On the one hand, it seems like to really understand the public health consequences, especially if some of the important effects are likely to be rare, one would

On the one hand, it seems like to really understand the public health consequences, especially if some of the important effects are likely to be rare, one would likely need to see a large population exposed for a very long period of time (e.g. do babies who live their whole life around this tech develop some cancer when they're middle aged?) meaning the wait could be very long indeed, and probably by the end of it, engineers would have figured out something way better anyway. But on the other hand, we do seem too prone to jump headlong into wide use of new tech without understanding all their impacts. Light pollution, climate change, microplastics inside everything including human placentas, leaded gasoline which may have driven a generation of higher crime rates, etc etc. So in what cases _should_ we as a society wait a few decades to really vet something on a beta-testing population, if ever?