3 min read
Scientific Certainty and Policy: How Certain Do We Need to Be to Act?
The precautionary principle demands near-certainty before endorsing reduced-risk products. The same standard is never demanded of the status quo. The asymmetry in standards of evidence is the central philosophical tension in nicotine policy.
The precautionary principle says: we shouldn't allow reduced-risk products until we're certain they're safe. But we allow cigarettes—whose lethality is certain—because they're already here. **The asymmetry is logically indefensible: the most harmful product is protected by its incumbency, while less harmful alternatives must prove their safety before they're permitted to compete. The standard of evidence demanded of nicotine harm reduction is never demanded of the status quo it seeks to replace.**
