Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Is a Little Pollution Good for You?Incorporating Societal Values in Environmental Research$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Kevin Elliott

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780199755622

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199755622.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 19 June 2019

Lesson #3

Lesson #3

Ethics for Experts

Chapter:
(p.132) 6 Lesson #3
Source:
Is a Little Pollution Good for You?
Author(s):

Kevin C. Elliott

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199755622.003.0006

This chapter argues that, if scientists are to avoid railroading their own values into individual and societal decision‐making processes, they need to follow an ethics of expertise (EOE) when disseminating information. The chapter suggests that an EOE based on the principle of informed consent would help decision makers to formulate choices based on their own values and priorities, and it would also help them to evaluate the trustworthiness of various experts. On the basis of this principle, it advises proponents of hormesis to be as explicit as possible in acknowledging the major and controversial value judgments present in their work. Two of these crucial judgments are that hormesis is the predominant toxicological dose‐response relationship and that it should be the default dose‐response model in risk assessment. Clarifying these judgments would help decision makers to recognize the key sources of uncertainty and controversy in the information supplied to them, and it would prevent interest groups from misusing the claims of hormesis proponents.

Keywords:   hormesis, ethics of expertise, consent, publication, dissemination, self‐determination, autonomy, research ethics, default dose response

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .