Scientific Studies and the EPA

by Julia Venturelli

 

This article explains new rules that will significantly change the role of the EPA. Scott Pruitt leading the agency announced a new set of standards when the EPA purposes new policies. This new change is that they are restricting the use of scientific studies. These are the studies that they use as data when conducting research in order to have evidence of why we need certain policies. Science is fundamental to the EPA so taking it away would leave the EPA powerless. This may be exactly what the Trump Administration wants, a powerless EPA. They say the reason for this change is so that the public could be able to see the certain studies that are being conducted in live time and making the organization “transparent”. Making it available to the public causes issues because the article explains that “much research relies on confidential health data from study subjects”. This type of regulation on the EPA is going to gridlock them and the studies that they will conduct will not be the cutting edge recent debate topics that the public wants. They will be the watered-down version of things that people either do not care about or things that there is already knowledge about. The Trump administration is really tarnishing the EPA and completely destroying any power that they once had. What do you think about these new regulations?

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Scientific Studies and the EPA

  1. Although this comes as no surprise, it still aggravates me. They make science sounds like an intangible asset, like culture or religion. It’s science. It’s the truth, not something that allows different perspectives. Taking it away from the public and showing and conducting your own falsified research is like propaganda. What the Trump administration and Pruitt are trying to accomplish is business profit and job security. There are many experts in the field who can find the most cost-effective way, while also sticking to environmental policy. The EPA should hire more of those experts. The U.S.A. has been innovative and prosperous before, we should be able to find a way to be profitable without being the second biggest polluter in the world.

  2. Reading that they are discontinuing scientific study is very displeasing. The EPA is definitely going to be effected negatively, and it is going to make the future of the EPA very difficult to predict. It’s not surprising that they would allow this because when there is an entire executive administration that is against environmental protection, it is not surprising.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s