It is wrong on two counts. In the first place, precautionary action does not always mean calling a halt or implementing a ban. It can also mean imposing a moratorium while further research is conducted, calling for monitoring of technologies and products already in use, adopting safer alternatives, and so forth. In the second place, a broad precautionary approach will encourage the development of better technologies. Making uncertainty explicit, considering alternatives, and increasing transparency and the responsibility of proponents and manufacturers to demonstrate safety should lead to cleaner products and production methods.
Precaution calls for zero risk, which is impossible to achieve.
Our real goal must be to impose far less risk and harm on the environment and on human health than we have in the past. We must harness human ingenuity to reduce the harmful effects of our activities. The precautionary principle is based on the assumption that people have the right to know as much as possible about risks they are taking on, in exchange for what benefits, and to make choices accordingly. With food and other products, such choices are often played out in the marketplace. Increasingly, manufacturers are choosing to reduce risk themselves by substituting safer alternatives in response to consumer uneasiness, the threat of liability, and market pressures.