Serra G, Cocco P
UPG, Servizio Prevenzione e Sicurezza dell'Ambiente di Lavoro, Azienda Sanitaria USL N. 3, Nuoro.
G Ital Med Lav Ergon. 2003 Jul-Sep;25 Suppl(3):256-7.
IARC evaluations of the carcinogenic risk to humans, although based on epidemiological and experimental studies, derive their value from the consensus among committee members on a decision based on the current status of knowledge, not from the studies themselves, nor from their summary evaluation. A judiciary setting, based on the opinion of an individual expert, or on the evaluation of the most updated state of the knowledge by a group of experts selected in non scientific settings, or even worse on the evaluation of a specific case with ad hoc epidemiological studies, cannot confute such decisions. Therefore, causal links already defined within the scientific community, such as between exposures in the IARC category 1 and specific cancer sites, should be accepted also in legal trials to establish individual responsibility in case of excess exposures for the general and/or the working population resulting from violation or omission of preventive duties, when those diseases follow such excess exposures. If no violation or omission occurred, a civil responsibility has to be defined when either a disease with established link with the given exposure occurs, or a disease for which no such a level of consensus exists in the scientific community, but for which the legal trial has reached a positive decision. In such instances, if omissions or law violations occurred, the legal trial carries the burden of establishing a causal link between such omissions and violations and the damage for the individual worker or citizen.
国际癌症研究机构（IARC）对人类致癌风险的评估，尽管基于流行病学和实验研究，但其价值源自委员会成员基于当前知识状况所达成的关于某项决定的共识，而非来自研究本身，也非来自其总结性评估。基于个别专家意见的司法环境，或基于在非科学环境中挑选出的一组专家对最新知识状态的评估，甚至更糟的是基于针对特定案例的特设流行病学研究的评估，都无法推翻此类决定。因此，科学界已确定的因果联系，例如国际癌症研究机构第1类暴露与特定癌症部位之间的联系，在法律审判中也应被接受，以便在因违反或疏忽预防职责而导致一般人群和/或工作人群接触过量时，如果这些疾病是由此类过量接触引起的，确定个人责任。如果没有发生违反或疏忽行为，那么当出现与特定暴露有既定联系的疾病，或者出现科学界对此未达成如此程度共识但法律审判已做出肯定裁决的疾病时，就必须确定民事责任。在这种情况下，如果发生了疏忽或违法行为，法律审判有责任确定此类疏忽和违法行为与个体工人或公民所受损害之间的因果联系。
