A List of Scientific Organizations That Have Supported and Opposed Limiting What Research EPA Can Use to Make Decisions

, Deputy director, Center for Science & Democracy | April 24, 2018, 1:17 pm EST
Bookmark and Share

The EPA today will announce a politically-motivated draft policy to restrict the use of science in agency decisions. The draft policy is based on legislation that has died in Congress for several years.

The mainstream scientific and academic organizations that have opposed new restrictions on EPA’s use of science, in alphabetical order:

The mainstream scientific and academic organizations that have supported new restrictions on EPA’s use of science, in alphabetical order:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The former tobacco industry-paid PR men who support new restrictions on EPA’s use of science, in alphabetical order:

Posted in: Science and Democracy, Scientific Integrity Tags: , , , , , ,

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

Show Comments


Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, self-promotional, obscene, rude, or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. UCS respects your privacy and will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.

  • Desertphile

    The America Treason Party finds science “too biased” against lies, ergo they must ban science.

  • Jan Dash

    There is a typo: “The mainstream scientific and academic organizations that have supported new restrictions on EPA’s use of science, in alphabetical order:

    ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    • Michael Halpern

      No typo there. We’re still waiting for the first one. Chairman Lamar Smith’s legislation, the inspiration for the EPA’s draft policy, was universally panned by scientific groups, as they understand the damage it would do to research and its use in making policy.