The precautionary principle is not really new. Participants noted that current policies such as risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis give the benefit of the doubt to new products and technologies. Unfortunately, those new products may later prove harmful. And when damage inevitably occurs, victims and the advocates have the nearly impossible task of proving that a particular product or activity was responsible. But the public must be fully involved.
Informed consent is just as essential.
It seems unlikely that the precautionary principle will replace the risk assessment approach to environmental protection in the U.S. any time soon. Opposition from the chemical industry alone would probably be sufficient to prevent that. A number of advisors to the chemical industry have called the precautionary principle unscientific and dangerous. True, the precautionary principle does shift the burden of proof for harmlessness onto the producers of toxic chemicals. Most people readily accept such a shift in the case of the pharmaceutical industry, which must show safety and efficacy before marketing a new drug.