calls to prevent its adverse effect to air quality, as well as its cost-effectiveness, were raised.