criminal science fraud

[ttweed@wildrockies.org (Tony Tweedale)]

today's excercise: amongst the crimes alleged here, spot the one that could
only be tried as a criminal violation (I believe).  this  e.n.s. summary is
very precise and jam-packed with info; a must read.

fyi, the WSJ article was  on p. B5 of 1 oct. '96.       -tony tweedale


From: Joe Toth  Newsgroups: sci.environment     Date: 20 Oct 1996 14:11:13 -0700

Cal-EPA Scientists Face Censorship

SACRAMENTO, October 17 (ENS) - The scientific community of the California
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is in a state of
turmoil. An elite cadre of politically appointed managers is forcing the
scientific staff to produce results consistent solely with the conservative
agenda of the current Republican administration. An internal memo, issued
last spring, tells employees to destroy research records that are not in
harmony with administrative decisions.

The supervisors even censor dialogue among collaborating scientists.
Members of the scientific branch claim results of critical scientific
research, directly affecting the health of California citizens, are being
altered, destroyed, delayed or suppressed by the management staff at OEHHA,
a division of the state廣 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

According to scientists working within the OEHHA, since the appointment of
Dr. Richard Becker by Governor Pete Wilson廣 administration in September of
this year, every subsequent document produced by the department has had to
pass a test of political correctness. In the opinion of the scientific
staff in both Berkeley and Sacramento this policy has far exceeded its
stated intent, "to insure good science".

Dr. Becker has been portrayed by members of the scientific team as rude and
abusive to his managers and staff. He is seen as ignoring all input
contrary to his preconceptions. In his appointment speech, Dr. Becker
emphasized the need to prevent any public analyses, a move that keeps the
epidemiologists from doing their jobs of informing the public, and abandons
several legislative mandates as well.

Sources within the OEHHA say the morale of the scientific members of OEHHA
has sunk to the point that, according to a scientist who wished to remain
anonymous, "We suspect that Dr. Becker may have been appointed to kill the
organization and prohibit it from doing anything so that it can be
abolished. This would be entirely consistent with Governor Wilson廣 recent
actions to eliminate other consumer protection groups."

At the beginning of Dr. Becker廣 tenure he launched the Document Retention
Policy that required destruction of all data produced that was in
contradistinction to political positions. Protests from the California
First Amendment Coalition, a free-expression watchdog group, have erupted
over blanket destruction of scientific research papers. Terry Francke,
director of the group said, "What you have is an overlapping of the domains
of science and politics, and politics is winning."

The memo instituting the Document Retention Policy, issued by the OEHHA,
directed employees to destroy files that were in disagreement with
management廣 political views. In addition, the memo required that
scientists working on projects not discuss their findings until management
had "reviewed" their work. Under the new policy, all memos and preliminary
findings must pass before censors prior to being sent elsewhere.

Kristen Haynie, spokeswoman for the California Association of Professional
Scientists, the labor union representing the scientific workers in OEHHA,
stated that a memo, written to her by one of the scientists, "was
intercepted by management and sent to the press," presumably to discredit
the dissenting scientist. In the memo Doctor Robert Howd stated,
"Controlling the right of scientists to decide what will be useful later
would attack our professionalism, our honor and the scientific process
itself."

Since this memo was leaked to the Wall Street Journal, meetings have taken
place to abandon the Document Retention Policy. However, public relations
professionals have been implanted into the system to make certain that
language in scientific research still meets political criteria. During a
recent meeting, Deputy Director of Scientific Affairs, Dr. William Vance
tried to reach an agreement with the scientific staff, stating that, "I
believe I used poor judgment" in signing the (Document Retention) policy
into effect. Although he issued a "clean slate" approach in the future, all
that has happened so far is that new censors have been positioned close to
all research project members.

During the siege at OEHHA three important studies have been impacted:

TAMOXIFEN
Research on tamoxifen, a breast cancer drug, has shown that when the drug
is administered it can frequently cause cancer, as well as act as a
preventative. Sources say certain, "potentially embarrassing records on the
Proposition 65 hassle over tamoxifen" regarding the drug廣 propensity to
cause cancer were destroyed by a staff worker in the management sector, who
was, according to one manager, "working on his/her own".

Research documents clearly indicated a high risk of breast cancer for
participants in a study among people initially free of breast cancer who
were being given tamoxifen as part of the study. A review board agreed with
the findings and directed OEHHA to post the results according to procedure.
Tamoxifen was to be listed as a carcinogen, as required by Proposition 65,
a California law. When the manufacturer of tamoxifen protested these
findings, the entire listing process was suspended by OEHHA management,
"rather than offend the drug company," said a scientist working with OEHHA.
At this time persons without breast cancer are still being given the drug
in a large clinical trial.

IS LEAD A POISON OR NOT?
The second case of interference was insistence by the installed censor,
whose position is handling public relations for CAL/EPA, and who has no
scientific expertise, that lead should not be tagged with the word
"poison". However, research indicates that lead doses in "drinking water
near the statistical effect threshold for IQ decreases in children and
blood pressure increases in adults" does, in fact, qualify as "poisoning"
according to a scientist who worked on the project. However, Cal-EPA's
public relations person was adamant that the word poison must be removed
from any reports that indicated the public might be at risk.

LOMPOC'S CANCER
When studies in Lompoc, California revealed high cancer rates among
residents directly adjacent to agricultural areas, the supervisor of the
scientists responsible for these findings received a written query from Dr.
Becker asking, "Why did he (a particular scientist) do such a poor job on
the cancer analysis for the Lompoc cancer and birth defects report?"
Because the comparative data showed central city residents with a much
lower rate of sickness, a memo from Dr. Becker was inserted into the
official research papers that indicated the discrepancy was due to "higher
elevations," a factor not valid in the study.

Every year members of the OEHHA scientific community participate in an
off-site informal meeting and picnic. In years past these gatherings have
been focused on "discussion of policies, directions and a review of
progress" amongst the staff. The meeting is typically infused with a spirit
of "camaraderie". This year during the entire meeting, attended by 70 or 80
members, no comments were allowed from the floor at all. There were no
discussion periods and no request for staff input. Instead, Dr. Becker
addressed the scientists telling them, "Here廣 what management is doing for
you and where we廝e going."

At this time the scientists have taken refuge in their work and are trying
to get the message out to the public that something is very wrong at OEHHA.
Meanwhile, management has continued censorship of research papers as well
as speech among colleagues. Travel, training and equipment budgets have
been slashed and individuals have been forced to transfer to other
facilities. At the same time the administrative staff has been enlarged.
Further reduction in the number of scientists seems to be a goal of
management, since "overstaffing" announcements have been issued by the
administrative leader, Olga Martin-Steele in recent days.

Posted to the web: Fri Oct 18 13:09:50 EDT 1996

The Environment News Service http://www.envirolink.org/environews/enews.html


Tony Tweedale                   || "I'm not going to get involved in any of
Bx 7941                           || that  peer-reviewed mumbo-jumbo."
Missoula, MT 59807     	||           -Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA)
406-542-1709,            ||
fax 728-0867                 ||
ttweed@wildrockies.org   || " 'Are the people being protected?'
			                                    ||   is too narrow a question."
 	                                     	||       -API lobbyists meeting,
12/12/96
              		                        ||
------------------|| "A species becomes extinct every 20 sec's.
Surely one must come into existence every 20 sec's?"
        	-Rep. Helen Chenowith (R-ID)