Restrictions on the Use of Public Health Research at US Government Agencies in the Name of Transparency

Abstract

Transparency measures at government agencies are essential in order to ensure scientific integrity and public trust in the government’s scientific output. Agency scientists, supported by a commitment to a rigorous independent science process, scientific integrity policies, and appropriate transparency measures, should be trusted to analyze available data and issue policies that consider and value the weight of the evidence. We evaluated how recent initiatives at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Interior (DOI) would block the agencies from using many kinds of scientific studies vital to decisionmaking, including studies that rely on personal health data, confidential business information, intellectual property, or older studies for which the authors or data sources may not be accessible. Comparing requirements for industry and all other submissions, we found that these proposals would protect industry data and confidential business information more adequately than public health information. Both directives would allow agencies to use the degree to which the underlying data is public to judge a study’s credibility, which would mean many types of studies done in the environmental health field would be discounted. We analyzed how the placement of unnecessary restrictions on the kinds of studies that agencies can consider stands to affect decisionmaking on everything from air pollution standards to water quality issues to chemical regulation in consumer products. The speaker will discuss the difference between genuine transparency needs in government science and these two misguided agency rules. Examples of how these policies could impact the foundation of public environmental and public health protection will be outlined and alternative recommendations for improved government scientific transparency that is protective of public health will be laid out.