Environmental and health studies conducted for or used by the federal government would require White House approval before their release, under a proposal now under review at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The plan would also give the White House authority to select which scientists take part in the system known as peer review -- the process by which fellow researchers evaluate the validity and reliability of studies before they are published.

Critics fear such a plan would undermine the impartiality of research that guides government policies and regulations. For example, it would open the door for the Administration to hand-select industry-friendly scientists to review studies that investigate the safety of chemicals in our food and consumer products, or studies that examine the environmental impact of energy plant emissions. The White House has frequently expressed its commitment to easing regulations for American industries. [1]

In a January 9 letter to the OMB, 20 former top federal agency officials, from both Democratic and Republican administrations, urged the White House to drop its proposal. The letter -- signed by former EPA Administrators Carol Browner and Russell Train; former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich; former Assistant Secretaries for Occupational Safety and Health Eula Bingham and Gerard Scannell; and others -- warned that the proposal, "in its current form, could damage the federal system for protecting public health and the environment." [2]

Currently, each federal agency controls peer review of its own projects. The government's rules to ensure research quality are already less stringent than those used by leading biomedical journals. For example, these journals require authors to disclose who paid for the research; and the journals will only publish studies done under contracts in which the investigators have the right to publish regardless of the results. Federal agencies do not have these requirements, nor do they consistently attempt to find out who paid for the studies. [3]

Far from ensuring the validity of the peer review process, the plan's critics assert that allowing the White House to control it would only add a layer of politics to what should be a purely scientific process. [4]

###

SOURCES:
[1] "White House Seeks Control on Health, Safety," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Jan. 11, 2004.
[2] Letter to Joshua B. Bolton, Director of the OMB from 20 former agency officials, Jan 9, 2004.
[3] Michaels D, Wagner W. Disclosure in Regulatory Science. Science. 2003; 302:2073.
[4] "Peer Review Plan Draws Criticism," Washington Post, Jan. 15, 2004.