Editing Precautionary principle (section)

=== Environment and health ===
Fields typically concerned by the precautionary principle are the possibility of:
* [[Global warming]] or [[abrupt climate change]] in general
* [[Extinction]] of species
* Introduction of new products into the environment, with potential impact on [[biodiversity]] (e.g., [[genetically modified organisms]])
* Threats to [[public health]], due to new diseases and techniques (e.g., HIV transmitted through blood transfusion)
* Long-term effects of new technologies (e.g. [[Mobile phone radiation and health|health concerns regarding radiation from cell phones]] and other electronics communications devices)
* Persistent or acute pollution (e.g., [[asbestos]], [[endocrine disruptors]])
* Food safety (e.g., [[Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease]])
* Other new [[biosafety]] issues (e.g., [[artificial life]], new [[molecule]]s)

The precautionary principle is often applied to [[biology|biological]] fields because changes cannot be easily [[containment|contained]] and have the potential of being global. The principle has less relevance to contained fields such as [[aeronautics]], where the few people undergoing [[risk]] have given [[informed consent]] (e.g., a [[test pilot]]). In the case of technological innovation, containment of impact tends to be more difficult if that technology can self-replicate. [[Bill Joy]] emphasised the dangers of replicating genetic technology, nanotechnology, and robotic technology in his article in ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'', "[[Why the future doesn't need us]]", though he does not specifically cite the precautionary principle. The application of the principle can be seen in the public policy of requiring [[pharmaceutical industry|pharmaceutical companies]] to carry out [[clinical trial]]s to show that new [[medications]] are safe.

Oxford based philosopher [[Nick Bostrom]] discusses the idea of a future powerful [[superintelligence]], and the risks should it attempt to gain atomic level control of matter.<ref>[[Nick Bostrom]] 2003 Ethical Issues in Advanced Artificial Intelligence – section 2</ref>

Application of the principle modifies the status of innovation and [[risk assessment]]: it is not the risk that must be avoided or amended, but a potential risk that must be prevented. Thus, in the case of regulation of scientific research, there is a third party beyond the scientist and the regulator: the consumer.

In an analysis concerning application of the precautionary principle to [[nanotechnology]], Chris Phoenix and Mike Treder posit that there are ''two forms'' of the principle, which they call the "strict form" and the "active form".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.crnano.org/precautionary.htm |title=Nanotechnology: Precautionary Principle Analyzed |publisher=Center for Responsible Nanotechnology |date=January 2004 |access-date=12 March 2016}}</ref> The former "requires inaction when action might pose a risk", while the latter means "choosing less risky alternatives when they are available, and [...] taking responsibility for potential risks." [[Thomas Alured Faunce]] has argued for stronger application of the precautionary principle by chemical and health technology regulators particularly in relation to Ti0<sub>2</sub> and ZnO [[nanoparticle]]s in [[sunscreens]], biocidal nanosilver in waterways and products whose manufacture, handling or recycling exposes humans to the risk of inhaling multi-walled carbon nanotubes.<ref>{{cite journal  |vauthors=Faunce TA, etal |title=Sunscreen Safety: The Precautionary Principle, The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration and Nanoparticles in Sunscreens |journal=Nanoethics |volume=2 |issue= 3|pages=231–240 |year=2008 |doi=10.1007/s11569-008-0041-z |s2cid=55719697 |url=http://law.anu.edu.au/StaffUploads/236-Nanoethics%20Sunscreens%202008.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110228183131/http://law.anu.edu.au/StaffUploads/236-Nanoethics%20Sunscreens%202008.pdf |archive-date=28 February 2011}}</ref>