Genna Reed

Science and policy analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

Author image
Genna Reed is a science and policy analyst in the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. In her role, she researches political and corporate influences on science-informed decision making—working to inform the public about issues where science is stifled or obscured, and to ensure that federal, state, and local policies are based on rigorous, independent science. See Genna's full bio.

Subscribe to Genna's posts

Genna's Latest Posts

Science Triumphs Over Disinformation in Initial Flame Retardant Victory

In a stunning victory for consumer safety and a powerful display of the ability of independent science to spur policy change, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) voted this week to ban a class of additive, polymeric organhalogen flame retardants (OFRs) that are present in many consumer products. Last week, I was one of many individuals who testified before the CPSC urging the body to grant a petition to ban the class of organohalogen flame retardants from four classes of consumer products: mattresses, children’s products, furniture, and electronic casings.

Read more >

Eric/Creative Commons (Flickr)
Flickr/Tracy Ducasse
Bookmark and Share

Consumer Product Safety Commission Takes On Flame Retardants

In 2015, Earthjustice and Consumer Federation of America, on behalf of a broad coalition of health, consumer, science and firefighter organizations, petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to ban a class of flame retardants, additive organohalogen flame retardants, from children’s products, furniture, mattresses, and electronic casings as hazardous substances. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Science Advice in Action: Highlights from an EPA Science Advisory Board Meeting

We have been writing a lot lately about the importance of federal science advice and defending the value of advisory committees like the EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors and EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) against threats of budget cuts and reform. When I saw that the full SAB would be meeting at the end of August, I jumped at the opportunity to attend. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Photo: The White House/Flickr

An Administration Defined by Its Conflicts (and What That Means for Science and Policy)

The first six months of President Trump’s time in office have consisted of a whirlwind of questionable governing decisions. From the outset, the Center for Science and Democracy established a baseline of the types of protections for science within the federal government that should be maintained by the Executive Office of the President; to say that the Trump Administration is not up to the mark would be a gross understatement. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

The Wall Street Journal Gets it Wrong on EPA Scientific Integrity…Again

The Wall Street Journal ran an opinion piece yesterday titled “A Step Toward Scientific Integrity at the EPA” written by long-time critic of the EPA and purveyor of anti-science nonsense, Steven Milloy. His piece commends Administrator Pruitt on his recent dismissals of EPA advisory committee members, and questions the independence of advisory committees, like the EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) and Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), claiming that they contain biased government grantees and have made recommendations on ozone and particulate matter that aren’t supported by science. His arguments are twisted and unfounded, but are not surprising based upon his history working for industry front groups that attempt to spread disinformation to promote a science agenda benefitting powerful interests. Read more >

Bookmark and Share