Environmental Protection Agency Drains All Funding from Scores of Long-term Studies on Children’s Health
Would it be helpful to know the effects of pesticides and other toxic chemicals on developing bodies and minds? Well, that’s a moot point, because studies that would provide insight here, some spanning decades, have now been defunded by the Trump EPA. Such long-term studies are considered to be the “holy grail of health care science.”
From this article: Many environmental-health researchers see the EPA’s decision to cut funding for the children’s centres as part of a push by President Donald Trump’s administration to undermine science at the agency, which is responsible for the safety of US air and water. “It works out perfectly for industry,” says Tracey Woodruff, who runs the children’s centre at the University of California, San Francisco. When weighing the harms of a chemical against its benefits, she says, “if EPA doesn’t know, it counts for zero”.
If this finger pointing seems cynical or out of line, ask yourself if there’s another possible motive. We hate children? No, we love children, but we love money more, and driving science out of the equation is the only way to make more of it. Science and profits are inversely proportional. S=k/P, as we would say in algebra.
Craig,
You’re right, judging by the responses, no one really seems to care.
Oppositions to the funding cuts seems to consist of three separate groups.
1) Just hate any proposal by President Trump.
2) Believers in “Big Government”. All those employed or funded by taxpayer money and regard it as a mission to destroy ‘evil’ corporations and American industry.
3) Vested interest. All those employed in government funded programs, research etc.
Of course, the problem is not as simple as the protagonists on both sides argue.
The debate is not helped by the emotive language and ideological agenda pursued by both sides.
Governments don’t have bottomless pockets and unlimited resources. The scope for research is boundless. This is especially true when the object of the research is rooted in a political or ideological basis.
On the other hand, governments are charged with protecting public safety and ensuring the public weal.
To do so administrations need to sponsor competent, unbiased and unfettered research in order to provide a rational and responsible basis upon which to formulate monitoring and regulatory policies.
Under President Obama the EPA was encouraged to spend taxpayer money to pursue political/ideological pogroms against commerce and industry.
President Trump intends to remove that agenda and atmosphere. The EPA is after all, a Federal Government Agency and should be free of political or ideological bias.
Yet, the President and Cabinet must not “throw the baby out with the bathwater”. The EPA has an important mission to fulfill in US society.
The EPA must learn to conduct research and regulatory duties without a political or ideological bias, while the administration must equally provide the funding and leadership to ensure the EPA is both efficient and effective.