Many federal laws dealing with environment, safety, and health contain language directing that certain kinds of standards be set on the basis of health evidence alone. That is, economic considerations are not to be taken into account in setting these standards. This paper presents arguments in defense of this position and then suggests why these arguments are not convincing. In other words, it makes the case that regulators should strive to balance economic, health, and other considerations for sensible policymaking.“…wisdom requires balancing the good against the bad to determine whether the overall result is positive or negative.”Albert Gore,Earth in the Balance(