The “Precautionary principle” is regarded as the new buzz phrase in the discussion of risk regulation relating to the areas of environment and health. Article 5.7 of the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measure (SPS Agreement) uses a similar approach to the protection of human, animal and plant life, and health. It is important to pay close attention to some of the relationships concerning the precautionary principle and Article 5.7. Firstly, when a member decides to take sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, they usually act from the perspective of prudence and precaution. In addition, the precautionary principle finds similar expression in Article 5.7. However, the precautionary principle has not been explicitly written in the SPS Agreement as a ground for justifying the SPS measures in situations that are inconsistent with the obligations set out in the Agreement. The case law shows that the Panel is very careful about the use of the language of precaution. The Appellate Body is reluctant to allow the precautionary principle to override the specific obligations in the Agreement. Whether Article 5.7 can be regarded as an application of the precautionary principle needs to be examined. Under the current discourse, however, this article finds that the precautionary principle cannot by any means be used as an interpretative tool for Article 5.7. Reliance on the precautionary principle to trigger Article 5.7 is supposed to be unsuccessful. As in situations where taking SPS measures threats the environment and health become irreversible, more attention should be paid to practical issues to ensure the necessity and efficacy of the measures.