FACA


Why the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act Is Bad for Science

, science and policy analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

Congress’ perennial bill, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act, has again reared its ugly head. The bill seeks to change the requirements for the EPA’s advisory committee to give industry greater influence while adding extra burdens that make it harder for the committee to meet its charge of providing science advice. It would also have the side effect of dissuading scientists from serving on this advisory committee because of future restrictions to obtaining EPA funding. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Advancing Scientific Integrity Through Federal Advisory Committees

, science and policy analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

Back in October, I provided a comment at a public meeting for a National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) advisory committee that was set up to review the process to update the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Their first charge was to write a report with recommendations on how the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) selection process could be improved to provide more transparency, minimize bias, and include committee members with a range of viewpoints. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Who Keeps an Eye on EPA Science?

, former science policy fellow

Perchlorate is both a naturally occurring and man-made chemical. It is a critical ingredient in explosives such as rocket fuel and fireworks. Perchlorate may have adverse health effects because it can disrupt the thyroid’s ability to produce hormones needed for normal growth and development. The Scientific Advisory Board of the Environmental Protection Agency is looking at scientific research to determine what – if any – level of perchlorate is safe. Who do you think should be examining that evidence and helping EPA make this decision? I think I would want scientists with both expertise and independence. Read more >

Bookmark and Share