There is a tremendous amount of support for the approach we have taken, which again is to base our decisions on risk analysis and thoughtful scientific process.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
One of the responsibilities faced by the Environmental Genome Project is to provide the science base upon which society can make better informed risk management decisions.
We necessarily operate in an environment in which there's a great deal of uncertainty. In such an environment, it makes sense to use a risk-management approach to identify and avoid the big mistakes. That's one reason I favor a cautious approach.
I think we need to think beyond the issue of absolute risk.
I think that we have to be constantly asking ourselves, 'How do we calculate the risk?' And sometimes we don't calculate it correctly; we either overstate it or understate it.
I have suggested that scientific progress requires a favorable environment.
As population susceptibilities are better understood, we will be in a better position than we are in today to make informed decisions about risk management.
We historians are increasingly using experimental psychology to understand the way we act. It is becoming very clear that our ability to evaluate risk is hedged by all sorts of cognitive biases. It's a miracle that we get anything right.
I think, however, that so long as our present economic and national systems continue, scientific research has little to fear.
Great risks come in long term, tremendously assiduous, very courageous study.
Science is the international language, so when we are able to convince countries that good decision-making for human health and animal health is based upon science, that's a real success story for us.
No opposing quotes found.