Personally, I would take it a step further. Even if there is a non-zero statistical chance that it causes cancer, I think there has to be some room to ask whet

Personally, I would take it a step further. Even if there is a non-zero statistical chance that it causes cancer, I think there has to be some room to ask whether the benefits outweigh the costs. To some, low food prices in a world of food shortages may very well merit some non-zero chance of cancer. Grown-up societies make these kinds of trade-offs all the time. A speed limit of 10 miles an hour would result in fewer dead than 55 mph. As a society, we are willing to sacrifice some non-zero number of people given the increase in time and convenience associated with the higher speed limit. This is, to most people, an acceptable trade-off. On the other hand, you have the hand-wringers arguing "even one life" is too many, and then driving home at 55 mph.