Record Detail

The idea that the degree of infringement public health interventions have on
individual rights should be proportional to the degree of expected benefits has emerged as
an influential principle in public health ethics and policy. While proportionality makes sense in
theory, it may be difficult to implement in practice, due to the inherent conflict between
individual rights and the common good underlying the principle. To apply the proportionality
principle to a decision of policy, one must still find a reasonable way of balancing these
competing values in light of the available options and empirical evidence. In this article, I
consider how the proportionality principle applies to the regulation of dietary supplements and
examine some critiques of the current oversight system. I argue that it may be difficult
maintain proportional oversight because the risks of dietary supplements vary considerably.
Strengthening the regulations may therefore promote an appropriate level of regulation in
some cases but lead to overregulation in others.