Mobile telephony and the precautionary principle - a phoney debate?

This paper explores potential adverse consequences of applying the precautionary principle (PP) to low-level radiofrequency (RF) transmissions from mobile phones and base stations. An oft-cited criticism of the PP is that it is poorly and inconsistently defined. In its best and most inclusive form, as defined in a recent communication from the European Commission, the PP includes elements of proportionality, non-discrimination, consistency, cost/benefit analysis and ongoing scientific review. In its worst form the PP can introduce arbitrary and onerous regulatory measures without regard to new community risks and costs that may be generated, e.g.: 1. Denying or delaying public access to the social, economic and public safety benefits of mobile telephony; 2. Redirection of limited community resources away from more important public safety issues; 3. Protracted legal argument (and costs) over the vague definitions inherent in the PP; 4. Undermining of the integrity of the scientific method in determining the true level of any health risk from direct exposure to low level EME; 5. Inappropriate occupational and public risk behaviors based on an exaggerated concern of EME as implied by the PP. There is little published data to quantify these risks, though a strong prima facie case exists for a cautious approach to the PP. A considered decision on the PP that protects the public interest will require quantitative analysis of the risks generated by the PP described above. Copyright (2001) Australasian Radiation Protection Society Inc