烟草公司使用的否认办法是有先例的:就是铅是否对人有害的这个“证实过程”发明出来的。

来源: Lily168 2015-03-04 11:37:37 [] [博客] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读: 次 (2865 bytes)
本文内容已被 [ Lily168 ] 在 2015-03-04 12:00:30 编辑过。如有问题,请报告版主或论坛管理删除.
烟草公司打官司时常用的一个辩护就是“相关性不等于因果性”。因此能拖延很长时间。

烟草公司使用的办法是有先例的:就是铅是否对人有害的这个“证实过程”发明出来的。

加州理工的geochemist Clair Cameron Patterson在1965年就指出铅的危害性,但经历了和Robert A. Kehoe针锋相对的漫长过程。20多年后,美国政府才禁止在汽油里加铅。由于这个措施,到1990年代后期,美国人血铅含量减少了80%。

Robert Kehoe是个有名的毒物学者,是鉴定物质毒性的专家。在争辩/证实铅是否有害过程中,有一个以他命名的“Kehoe Paradigm”:

While the Kehoe Paradigm (also called Kehoe Rule) assumes that in the absence of clear evidence of risk there is no risk of significance, the Precautionary Principle assumes that there is a possible risk until proven otherwise.

The Show me the data approach (即Kehoe's Paradigm) made it critical for the industry to fund and control the research in lead toxicity. This was done through the Kettering Laboratory under Kehoe’s direction. The Kehoe Paradigm worked for the lead industry, as all that was necessary now was to characterize any criticism as fraught with uncertainty. In the case of lead toxicity, Kehoe's laboratory dominated the scene for decades, attesting to the safety of leaded gasoline and deconstructing any criticism. The credibility of his research was bolstered for decades by the support of the U.S. Public Health Service and American Medical Association. [4]

Using Kehoe's paradigm, Ethyl Corporation was a winner in either situation: if its product would prove to be safe, it would be seen as a responsible party. If, however, its product was unsafe it would take decades to prove this with certainty in a process that could be prolonged by challenging the methods and results and calling for more data. Meanwhile, production was profitable and ultimately the owners would be insulated from responsibility.[4] Kitman indicates that the strategy taken by the lead industry, namely the use of Kehoe's Paradigm, "provided a model for the asbestos, tobacco, pesticide and nuclear power industries, and other(s) ... for evading clear evidence that their products are harmful by hiding behind the mantle of scientific uncertainty".[4]

我不想借此来说,质疑雾霾致癌一说的人都是在使用Kehoe伎俩。只是最近有讨论铅中毒的事,今天又想起那些烟草致癌打官司的过程,联想在一起了。


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Kehoe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clair_Cameron_Patterson

所有跟帖: 

读到过Patterson的公案过程中涉及smear campaign,相关利益集团吃相很难看。 -viewfinder- 给 viewfinder 发送悄悄话 viewfinder 的博客首页 (139 bytes) () 03/04/2015 postreply 12:10:03

请您先登陆,再发跟帖!

发现Adblock插件

如要继续浏览
请支持本站 请务必在本站关闭/移除任何Adblock

关闭Adblock后 请点击

请参考如何关闭Adblock/Adblock plus

安装Adblock plus用户请点击浏览器图标
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安装Adblock用户请点击图标
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”