Sidelining Science

Without Regard to Public Health and Safety

Disclaimer: This post was written by Dr. Andrew Rosenberg in his personal capacity and not on behalf of any organization or entity. The views expressed herein are those of the author alone.

The Trump Administration has seemingly adopted the sidelining of science as a core operating principle. Two egregious examples in this week’s news are emblematic of the extent to which this administration actively regards scientific research and evidence as a hindrance to their policies rather than a critical input.

The Washington Post reported that the scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were ignored in the recent overhaul of the childhood vaccine schedule. The Post reported that, “That process to alter vaccine recommendations, they [CDC scientists] and several former health officials said, did not include extensive consultation with the agency’s subject matter experts or the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel that is usually done.” In other words, it was a wholly political decision with no regard for the scientific evidence.

It was also reported that, “Trump administration health officials said the revised schedule more closely resembles recommendations in other high-income countries and would build trust with Americans who think their children are getting too many shots…”. Of course, the officials didn’t note that they and the Secretary of Health and Human Services have aggressively worked to persuade Americans that their children are getting too many shots despite the scientific evidence to the contrary. Tautology is not dead, in case you were wondering.

The EPA Jumps on This Week’s Sidelining Bandwagon

Not to be left out, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to do all they can to ignore the science on chemical safety. After all, it is only one of their core responsibilities in protecting the public. ProPublica reports the EPA is considering adopting a position pushed by chemical companies that the agency does not have the authority to place new restrictions on air pollution once an initial decision has been made, regardless of new evidence as to the potential harm and public health effects of the pollutant. Even writing that sentence seems nonsensical to me.

The implication is straightforward. Scientific evidence that could protect people’s health and safety can only be used once like a Kleenex. New evidence should be ignored. The case in point for this particular sidelining action is restrictions on the use of ethylene oxide for sterilizing medical equipment and in other chemical processes. Prior to 2016, this chemical wasn’t considered as a major dangerous pollutant. It should be noted that the facilities that emit ethylene oxide are largely located in black communities or communities of color as is the case with many chemical facilities. New evidence emerged that ethylene oxide was far more dangerous than previously thought and in 2024 greater restrictions were placed on it’s use. Those restrictions were delayed by the Trump Administration already to allow for a slower transition by industry (apparently 10 years was too fast).

The EPA now is considering adopting the position that the restrictions that are on hold rely on new scientific evidence and that they don’t have the authority to use new evidence. Since the industry complied with the previous, weak, standards there is no problem. Except of course for the increased cancer risk for the people exposed to the pollutant.

Sidelining as a Principle

These two cases from two different agencies rely on the same essential approach by this administration. In the Trump Administration science will not be allowed to influence public policy. Danger to the public be damned.

That’s it for today - Thank you so much for reading SciLight!

If you enjoyed today’s post, please like it or share it with others. You can also support the work we do to shine a light on the politicization of science by becoming a paid subscriber!

If you want to share today’s post as a web page with your network, click this button:

If you have suggestions, questions, comments, or want to drop us a line - send it all to scilightsubstack@gmail.com