quarta-feira, setembro 05, 2007

Princípio da precaução: UE vs EUA II

"...had the precautionary principle been invoked in the past, many of the adverse effects of new scientific and technological introductions might have been prevented, or at least mitigated, and they cite the introduction of halocarbons, and the tear in the ozone hole in the Earth's upper atmosphere, the outbreak of BSE in cattle, growing antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria caused by the over-administering of antibiotics to farm animals, and the widespread deaths caused by asbestos, benzene and PCBs."

"The REACH system requires companies to conduct safety and environmental tests to prove that the products they are producing are safe. If they can't, the products will be banned from the market. (...) In America, newly introduced chemicals are generally assessed to be safe, and the burden is primarily put on the consumer and the public at large or the government to prove they cause harm. (...) In the US, regulation is designed, for the most part, to address environmental problems once they occur. (...) The vast majority of non-pesticide chemicals are not screened or tested at all before introduction into the market."

"... the US has integrated aspects of the precautionary principle into some of its environmental regulations, for the most part America's approach and standards are far more lax than the EU's, while still arguably better than those of many other countries."

"For example, in the USA, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), is responsible for monitoring health problems in the nation's farm animals and plants. But the USDA is also charged with the responsability of promoting American agricultural products. In countless instances, the department has been less then rigorous in the pursuit of potential adverse environmental and health effects caused by existing agricultural practices"

"What the US didn't understand is that Europe's opposition to the introduction of GMO's was not just a political maneuver to gain a bargaining chip with the US on trade, but something far more important. (...) Europeans argue that because GMOs are alive, reproduce, mutate, proliferate, and can contaminate and create ireeversible niches, they pose potential threats that are global in scale and therefore require a different level of oversight."

"The European Dream: How Europe’s Vision of the Future is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream", Jeremy Rifkin, ed. Polity, 2004, pag. 321-331

Sem comentários: