IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v11y1991i2p325-332.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting EPA's Forthcoming CO Standards in Light of New Clinical Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • John D. Graham
  • David R. Holtgrave

Abstract

For the past several years, the EPA has been monitoring clinical studies on the adverse health effects of heart patients’exposure to carbon monoxide. This paper examines the impact of three such studies (including the multi‐center CO study organized by the Health Effects Institute) on the forthcoming EPA standards for carbon monoxide. Eleven peer‐nominated specialists with expertise in environmental science and public policy were interviewed according to a specific protocol. Overall, the experts felt that the HEI study would receive greater weight than the other two studies in the regulatory process for a variety of technical reasons. Weighting each expert opinion equally, we conclude that there is about a 0.69 probability that the CO standards will be retained at their present levels, a 0.28 probability that the standards will be tightened, and a 0.03 probability that the standards will be relaxed. When asked to imagine that the HEI data were never collected and then asked to reassess their probability judgments, the mean probability judgment that the standards will be relaxed rose to 0.11, while the mean probability judgment that the standards will be tightened fell to 0.20. A modest degree of variability in expert opinion is reported in the paper. While the HEI study may receive relatively great weight in the regulatory process, it increases only slightly the probability that EPA's CO standards will be changed.

Suggested Citation

  • John D. Graham & David R. Holtgrave, 1991. "Predicting EPA's Forthcoming CO Standards in Light of New Clinical Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 325-332, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:11:y:1991:i:2:p:325-332
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00608.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00608.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00608.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jane Warren & Thomas E. Dahms, 1991. "Comments on Predicting EPA's Forthcoming CO Standards in Light of New Clinical Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 577-579, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:11:y:1991:i:2:p:325-332. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.