Abstract
This article analyzes the consequences of the increasing reference to scientific expertise in the decision and implementation process of occupational health policy. Based on examples (exposure limits and attributable fractions) taken from an interdisciplinary seminar conducted in 2014 to 2015 in France, it shows how the measurement or regulation of a problem through biomedicine-based tools produces blind spots. It also uses a case study to show the contradictions between scientific and academic aims and public health intervention. Other indirect implications are also examined, such as the limitation of trade unions' scope for action. Finally, the article suggests launching a broad political debate accessible to nonspecialists about collective occupational health issues-a dialogue made difficult by the rise of the afore-mentioned techno-scientific perspective.
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 callMore From: NEW SOLUTIONS: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy
Disclaimer: 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.
