> In science, the burden of proof is on the new thing to unequivocally prove itself true...not 'harmless until proven harmful.' The former statement does not i

> In science, the burden of proof is on the new thing to unequivocally prove itself true...not 'harmless until proven harmful.' The former statement does not imply the latter--it depends on whether you default to "we assume, as a null hypothesis, that everything is harmless until proven harmful", as in the US, or "we assume, as a null hypothesis, that everything is harmful until proven harmless", as in the European Union (which, by the way, is not "the rest of the world").