{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024051803885291396, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0037002775208140612, 'mean_word_length': 5.80503144654088, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Precaution: Belief, Regulatory System, and Overarching Principle

Abstract The precautionary principle has been incorporated as a belief statement in international agreements for more than a decade. The 1998 Wingspread definition of the principle was the first to bring together four components that, in the past two years, have formed the elements of a broader, overarching approach to precaution that is a robust basis for its specific implementation: prompt action even in the face of scientific uncertainty, burden of proof and persuasion on proponents of potentially hazardous technologies, assessment of alternatives, and transparency. This broad approach to precaution is in direct conflict with the simplistic, easily manipulated principles and methods of risk assessment-based risk management being exported by U.S. officialdom. In contrast to risk assessment, precaution, broadly defined, incorporates the full range of human intelligence in the task of protecting human health and the environment: flexibility, foresight, fairness, thoughtful consideration, and honesty.