Abstract
It has been argued that the phenomenon of hormesis should prompt us to revise current regulatory policy in order to take beneficial effects of small doses of various agents into account. I argue that three problems--the comparative smallness of hormetic effects, the fine-tuning problem, and the problem of aggregated actions--should lead us not to overemphasize the importance of hormesis for policy, and that they, if anything, points towards a non-consequentialist approach to the ethics of risk.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
