In 1990 remarks to the National Academy of Science, the first President Bush said, “Science…relies on freedom of inquiry; one of the hallmarks of that freedom is objectivity. Now more than ever, on issues ranging from climate change to AIDS research to genetic engineering to food additives, government relies on the impartial perspective of science for guidance.” Ironically, there is significant evidence to show that the administration of Mr. Bush’s son is distorting the truths of scientific evidence for political gain.

Last month, the Union of Concerned Scientists issued a stinging report entitle “Scientific Integrity in Policymaking: An Investigation into the Bush Administration’s Misuse of Science.” The report was accompanied by a statement signed by some sixty leading scientists, including twenty Nobel laureates. The full text of the report can be viewed online at http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/index.html.

The lengthy report details disturbing examples of the misuse of scientific evidence. Most disturbing, however, are its conclusions:

“(1) There is a well-established pattern of suppression and distortion of scientific findings by high-ranking Bush administration political appointees across numerous federal agencies,

(2) There is strong documentation of a wide-ranging effort to manipulate the government’s scientific system to prevent the appearance of advice that might run counter to the administration’s political agenda,

(3) There is evidence that the administration often imposes restrictions on what government scientists can say or write about ‘sensitive’ topics,

(4) There is significant evidence that the scope and scale of the manipulation, suppression, and misrepresentation of science by the Bush administration is unprecedented.”

For an administration so obsessed with bringing “American ideals” and democracy to other countries, it seems that in the case of scientific policymaking, the Bush administration’s actions-censorship, distortion, misinformation-are distinctly anti-American.

Picking and choosing data that best supports policy positions is nothing new in politics, of course. But, as CBS News.com columnist Dick Meyer points out, “What’s different is that the Bush administration stands accused of politicizing and bullying processes of government that are designed to be above the fray of partisanship and ideology.”

Son needs to learn from Dad: scientific findings should be above politics. When Americans learn to distrust even the scientific agencies of their government, it is hard to know where they should turn for accurate information about health and the environment. The Bush administration’s manipulation trounces on fundamental notions of academic freedom and knowledge validation.

A few examples:

For years, anti-abortion activists have claimed that abortion increased the risk of breast cancer. These activists pushed for scare-tactic laws requiring doctors to inform abortion-seekers about this risk. For five months, the National Institute of Cancer’s website posted information that seemed to support the link, adding the legitimizing force of what Meyer accurately describes as “the nation’s premier clearinghouse of cancer science.” After an emergency three-day conference called by Congress, the information was pulled off the website: the link was not science, but politicized propaganda. Oops.

On the CDC’s webpages about HIV/AIDS, data about condom efficacy and studies showing that condom education did not increase sexual activity was replaced by scientifically-questionable abstinence information. The Union of Concerned Scientists’ report says, “When a source inside the CDC questioned the actions, she was told that the changes were directed by Bush administration officials.” Oops.

In an August 2001 address to the nation on stem-cell research, President Bush explained his compromise position: research on existing lines could continue, but no new lines could be used. He said, “As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist.” The Council on Bioethics, the formation of which President Bush announced in that very speech, recently concluded “By September of 2003, twelve of the eligible lines had become available to federally funded researchers.” That’s a difference of 48-scientifically significant by any accord. Oops.

Shortly after taking office, Mr. Bush pulled America out of the Kyoto treaty on global warming. Convinced that global warming was fake, he directed the National Academy of Sciences to look into the issue. Meyer reports, the National Academy “concluded that global climate was indeed changing because of man-made factors.” Too late-we were already out. Oops.

Washington University’s population is full of students, staff, and faculty concerned with and dedicated to the advancement of science. The Bush administration’s political manipulation of scientific data should be an affront to those on this campus investing their lives in scientific research. Scientists value truth, honesty and credibility-three things that, at least in scientific policy, President Bush lacks-no oops about it.

Popularity: unranked [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Friday, March 19th, 2004 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Forum. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.