The Los Angeles Times reports today ("Common chemicals pose danger for fetuses, scientists warn") that
In a strongly worded declaration, many of the world's leading environmental scientists warned Thursday that exposure to common chemicals makes babies more likely to develop an array of health problems later in life, including diabetes, attention deficit disorders, prostate cancer, fertility problems, thyroid disorders and even obesity.
The declaration by about 200 scientists from five continents amounts to a vote of confidence in a growing body of evidence that humans are vulnerable to long-term harm from toxic exposures in the womb and during their first years.***
...the scientists urged leaders not to wait for more scientific certainty and recommended that governments revise regulations and procedures to take into account subtle effects on fetal and infant development.
(emphasis added).
This concern reinforces the basic theses that I have long advocated in this blog-- every action has a reaction; every right has a corresponding obligation. Is the government's role to protect the fetus or to protect the right to treat the fetus as a disposable part of a woman's body? Isn't it cognitive dissonance for the government to do both-- sort of like the government's campaign against tobacco smoking while subsidizing tobacco farming?
To those favoring one position or the other: there is no free intellectual lunch. Think through all the implications of your ideology.
