| Ilena Rose 2006-08-30, 4:33 pm |
| LOL ... Jeff Utz, altho somehow made it thru Med School ... he was
never allowed to practice medicine with an unrestricted license ...
despite this, he has falsely claimed to be a Pediatrician (Kids Doc)
on Usenet for years ... while promoting the Vaccination Propaganda of
the vast Vac Industry.
"Peer review" is recognized as being Pro-Industry ... far from
unbiased ...just like Utz & his ilk.
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1615
EXCERPT:
The blatant pro-industry bias of OMB’s peer review panel selection
criteria is staggering.
Public Citizen Criticizes White House Plan to Impose Peer Review on
Agency Information, Increase Secrecy, Stymie Important Public
Protections
OMB Proposal Would Increase Pro-Industry Bias in Government
Decision-Making and Delay or Derail Needed Health, Safety and
Environmental Protections
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A proposal issued by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) would effectively give regulated industries such as
utilities and chemical manufacturers the ability to block federal
agencies from implementing important safeguards or making critical
information about hazards available to the public, Public Citizen said
in comments filed with the agency last week. The proposal would bar
federal agencies from using scientific data, or releasing it to the
public, unless the information has first gone through a cumbersome and
industry-favored "peer review" process.
Other groups that have filed comments opposing the proposed bulletin
include the Federation of American Scientists, the American Public
Health Association, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the
Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, OMB Watch,
the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Center for Progressive
Regulation and members of Congress.
"Requiring outside peer review of all scientific data prepared by or
used by government agencies is an impossibility, and is wasteful and
unauthorized," said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook. "This
proposal is a red herring designed to stymie government decisions,
keep information secret from the public, and introduce potentially
massive costs and delays into the regulatory process."
Public Citizen has a long history of involvement in regulatory
activities at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, among other agencies. In its detailed
critique of the proposal, Public Citizen highlighted some of the many
flaws in the proposal, including:
OMB has not produced a single example of flawed government science
that would have benefited from peer review, but proposes sweeping new
requirements.
The blatant pro-industry bias of OMB’s peer review panel selection
criteria is staggering. All academic scientists whose universities
receive federal funding are labeled as having "conflicts of interest,"
but scientists employed by regulated industries are not, unless they
actually work on the specific issue under review. The result will be
panels stacked with pro-industry scientists sitting in judgment on
government science.
The mandatory review and comment periods imposed by the bulletin will
bog agencies down to the point of ossification and lay the groundwork
for challenges by regulated industries at the end of the process.
"Permit applications" are exempt from the scope of the bulletin. In
other words, when industry wants a government agency like the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, or FDA to grant permission for a business activity,
science doesn’t have to be peer reviewed under the proposal. But when
the government is considering imposing limits on industry for the
protection of the public, it does.
Control over release of information to the public in the event of a
public health emergency is transferred away from health, safety and
environmental officials and into the hands of OMB. This makes explicit
a power that OMB has already exercised behind the scenes. According to
a December 29, 2002 article by Andrew Schneider in the St. Louis
Post-Dispatch, "White House Office Blocked EPA’s Asbestos Plan," OMB
prevented the EPA from declaring a public health emergency and issuing
a national warning about Zonolite insulation, which contains highly
carcinogenic asbestos fibers. (Click here to view the newspaper
article and Public Citizen’s letter to OMB.)
In joint comments, the Association of American Medical Colleges and
the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, with
105,000 and 60,000 members respectively, described the proposal as
effectively creating a "receivership regime" and deplored its "likely
interference with timely, responsible public health announcements to
the detriment of the public weal." Click here to view those comments.
###
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|