Ominous News From Dr. Dana Loomis, NIOSH Study Section
Click
Here to Add Comment Subject:
Ominous News From Dr. Dana Loomis, NIOSH Study Section
Date:
Sat, 2 Nov 2002 07:30:46 -0500
From:
Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State of California, Department of Pesticide
Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
This is a note from Dana Loomis, chair of the NIOSH Study Section, the panel that advises NIOSH on extramural research funding. It is circulated with Dr. Loomis's permission: [Also please see the Science editorial cited at the end of the note.]
I have disturbing news to share concerning the process of scientific review on which much of our professional work depends. When the Bush administration took office, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson announced that he wanted to review the membership of the department's many advisory boards and committees and that nominations for membership on those panels would be frozen until his review was completed. The committees that advise the government on such politically-charged issues as genetic testing seemed to be the primary targets, but some study sections, which are also advisory committees under Federal law, were caught up in the process, as well.
I am Chair of one of the affected study sections, which reviews research grant proposals submitted to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and other agencies. Two years of inaction on nominations for membership have complicated our work, but although Secretary Thompson has been criticized for his handling of other advisory committees (1), it was assumed that study sections, which are charged rather narrowly with advising Federal agencies on the scientific merit of proposed research projects, would eventually be allowed to continue with business as usual.
This assumption has proven to be incorrect. Secretary Thompson's office has finally begun to act on the frozen appointments and sent word this week that three of the six candidates nominated in 2001 for permanent membership would not be confirmed. The rejected nominees are established scientists who had already served as temporary members for some time and whose qualifications had been duly reviewed and approved at every other level. The Secretary's office declined to give reasons for its decision, but they seem ominously clear in at least one case: one of the rejected nominees is an expert in ergonomics who has publicly supported a workplace ergonomics standard.
It is not clear how such views could affect Federal policy, except through a convoluted pathway in which a reviewer might favor a proposed project whose results, when the project was completed, could eventually be cited in support of a standard. But that is beside the point. In contrast to policy advisory boards, where the potential for political conflict is recognized and members are supposed to represent a range of views, study section members are selected for their qualifications as researchers and may not consider the relevance of the projects they review to specific government policies or agendas.
This level of political interference with study sections is a troubling precedent for researchers who have served on these panels or rely on them for fair, expert reviews. I am not aware of the membership of other NIH study sections having been manipulated, but many aspects of human biology and medicine are controversial, and there is no assurance the same approach will not be extended into other areas of research. If you believe that the integrity of the scientific review process should be protected, I urge you to express your views through appropriate channels.
Dana Loomis, PhD
Professor of Epidemiology,
University of North Carolina
Chair, Safety and Occupational Health Study Section
Reference
1. Michaels D, Bingham E, Boden L, Clapp R, Goldman LR, Hoppin P, et al.
Advice without Dissent. Science 2002;298:703 (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/298/5594/703)
David F. Goldsmith, MSPH, PhD
Associate Research Professor Department of Environmental & Occupational Health
George Washington University
2300 K Street NW, Suite 201
Washington DC 20037 USA
Tel: 202-994-1734
fax 202-994-0011
cell: 202-549-1019
email: eohdfg@gwumc.edu
website:
http://www.OccupationalEpi.com
Remember to vote Tuesday! Stephen L. Tvedten
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com.