Promoted by Steven D. This is a very important issue (if somewhat under the radar) because its impact will have direct effects on anyone who lives within the United States. Public health, food and drug quality, environmental assessments, etc. will be affected (for the worse) if the OMB is allow to “dumb down” its risk assessment process. Kudos to Knoxville Progressive for spotting this story. I suggest you send the link to your representatives in Congress or phone them directly. I doubt many of them are even aware that this revision of the federal government’s risk assessment process is taking place.
Because trust me, the battle is not over. OMB will still try to get revised risk assessment rules passed, and we need Congressional members to send the OMB a few letters letting them know they disapprove of what the OMB is trying to pull. Links for contact info are here, here, (Senators) or call the central number of the House of Representatives at (202) 224-3121 and they will put you through to your Representative’s office directly. I just called that number myself, spoke to a staffer for my Congressman (a Republican in my case, but don’t let that stop you), and was thanked for reporting this story.
OMB Slapped Down by Scientific Review Board
The Office of Management and Budget has had its proposed revisions to the processes by which the government conducts risk assessments given a failing grade, and returned for a total rewrite, not just revisions to address comments. In unusually blunt language for scientists, the National Research Council called the plan “fundamentally flawed.” The OMB had proposed the revisions in order to “to enhance the technical quality and objectivity of risk assessments prepared by federal agencies by establishing uniform, minimum standards.”
The juicy details are below the fold…
“We began our review of the draft bulletin thinking we would only be recommending changes, but the more we dug into it, the more we realized that from a scientific and technical standpoint, it should be withdrawn altogether,” John F. Ahearne, chair of the committee that wrote the report, said in a statement.
Ahearne is director of the ethics program at Sigma Xi, the scientific research society, based in Research Triangle Park, NC.
Among the complaints:
· The guidelines do not even consider engineering risks such as might be found at NASA or DOE, or ecological risks to only focus on human health risks, such as might occur in the drug approval process or potential restrictions on pollution. The bulletin’s “incomplete and unbalanced approach to engineering, ecological, and other types of risk assessments” contradicts its stated objective of improving the quality of risk assessment throughout the federal government, the committee added.
· OMB defined an adverse health effect as something than is clinically diagnosed. That ignores a basic public health goal to control exposures before they cause physical damage.
· The bulletin attempts to move standards for risk assessment into “territory beyond what previous reports have recommended and beyond the current state of the science.”
· OMB’s definition of risk assessment is too broad and in conflict with long-established concepts and practices.
· The bulletin gives little attention to the integral role of risk communication, the importance of default assumptions in conducting risk assessments, and the risks faced by sensitive populations, such as children and pregnant women.
· The committee concluded that the potential for negative impacts on the practice of risk assessment in the federal government would be very high.
OMB tried to put a good face on the slap down, but you know this must have gone down like biting a green persimmon:
The Office of Management and Budget said it will not finalize its original proposal after the independent National Research Council called the plan “fundamentally flawed.”
Steven Aitken, acting administrator for OMB’s office of information and regulatory affairs, said his agency will study the report as well as comments from the public and other government offices and will “seek to develop improved guidance for risk assessment.”
Aitken said OMB is pleased that the Research Council agreed on the need to improve the quality of risk assessments, and takes very seriously the panel’s criticism of the original plan. OMB had asked the council to review the proposed standards, which it issued last January.
Just another skirmish in the war to bring sanity back to America. But it’s nice to have the tide turning in our favor…
Office of Management and Budget
