Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge

Subject: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Amos
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:07 PM

THe following is merely the Exec Summary of a PDF file focused on damge caused to the progress of science by Bush and his nutballs.

The full report can be found here: Waxman PDF Report.

The URL is http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/pdfs/pdf_politics_and_science_rep.pdf.


"The American people depend upon federal agencies to promote scientific research and to develop science-based policies that protect the nation's health and welfare. Historically, these agencies — such as the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Environmental Protection Agency — have had global reputations for scientific excellence.
Recently, however, leading scientific journals have begun to question whether scientific integrity at federal agencies has been sacrificed to further a political and ideological agenda. As the editor of Science wrote earlier this year, there is growing evidence that the Bush Administration "invades areas once immune to this kind of manipulation."


At the request of Rep. Henry A. Waxman, this report assesses the treatment of science and scientists by the Bush Administration. It finds numerous instances where the Administration has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings. These actions go far beyond the typical shifts in policy that occur with a change in the political party occupying the White House. Thirteen years ago, former President George H.W. Bush stated that "[n]ow more than ever, on issues ranging from climate change to AIDS research . . . government relies on the impartial perspective of science for guidance."

Today, President George W. Bush's Administration has skewed this impartial perspective, generating unprecedented criticism from the scientific community and even from prominent Republicans who once led federal agencies.
The Administration's political interference with science has led to misleading statements by the President, inaccurate responses to Congress, altered web sites, suppressed agency reports, erroneous international communications, and the gagging of scientists. The subjects involved span a broad range, but they share a common attribute: the beneficiaries of the scientific distortions are important supporters of the President, including social conservatives and powerful industry groups.

The report identifies over twenty scientific issues affected by the undermining of science, including:

• Abstinence education, where performance measures were changed to make unproven "abstinence-only" programs appear effective;

• Condom use, where information about condom use and efficacy was deleted from CDC's web site;

• Global warming, where reports by the Environmental Protection Agency on the risks of climate change were suppressed;

• Missile defense, where Defense Department officials presented misleading information on whether a functional system could be quickly deployed; and

• Wetlands policy, where comments from scientists at the Fish and Wildlife Service on the destructive impacts of proposed regulatory changes were withheld.

Other affected topics include HIV/AIDS, agricultural pollution, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, environmental health, lead poisoning, oil and gas exploration, prescription drug advertising, stem cells, substance abuse, drinking water, women's health, workplace safety, and Yellowstone National Park.

Across this wide range of issues, the report identifies the three principal ways in which the Bush Administration has pursued its agenda: by manipulating scientific advisory committees, by distorting and suppressing scientific information, and by interfering with scientific research and analysis.

Manipulating Scientific Advisory Committees

Scientific advisory committees assure that the government hears from the nation's top experts in a particular field before creating policy in that area. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that such committees be "fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented" and requires that advice and recommendations "not be inappropriately influenced by the appointing authority or by any special interest."

The Bush Administration, however, has repeatedly manipulated the advisory committee process to advance its political and ideological agenda. Examples include:

• Appointing Unqualified Persons with Industry Ties. After dropping three national experts in lead poisoning from the Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention, the Department of Health and Human Services appointed several individuals with ties to the lead industry, including a lead industry consultant who had testified that a lead level seven times the current limit is safe for children's brains.

• Appointing Unqualified Persons with Ideological Agendas. The Department of Health and Human Services nominated as chair of the FDA's Reproductive Health Drug Advisory Committee an anti-abortion activist who recommends that women read the bible for relief of premenstrual symptoms. The appointee's principal credential appears to be his opposition to the abortifacient RU-486. The medical journal Lancet described his scientific record as "sparse" and wrote that "[a]ny further right-wing incursions on expert panels' membership will cause a terminal decline in public trust in the advice of scientists."

• Stacking Advisory Committees. The Department of Health and Human Services replaced 15 of 18 members of the key advisory committee to the National Center on Environmental Health. Several of the new members were long-time industry consultants. In response, ten leading scientists wrote in Science that "stacking these public committees out of fear that they may offer advice that conflicts with administration policies devalues the entire federal advisory committee structure and the work of dedicated scientists who are willing to participate in these efforts."

• Opposing Qualified Experts. The Department of Health and Human Services rejected a widely respected expert's nomination to a grant review panel on workplace safety after it became clear that she supported rules to protect workers from musculoskeletal injuries, rules that the Bush Administration opposes. The head of the panel called the rejection "directly opposed to the philosophy of peer review, which is supposed to be nonpolitical and transparent."

Distorting and Suppressing Scientific Information

The public relies on government agencies for accurate scientific information, evidence-based decision making on matters of life and health, and clear explanations of complex technical matters. Under the Bush Administration, however, Administration officials have withheld or skewed important scientific information that conflicts with the Bush Administration's ideological and political agenda. Examples include:

• Including Misleading Information in Presidential Communications. After banning research on new lines of embryonic stem cells, President Bush assured the American people that research on "more than 60" existing lines cells "could lead to breakthrough therapies and cures." In fact, only 11 cell lines are now available for research, all of which were grown with mouse cells, rendering them inappropriate for treating people.

• Presenting Incomplete and Inaccurate Information to Congress. When Interior Secretary Gale Norton assured Congress that drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge would not harm the region's caribou population, she altered or omitted multiple key scientific conclusions prepared by federal biologists at the refuge. One Fish and Wildlife Service official commented, "We tried to present all the facts, but she only passed along the ones she liked. And to pass along facts that are false, well, that's obviously inappropriate."

• Altering Web Sites. As social conservatives campaigned to require women to be "counseled" about an alleged risk of breast cancer from abortions, the National Cancer Institute revised its web site to suggest that studies of equal weight conflicted on the question. In fact, there is scientific consensus that no such link exists; as the head of epidemiology research at the American Cancer Society had concluded previously, "This issue has been resolved scientifically . . . . This is essentially a political debate."
• Suppressing Agency Reports. After the White House edited a discussion of global warming in the Environmental Protection Agency's Draft Report on the Environment, agency scientists objected that the draft "no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change," and EPA chose to eliminate the discussion entirely. A former EPA Administrator in the Nixon and Ford Administrations commented, "I can state categorically that there was never such White House intrusion into the business of the E.PA. during my tenure."

Interfering with Scientific Research

The federal government invests $100 billion annually in scientific research to discover new cures, protect the environment, defend the country, and support other effective policies for the health and welfare of the American people. But instead of encouraging the development and dissemination of objective scientific information, the Bush Administration has repeatedly interfered with scientific research and analysis where political and ideological interests are at stake. Examples include:

• Scrutinizing Ongoing Research. Officials of the National Institutes of Health warned HIV researchers to expect increased scrutiny of any research grant requests using the words "gay" or "men who sleep with men." The Administration has also instituted a new policy at the Agriculture Department requiring scientists to seek approval of any research on "agricultural practices with negative health and environmental consequences."

• Obstructing Agency Analyses. The Bush Administration refused to let the Environmental Protection Agency conduct analyses on air quality proposals that differ from the President's "Clear Skies" initiative. William Ruckelshaus, the first EPA administrator under President Nixon, said of this pattern, "Is the analysis flawed? That is a legitimate reason for not releasing it. But if you don't like the outcome that might result from the analysis, that is not a legitimate reason."

• Undermining Outcome Assessment. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used to evaluate sex education programs and identify those with scientific evidence of effectiveness. After social conservatives complained that none of the programs taught "abstinence only," the agency ended the "Programs That Work" initiative altogether.

• Blocking Scientific Publication. The Agriculture Department prohibited one of its microbiologists from publishing or presenting research indicating that industrial hog farming may contribute to antibiotic resistance.

The scientist traced the Department's actions back to communications from industry.
This report describes these and other examples of interference in the scientific process. While in a few cases the Bush Administration reversed itself or admitted error, most of these actions, policies, and appointments remain in effect.
...

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Amos
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:08 PM

Sorry--this should be a BS: thread.


A

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 May 05 - 08:47 PM

Not to bring a metaphysical element into this - A friend says that he firmly believes that President George W. Bush could rape an 8 year old chlld on live television with lots of witnesses and still get away unscathed.

That sounds a bit extreme- but I do wonder if selective blindness is let loose upon the land.

The Emperor has such a pretty set of clothes.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Bobert
Date: 13 May 05 - 09:25 PM

There is good news, though... If the earth is indeed flat than we don't have to worry much about folks down under fallin' off!!! Unless of course they are living on the other side of the flatness which of course would be very bad fir them... About an hour of hanging upsidedown and they'd just give up and fall into, ahhhh, whatever... Is "space" in or out with the Bushites these days...

I know that evolution is out and when I say out I mean OUT and BIG TIME... Seems that God did all this in one week, folks... That's right, you heard it here, okay maybe not first, but you heard it here... God went from creatin the heavens and the earth in just seven days and guess what.... In that seven days He crreated two adults!!!

(But, Bobert, when were Adam and Eve kids?)

Shut up... That's the way it was... That's the story and since we stole the election you had better remember it...

Okay, firget that religious stuff... What about global warmin'? Now here's something that 99% of scientist agree on, don't they???

(But, Bobert, Bush has hired every one of the 1% who don't agree and...)

Awwww, nevermind....

My head hurts...

Bobert

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Peace
Date: 13 May 05 - 09:31 PM

The one mistake being made by most of us is that we refer to Bush as though he means something in this scheme. He doesn't. This shit is Neocon, through and through. Bush is a pawn. A willing pawn, but pawn nevertheless.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 May 05 - 09:43 PM

But a very VISIBLE pawn.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: dianavan
Date: 13 May 05 - 10:02 PM

There are far more dangerous men than GWB. He is the visible pawn, the fall-boy, the idiot who would sacrifice the America for a few years of glory and a whole pile of money. When he's gone, there will be plenty of people lining up to take his place. The dangerous men are the Kissingers and the Cheneys of the world. In fact, I would extend that to include anyone who profits from war and environmental destruction.

The sad thing is that we give them the power because we think we are entitled to a standard of living that cannot be sustained.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Amos
Date: 15 May 05 - 09:20 AM

HHS Restricts Communications between U.S. Scientists and WHO Officials

A new HHS policy requires the World Health Organization to submit all requests for expert scientific advice to political officials at HHS who pick which federal scientists will be permitted to respond. The new policy and two recent Administration decisions to withdraw federal scientists from major international health conferences are part of a disturbing pattern of political interference in global health issues.

From http://democrats.reform.house.gov/features/politics_and_science/index.htm

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 May 05 - 09:13 AM

We are greatly priveleged, as few before us in history have been, to be watching a rerun of 'The Fall of the Roman Empire' - maybe not yet Caligula, but possibly Nero...

It's all those ex-Nazi advisors...

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST,Rapaire
Date: 16 May 05 - 09:40 AM

Control of people by control of information is standard practice in totalitarian regimes. They get there by controlling information -- and by having a people who "can't be bothered" to check the accuracy of the statements because "it's too hard" or "it's too much trouble" or "I don't understand those things anyway" or "the Big Game is on right now; I'll do it later" or "it interfers with what I believe."

So this is your democracy:
"Be silent or agree with me."

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: DougR
Date: 16 May 05 - 02:26 PM

Wow! Amos offers yet again another tirade from that Congressman from California who hates Bush, perhaps as much as Amos does, and all you Bush haters pile aboard. Fun, isn't it?

What happend to your 1,000 plus thread about the Bush Administration Amos? Is it still alive? I haven't checked in ages.

DougR

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 May 05 - 02:50 PM

Keep fiddling while the Titanic goes down, DougR. Give us some purty music, you hear?

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Once Famous
Date: 16 May 05 - 02:52 PM

It's alive, but no one reads it, DougR. a shame someone's life's work can be deleted in a heartbeat.

It's just still the same old handwringing by the same old losers who piss and moan because of such unhappiness in their lives.


quite frankly, DougR, they have nothing else going on in their lives and have no friends except here to share it with.

right, amos?

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Peace
Date: 16 May 05 - 02:57 PM

The list of friends is growing, however. The threat is real and more and more folks are taking it seriously.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: SharonA
Date: 16 May 05 - 04:50 PM

But, Amos, the report you cite at the beginning of this thread is dated November 2003. What prompted you to bring it up now? (...besides, y'know, disgust that GWB was re-elected anyway and that his administration is still doing what it was doing back then...)

IMO, the Bush Administration does a heck of a lot more ad(vertising) than ministration...

Sharon

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 May 05 - 05:45 PM

EX-Nazi advisors?? Whence the "ex"?

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST
Date: 16 May 05 - 06:20 PM

This is good news for the rest of the world. History shows that once a society becomes a "nay" sayer it begins to decline. All those areas of research and development now being stopped, underfunded, derided etc by the religious right and therefore the govt of America are forging ahead in other countries which will reap the economic benefits of progress. if America doesn't want it, we'll have it thanks you! America under Bush is undoubtedly going backwards, which is where all religion dominated societies go. Already we can see the future elsewhere.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST,brucie
Date: 16 May 05 - 09:22 PM

A good friend sent me this. You want to do something active to help stop that guy in Washington, here's a group of people who are trying.

www.moveon.org

Give 'em a look.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 16 May 05 - 09:44 PM

Moveon.org is a good one, as are actforchange.org and truthout.org. All three do a good job of getting the information out to the people.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Kaleea
Date: 16 May 05 - 11:16 PM

knowledge suppresed? Bush?
Didn't I see on Letterman a Bush joke that's not a joke:
   
            "I have nothing to do with intelligence!"
                  . . .the current occupant of the oval office

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST,brucie
Date: 16 May 05 - 11:58 PM

I call it "The Enchanted Kingdom".

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST
Date: 17 May 05 - 10:39 PM

BTW,

I asked on another thread just how many nuclear weapons were still in the American arsenal. Just found the answer.

"On Nov. 13, 2001, President George W. Bush announced that he had told Russian President Vladimir Putin that the United States would reduce "operationally deployed nuclear warheads" from approximately 5,300 to a level between 1,700 and 2,200 over the next decade."

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 17 May 05 - 10:47 PM

It's not just Bush haters. Government scientists who were (and are) loyal Republicans are being stifled - much to their dismay - because their results don't fit the policy goals (sounds suspiciously like a certain Downing Street emeo doesn't it? - also suspiciously like the way science was done in the early Soviet Union). This is an extremely under-the-radar issue, but deadly serious. Check out the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS.org). While the neocons abuse science for political purposes (and gr$$d), China churns out 6 four times the scientists and engineers that the USA does per capita. Who will win in the long run?

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 May 05 - 08:17 PM

That famous 'prophet' said something about the Bear & the Eagle, did he say who would take over?

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 18 May 05 - 08:28 PM

If you have enough faith, you don't need knowledge.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Bobert
Date: 18 May 05 - 09:02 PM

Imagination is more important than knowledge... Einstein

Right (pun intended) now the US has neither...

Just dumb opinions that control public policy????

Yeah, we are doomed...

Bobert

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Amos
Date: 18 May 05 - 09:57 PM

The truly intelligent have faith without idols, certainty without icons, and knowledge without authoritarian doctrine.


Amos

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: SharonA
Date: 19 May 05 - 06:37 PM

That may be so, Amos, but it doesn't answer my question to you! Once again: Why bring up a report from November 2003 now? (And what, if anything, has changed since then for the better [yeah, right] or for the worse?)

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Amos
Date: 19 May 05 - 07:50 PM

SharonA:

Simple truth: I didn't notice the date.


A

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 19 May 05 - 09:39 PM

SharonA-
If nothing's changed, it's still relevant.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Peace
Date: 19 May 05 - 10:13 PM

Someday the lion will lie down with the lamb. But one of them won't get a very good night's sleep.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 May 05 - 07:03 AM

The Lion Sleeps Tonight!

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Boab
Date: 20 May 05 - 11:23 PM

Go easy on wee Georgie on this-----he's entitled to a level playing field, after all.

Subject: RE: Bush and the Suppression of Knowledge
From: Peace
Date: 20 May 05 - 11:26 PM

An intellectual level playing field for Georgie? Hell, that would require that he argue with a casaba.