On March 25, France’s national agency for food, environmental and occupational health safety (ANSES) confirmed in a report that reference toxicological values for cadmium had been exceeded in a significant number of French people, with children particularly affected; food is the main source of exposure. The agency recommends taking action on phosphate fertilizers.
In the report, the agency did not conclude that there was a proven causal link between cadmium and pancreatic cancer. However, as soon as it was published, the debate became polarized: On one side, some doctors saw cadmium as a plausible explanation for the increase in these cancers in France; on the other, some argued that ANSES had not established this link, and that claiming otherwise would amount to activism.
As with every health alert related to chemical exposure, each side claimed to represent science and accused the other of ideological bias. This polarization revealed a deeper confusion surrounding the role of scientific evidence in guiding public health decisions. The lack of evidence is all too often interpreted by public authorities and industry as an absence of risk: This reasoning is a recurring theme in the history of public health, often with serious consequences.
Complexity of reality
In 2013, for example, claiming to base her analysis on data, American economist Emily Oster concluded in her book Expecting Better that a glass of wine a day during pregnancy was risk-free. Experts in fetal alcohol spectrum disorders challenged this conclusion: They pointed out that negative effects become apparent when children are monitored beyond early childhood and when the spectrum of disorders measured is broadened. The absence of findings reflected the limitations of the studies, not the absence of risk.
Hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in the United States provides another example. The industry argued the process could not contaminate groundwater. In 2017, researchers Janet Currie, Michael Greenstone and Katherine Meckel showed an increased risk of low birth weight near fracking sites, though they were unable to identify the transmission pathway. Five years later, researchers Elaine Hill and Lala Ma isolated a mechanism: drinking water contamination. France has also experienced several health crises linked to chemical use (including chlordecone), in which the initial lack of irrefutable evidence was interpreted as indicating no risk.
You have 58.96% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.
