Science and Politics

[JimC]

Where is the resistance?

Vichy progressives...

[L'Emmerdeur]

Where is the resistance?

Vichy progressives...

There've been lawsuits and in a few instances they've made a dent, but the US Supreme Court tends to let the Trumpists have their way.

---

---

Meanwhile at the US Environmental Protection Predation Agency the glorious work of Making America Great Again proceeds:

Citing US President Donald Trump’s anti-climate executive actions, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin on Friday unveiled a proposal to end a program that requires power plants, refineries, landfills, and more to report their emissions.

While Zeldin claimed that “the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is nothing more than bureaucratic red tape that does nothing to improve air quality,” experts and climate advocates emphasized the importance of the data collection, which began in 2010.

“President Trump promised Americans would have the cleanest air on Earth, but once again, Trump’s EPA is taking actions that move us further from that goal,” Joseph Goffman, who led the EPA Office of Air and Radiation during the Biden administration, said in a statement from the Environmental Protection Network, a group for former agency staff.

“Cutting the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program blinds Americans to the facts about climate pollution. Without it, policymakers, businesses, and communities cannot make sound decisions about how to cut emissions and protect public health,” he explained.

[source]

* * *

Public health and environment defenders on Friday condemned the Trump administration’s announcement that it will no longer uphold Environmental Protection Agency rules that protect people from unsafe levels of so-called ”forever chemicals” in the nation’s drinking water.

In addition to no longer defending rules meant to protect people from dangerous quantities of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—called forever chemicals because they do not biodegrade and accumulate in the human body—the EPA is asking a federal court to toss out current limits that protect drinking water from four types of PFAS: PFNA, PFHxS, GenX, and PFBS.

The EPA first announced its intent to roll back limits on the four chemicals in May, while vowing to retain maximum limits for two other types of PFAS. The agency said the move is meant to “provide regulatory flexibility and holistically address these contaminants in drinking water.”

However, critics accuse the EPA and Administrator Lee Zeldin—a former Republican congressman from New York with an abysmal 14% lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters—of trying to circumvent the Safe Drinking Water Act’s robust anti-backsliding provision, which bars the EPA from rolling back any established drinking water standard.

“In essence, EPA is asking the court to do what EPA itself is not allowed to do,” Earthjustice said in a statement.

[source]

[L'Emmerdeur]

Making Science Great Again. Like never before. Beautiful science.

'EPA tells scientists to stop publishing studies, employees say'

The Environmental Protection Agency has ordered scientists in at least one of its research offices to immediately pause almost all efforts to publish research, according to two agency employees familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Staff from the EPA’s Office of Water were summoned to a town hall meeting this week and instructed to halt work on most ongoing research papers. The researchers were told that unless scientific journals had already returned proofs — the final step in the academic publication process — the studies would be subject to a new review process, the two employees said.

The order to reevaluate all manuscripts came from political appointees, the employees said.

EPA press secretary Brigit Hirsch said the agency will continue its work to protect human health and the environment but did not provide details about the new review process.

“Great scientific work is continuing at EPA like never before,” Hirsch said. “We are confident EPA has the resources needed to accomplish the agency’s core mission of protecting human health and the environment, fulfill all statutory obligations, and make the best-informed decisions based on the gold standard of science.”

Staff within the Office of Water have asked for an explanation they can send to scientific journals that ask why their papers are on pause, but staff have so far not received a response from higher-ups, one of the employees said.

Both employees said that the imposition of this type of review is unprecedented and warned that it could stymie the release of scientific findings important to preserving public health.

[Brian Peacock]

Interesting that this comes from the Water Office. The completion of the recent drinking water review produced rather patchy recommendations as it was, and now this seems a pretty good way of scuppering the rational underpinning of any regulatory framework - though it's not like everything's always been peachy in that regard anyway.

But I'm sure Ms Hirsch is sincere about the EPA's role in protecting human health, it's just that the agency has to apply a complex cost-benefit analysis of every standard they set and every regulation they propose - and if the cost isn't carried by the taxpayer and the benefit doesn't go directly to the private sector then it simply doesn't go through.

[JimC]

Science results must be MAGA friendly, or else...

[Svartalf]

Science results must be MAGA friendly, or else...

impossible,
a) science observes and records the results
b) maga wants to dictate the results
c) for whatever reason, the actual recorded results seldom, if ever, match with maga's will

[Tero]

Paracetamol
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2817406

[pErvinalia]

What about it?

[Tero]

Trump babbles an hour or so about. Wants to ban, or write some FDA documents. All false. Swedish study makes clear it has no autism connection.

Conclusions and Relevance Acetaminophen use during pregnancy was not associated with children’s risk of autism, ADHD, or intellectual disability in sibling control analysis. This suggests that associations observed in other models may have been attributable to familial confounding.

[Tero]

A bit more on the last phrase.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03479-5

[Tero]

"A rule of thumb: The more certainty a person expresses regarding the causes of autism, the less knowledgeable they are. President Donald Trump and his advisers expressed excessive certitude on Monday about this complex neurodevelopmental disorder."

"The much-ballyhooed news conference made clear that the administration intends to march headlong into its anti-vaccine delusions. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that his department will investigate vaccines as potential causes of autism, promising “no areas of taboo,” even though reams of studies have already relentlessly debunked the association."

"A major study out of Sweden last year, using data from 2.5 million births, compared outcomes between siblings born to the same mother and exposed in utero to different amounts of acetaminophen. That paper found no difference in terms of autism diagnoses."

"This stands to reason, given that scientists believe maternal fevers during pregnancy increase the risk of neurological disorders, and mothers who experience such fevers are likelier to take drugs such as Tylenol. After all, it is one of the few pain relievers available to pregnant women. That doesn’t necessarily mean that the drug is to blame for neurological disorders any more than ice cream trucks are to blame for increased shark attacks during the summer."

"Kennedy’s approach to studying autism has been farcical from the beginning. He announced the effort in April, with the firm belief that environmental factors are driving the rise in cases. He also vowed that the government would “know what has caused the autism epidemic” within six months, an absurdly short time frame."

"Herein lies the danger of letting political views take a leading role in scientific investigations. At best, Trump’s rant on Monday merely undermines the government’s credibility. Many Americans understand autism’s complexity, and will find the administration’s pronouncement to be further evidence of its untrustworthiness. At worst, it could do serious damage: The president’s comments about vaccines are likely to turn more people against immunizations, making society more vulnerable to disease outbreaks."

"To its credit, the Trump administration has invested millions of dollars into further research on autism. But the news conference on Monday casts a shadow on that work: What good is research if its outcome is predetermined?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... aminophen/