Jump to: Page Content, Section Navigation, Site Navigation, Site Search, Account Information, or Site Tools.
|
|
EditorialA Call for More Science in EPA RegulationsWilliam J. MadiaThe need for a more credible, scientific basis for environmental regulation continues. Current models of exposure to environmental pollutants and their associated health effects are based on conservative and often outdated assumptions. A stronger science basis for environmental regulation becomes even more pressing as the costs of preventing and remediating contaminants in the environment increase. The lack of adequate peer-reviewed science leads to environmental policy that is at best overly stringent and at worst ineffective. In either case, we experience unacceptable societal costs. In setting standards, government regulators must rely on the research performed in their own laboratories, as well as in private laboratories and universities. This research must be directed at understanding the underlying biological mechanisms by which the population experiences health effects. One of the more important issues today, for instance, is the extrapolation from high doses of chemicals administered via a single pathway in laboratory animals to lower-dose, chronic exposures of populations. Although we test and evaluate pollutants one chemical at a time, the population is exposed to these constituents as mixtures, via a number of different pathways. The synergistic effects of exposure to toxins combined with genetic contributions to the development of disease and the process of aging are poorly understood. Only by understanding the mechanisms of harm can we begin to design solutions based on actionable scientific findings. Environmental problems require the combined insight of a variety of scientific disciplines to understand the complexity of exposure pathways and related health effects, from the cellular levels at which mutations and repair mechanisms are initiated to the organ and system levels where symptoms of disease are most often observed. Recent advances in molecular chemistry and physics have led to increased understanding of the transport and reaction of pollutants in the environment and to the development of more effective mitigation technologies. Yet understanding the links to biological mechanisms, as well as how living organisms are affected by pollutants, remains an enormous challenge.
For instance, chlorine used to disinfect drinking water sources is now known to generate byproducts that appear to have negative health effects.* Finding ways of delivering drinking water that minimize both microbial and chemical risks requires a much better understanding of the health effects of each. In addition, it points to a need for much better understanding of alternative technologies that might be used in treatment. Dealing with this level of complexity requires not just more research but a revolutionary new approach. Advances in computational capability and other physical, chemical, and life sciences must be integrated to address fundamental questions about mechanisms, exposures, and effects from environmental pollutants. Ken Olden, of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, has highlighted the importance of "strengthening the links" between fundamental science, toxicology, epidemiology, and public health. Lambasting regulators for their lack of a scientific basis for their actions will not achieve the necessary results. The problem is far too complex for any single agency. As a nation, we have for too long ignored this pressing need, allowing the status quo to prevail. Now is the time for science to close the gap. W. J. Madia is director of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, operated by Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland, WA 99352, USA.
|
Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)