GM crops have become a test case for the conflicting slogans of `the precautionary principle' versus `sound science.' The issues can be illustrated by developments in regulatory science for Bt maize in the European Union. As this case study suggests, risk assessment is always framed by some account of the relevant uncertainties. These in turn depend upon how the environment is valued and how scientific questions are posed about cause?effect pathways of potential harm. The slogan of `sound science' hides such judgements, by representing ignorance or value-judgements as `science.' By contrast, precaution can challenge such judgements, identify new unknowns, generate different criteria for evidence, open up new scientific questions, and make these judgements more transparent. It is doubtful whether these complexities have been fully acknowledged by specialists, and thus whether the continued risk debate is due solely to a public misunderstanding of science.