permaculture

[Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jonathan Latham <jrlatham@bioscienceresource.org>
Date: Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 9:41 AM
Subject: [SANET-MG] USDA JUSTIFIES SCIENTIFIC SUPPRESSION
To: GMOList List <gmolist@googlegroups.com>,
divfarmingsystems@lists.berkeley.edu, sanet-mg@googlegroups.com,
healthy_debate@lists.umn.edu, Science for the People Discussion List <
SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@list.uvm.edu>, CHE Science List <
chescience@lists.healthandenvironment.org>


Remarkable.
Jonathan
USDA JUSTIFIES SCIENTIFIC SUPPRESSION AS ITS POLICY

Confidential Agency Panel Approves Censorship and Media Gag Orders

Posted on Feb 29, 2016 | Tags: Scientific Integrity
<http://www.peer.org/news/tags.html?news-tags=scientific-integrity>, USDA
<http://www.peer.org/news/tags.html?news-tags=usda>

------------------------------

Washington, DC — Under its policy purporting to protect scientific
integrity, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is entitled to do just the
opposite, according to confidential findings by an internal agency panel
released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
The panel rejected a complaint by one of its top entomologists that USDA
purged controversial findings, blocked publication of research papers with
policy implications, and forbade scientists from being interviewed by
reporters.

These conclusions come from a report by a five-member “Scientific Integrity
Review Panel” convened to review the dismissal of a complaint filed by Dr.
Jonathan Lundgren, a Senior Research Entomologist and Lab Supervisor for
the USDA Agriculture Research Service based in South Dakota who has
published research about adverse effects on monarch butterflies from
widely-used neonicotinoid insecticides (or “neonics”). The panel agreed
that Dr. Lundgren’s complaint should not be pursued because –

   - The panel was told that charges of “reprisal” and retaliatory
   investigations were outside the scope of its review;
   - The panel found that USDA is entitled to prohibit scientists from
   speaking with reporters or even answering questions at conferences about
   the significance or ramifications of published studies; and
   - USDA’s Scientific Integrity Policy explicitly authorizes it to block
   publication of research containing “statements that could be construed as
   being judgments of or recommendations on USDA or any other federal
   government policy.”

“This review confirms that what occurs inside USDA does not resemble what
anyone else would consider ‘scientific integrity,’” stated Jeff Ruch,
Executive Director of PEER which is suing USDA for its refusal to even
consider a rulemaking petition seeking to strengthen the agency’s
Scientific Integrity Policy. “Inside USDA, politics determines what
scientific work will see the light of day.”

On February 12th, USDA Inspector General Phyllis Fong announced that her
office had opened an investigation into a “significant volume” of
complaints by agency scientists about censorship and interference with
research on subjects that USDA upper management deemed sensitive.

The review panel report on the Lundgren complaint arises out of the first
appeal of any USDA scientific integrity complaint. Dr. Lundgren filed his
formal scientific integrity complaint in September of 2014. One month
later, it was rejected as not even meriting an investigation. Dr. Lundgren
immediately appealed but since USDA had never received an appeal on a
scientific integrity complaint decision, the agency took an entire year to
determine how to handle it. Yet under the guidelines finally developed –

   - The panel does not investigate the complaint but instead simply
   reviews materials provided by agency management. In this case, no panel
   member even attempted to speak with Dr. Lundgren or any of the witnesses he
   identified;
   - There is no process for remedying any alleged scientific misconduct if
   it is ever confirmed; and
   - The panel findings are confidential and USDA will not release them
   under the Freedom of Information Act by maintaining that even final reports
   are “deliberative.”

“How will public confidence in the integrity of USDA science be enhanced
when all of the reviews are kept secret?” asked Ruch, noting that a stated
objective of the policy is to “ensure public confidence.” “Given how this
complaint was handled, no wonder scientific integrity lapses inside USDA
are never resolved and simply fester. Something now unmistakably clear is
that no scientist in their right mind should report political manipulation
of science inside USDA.”


###

Read the Scientific Integrity Review Panel report and approvals
<http://www.peer.org/assets/docs/usda/2_29_16_SIRP_report.pdf>

See ruling that reprisal is outside the scope of USDA Scientific Integrity
Policy
<http://www.peer.org/assets/docs/usda/2_29_16_Ruling_Reprisal_Outside_Scope.pdf>

Examine USDA scientific integrity appeal guidelines
<http://www.peer.org/assets/docs/usda/2_29_16_Appeal_Guidelines.pdf>

View transmittal letter to Dr. Lundgren asking him to keep it confidential
<http://www.peer.org/assets/docs/usda/2_29_16_Lundgren_transmittal_ltr.pdf>

Look at Dr. Lundgren’s scientific integrity and whistleblower complaints
<http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/usda-scientist-punished-for-pollinator-research.html>

Revisit USDA refusal to consider strengthening its scientific integrity
policy
<http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/usda-sued-to-end-scientific-censorship.html>
Jonathan Latham, PhD
Executive Director
The Bioscience Resource Project
Ithaca, NY 14850 USA

www.independentsciencenews.org
and
www.bioscienceresource.org

jrlatham@bioscienceresource.org
Skype: jonathanlatham2
Tel: 1-607-319-0279

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits
and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic
society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society
constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of
our country.”—Edward Bernays, Propaganda

-- 
Lawrence F. London
lfljvenaura@gmail.com
https://sites.google.com/site/avantgeared/