RISK & SCIENCE STUDIES
RISK & SCIENCE STUDIES
|
|
Since first adopted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the 1970s to determine the toxicity of chemicals, government risk assessment practices now shape the entire regulatory landscape. Indeed, such practices now define the regulatory domain of not only the FDA, but of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and a host of other federal, state, and local government agencies. Unfortunately, the government's risk assessment practices too often depart from the scientific ideal. A recent EPA internal advisory group, for instance, reported that "EPA science is of uneven quality, and the agency’s policies and regulations are frequently perceived as lacking in strong scientific foundation." Moreover, the EPA recently admitted that its studies are frequently carried out "without the benefit of peer review or quality assurance" and that many of its risk assessment procedures are on "shaky scientific ground." Cato’s risk and science studies are devoted to the study of government risk assessment practices, their scientific validity, and their public policy impact. Goals include: (1) exposing questionable or 'junk' science; (2) illuminating the opportunity costs of resulting regulations; and (3) improving public understanding of real and imaginary risks. Cato Institute studies on risk and science include: Books: • Chemicals, Cancer, and Choices: Risk Reduction through Markets, 1999, by Peter VanDoren, Even with good scientific evidence, policy conflicts about exposure to chemicals will persist because those conflicts reflect differences in values and preferences. The market provides the sorting mechanism through which many of the conflicts may be reconciled. In the case of exposures that arise from the consumption of specific products, markets permit individuals to choose their level of exposure. Even when there is joint exposure to chemicals in the air, the creation of a market for emission rights would allow the cautious to purchase such rights and reduce their exposure. Emission rights also would allow firms to increase their pollution in return for compensating everyone else for increased risk. In short, the market affords individualized responses to chemical risk as an alternative to government-imposed rules for everyone. • Silencing Science, 1999, by Steven Milloy and Michael Gough. Science is responsible for much of the health and wealth we enjoy today, but not everyone is always happy with it. Science can get in the way of social and environmental activists, politicians, personal injury lawyers, government regulators and businesses. This is a tongue-in-cheek "how-to" book for the person annoyed by pesky science. The authors describe more than 20 efforts of individuals and organizations to stop science in its tracks through use of techniques ranging from defunding scientific research to quashing scientific debate to substituting "fake" science for "real" science. Their witty descriptions illuminate the mischief that has followed successful efforts and offer stark reminders of the risks that follow when science is silenced. • Science without Sense, 1995, by Steven J. Milloy, director of science policy studies at the National Environmental Policy Institute. Unscientific public health research costs U.S. consumers billions of dollars each year but does nothing to improve the well-being of Americans. To mock the sorry state of public health research, Cato published this book as a humorous, tongue-in-cheek guide to getting ahead in the field¾ without wasting time on real science. Milloy says he wrote the book to call attention to the weaknesses of public health research and to bring about much-needed improvements. • Haunted Housing: How Toxic Scare Stories Are Spooking the Public Out of House and Home, 1997, by Cassandra Chrones Moore, adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The phrase ‘home sweet home’ brings thoughts of tranquillity and safety. That’s misleading say various experts and federal regulatory agencies that warn about the dangers from asbestos, lead paint, radon, electromagnetic fields, and various other toxins in the home. This Cato Institute book reveals the flawed science that underlies these fears. Studies: • "Gambling America: Balancing the Risks of Gambling and Its Regulation," June 18, 1999, by Guy Calvert. • "The Increasing Sustainability of Conventional Energy," April 22, 1999, by Robert L. Bradley Jr. • "Cars, Cholera, and Cows: The Management of Risk and Uncertainty," March 4, 1999, by John Adams. • "Long Hot Year: Latest Science Debunks Global Warming Hysteria," December 31, 1998, by Patrick J. Michaels.
• "The Consequences of Kyoto," May 7, 1998, by Patrick J. Michaels.
• "Replace FDA Regulation of Medical Devices with Third-Party Certification," November 12, 1997, by Noel D. Campbell
• "EPA’s Cancer Risk Guidelines: Guidance to Nowhere," November 12, 1996, by Mike Gough and Steven J. Milloy.
• "Privatizing Superfund: How to Clean Up Hazardous Waste," December 18, 1995, by James V. DeLong.
• "Wrecking Ball: FDA Regulation of Medical Devices," August 7, 1995, by Robert Higgs. Events: • "Science on Trial," a Policy Forum with Marcia Angell, M.D., executive editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and author of Science on Trial. One to two million American women have had breast implants, and in 1990 over 90 percent said they were pleased with the results. Now, more than 450,000 women are suing implant manufacturers. Angell discussed the flimsy evidence about alleged health effects of implants, the profit motives of manufacturers, the background to and consequences of FDA Commissioner David Kessler’s decision to ban silicone-gel implants, the temptation of ‘free money’ for plaintiffs, and the attempts to silence or discredit medical researchers. • "The Risky Business of Public Health Research," a Policy Forum featuring Steven Milloy, director of the National Environmental Policy Institute, and Jonathan Samet, chairman, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University. Milloy discussed his new book, Science without Sense, a biting critique of the misapplications of techniques and results of epidemiology, statistics, and toxicology. Samet responded to Milloy’s description of the misuse of epidemiology and related disciplines and offered a spirited defense of science properly understood and used. Articles: • "The Decade of 'Junk Science'," May 10, 1999, by Doug Bandow. • "Scaring Consumers Away from Good Health," August 28, 1998, by Alex Avery. • "EPA Uses UN Agencies to Overcome US Scientific Review," August 20, 1998, by Michael Gough. • "Where's the News About Cancer Rates?" April 22, 1998, by Michael Gough and Peter VanDoren. • "Trying to Put the Brakes on Junk Science," March 26, 1998, by Doug Bandow. • "Science, Salamanders and Political Correctness," February 18, 1998, by Michael Gough. • "An Empty Uniform," February 13, 1998, by Michael Gough. • "Show Caution on Cloning Regulation," January 22, 1998, by Michael Gough. • "Does the Federal Government
Have a Monopoly on Science?" January 14, 1998, by Aaron Steelman.
|
