Destruction of Science

[Guest guest]

More on the hideous and heady combination of greed and psycho fundy

ideology combining and overlapping to help destroy science in the US

government.

W. Bush, Cheney and his administration are perhaps the single

worst, most vile administraiton, full of hypocrisy, ignorance, greed,

stupidity, venality and hate that conspire to make the world more

dangerous, more disrespectful of the United States and have managed to do

more to rob, steal, cheat and kill to obtain their misguided, violent and

poorly executed goals.

The story below is about the EPA and FDA. Much criticism can be leveled

at the CDC, NASA, NIH and other institutions where science and evidence

are ignored in favor of these sick, murderous ideologies.

M.

**

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080706O.shtml

The Political Corruption of Science

By Gene C. Gerard

t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Monday 07 August 2006

Unions representing thousands of scientists and other

specialists employed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

recently complained that EPA officials are ignoring science. The unions

indicated that agency administrators are allowing numerous toxic

substances to be used in agricultural pesticides. This revelation comes

on the heels of a survey of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scientists

which found that the agency has become so political that it's no longer

protecting public safety. While all presidential administrations, by

their very nature, are political, it's increasingly clear that the Bush

administration is using politics to corrupt science.

Nine unions comprised of 9,000 EPA scientists

maintained that multiple agricultural pesticides are dangerous for

pregnant women, children, and the elderly. In a letter to EPA

administrator L. , union leaders indicated that agency

officials seem to believe that " the concerns of agriculture and the

pesticide industry come before our responsibility to protect the health

of our nation's citizens. " An EPA scientist warned that the agency

often ignores scientific studies that disagree with industry-funded

studies. This isn't surprising, given that the EPA's own inspector

general acknowledged earlier this year that the agency had failed to

protect children from pesticide exposure.

Late last month, the Union of Concerned Scientists

released the disturbing results of its survey of FDA scientists. The

survey was sent to almost 6,000 FDA scientists, of whom about one-fifth

responded. The responses revealed that 20 percent had been asked

explicitly by FDA administrators to provide incomplete, inaccurate or

misleading information to the public. And 60 percent of the scientists

reported that commercial interests have inappropriately induced or

attempted to induce the reversal, withdrawal or modification of FDA

actions.

Almost 20 percent of FDA scientists in the survey

indicated that they had been asked, for non-scientific reasons, to

inappropriately exclude or alter technical information or conclusions in

a scientific document. There was ample evidence of this in 2004 when the

FDA prevented an agency scientist from publicly criticizing

antidepressants. In February of that year agency officials prevented Dr.

Mosholder from testifying at a public hearing on the increased

risk of suicide among children who take antidepressants.

Dr. Mosholder conducted an FDA review of 22 studies on

children and antidepressant medication. He concluded that these children

were twice as likely to become suicidal. After being slated to present

his findings at a public hearing, FDA officials removed him from the

agenda. In the fall of 2004, a Congressional committee discovered that

agency administrators forced Dr. Mosholder to delete data regarding the

risks of antidepressants from documents he submitted to Congress.

Essentially, FDA officials put the health and safety of America's

children at risk by promoting the interests of the pharmaceutical

industry. But that shouldn't be shocking, given that drug makers spent

$158 million in 2004 to lobby the Bush administration, according to the

Center for Responsive Politics.

Almost half of the FDA scientists in the survey

indicated that the agency isn't effectively protecting public health. The

FDA's involvement in the now discredited drug Vioxx is glaring proof of

this. Dr. Graham, the associate director of the FDA Office of Drug

Safety, complained in 2004 that officials attempted to suppress the

results of his study on Vioxx. He found that as many as 139,000 people

had suffered heart attacks or strokes and approximately 55,000 people

died as a result of taking the drug.

Ironically, late in 2004 the manufacturer of Vioxx,

Merck, removed the drug from the marketplace after clinical studies

demonstrated an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. According to

Dr. Graham, the FDA is " virtually incapable of protecting

America. " Merck made almost half a million dollars in political

contributions in 2004, with 70 percent going into Republican coffers. It

seems likely that the FDA's actions toward Vioxx were attributable to

politics.

More than half of the agency's scientists who

participated in the survey reported that the FDA doesn't routinely

provide complete and accurate information to the public. The agency was

certainly guilty of this concerning its involvement with the drug Ketek.

In 2001 an FDA panel recommended its approval to treat pneumonia,

although the panel had concerns about potential liver damage.

Consequently, the drug's manufacturer, Sanofi-Aventis, agreed to conduct

a study of the drug's effect on the liver. It was later discovered that

the study was fraudulent.

However, FDA officials continued to cite the study as

proof that Ketek was safe, and in 2004 the drug was approved. Earlier

this year, the agency's Office of Drug Safety found 110 cases of liver

problems related to Ketek, including cases of liver failure and death,

and recommended that it be withdrawn from the market. And agency

scientists estimated that the drug caused liver failure at approximately

four times the rate of other antibiotics. Despite all these warnings, FDA

administrators approved of clinical trials using the drug on children as

young as six months old.

The complaints of scientists at both the EPA and the

FDA are serious and troubling. And there seems to be little doubt that

their accusations are valid. The Bush administration is consistently

placing political and industry interests ahead of sound science. As a

result, the health, safety and welfare of the nation are being

compromised.

--------

Gene C. Gerard has taught history, religion, and

ethics for 14 years at several colleges in the Southwest, and is a

contributing author of the forthcoming book Americans at War, to

be published by Greenwood Press. He writes a political blog for the world

news web site OrbStandardt

www.orbstandard.com/GGerard.

-------