Whose science? A new era in regulatory “science wars”

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  09 Nov 2018:
Vol. 362, Issue 6415, pp. 636-639
DOI: 10.1126/science.aau3205

You are currently viewing the summary.

View Full Text

Log in to view the full text

Log in through your institution

Log in through your institution


Good laws need good science; however, good science is never guaranteed. Debate over the use of science in law is nearly as old as the laws themselves. With “science wars” waging in health and environmental regulation for at least three-quarters of a century, it is tempting to conclude that recent proposals for reforming regulatory science are similar to what has occurred in the past. They are not. They mark a sharp departure with the past because they legally constrain how agency scientists conduct the initial literature review and synthesis informing policy. Because the reforms generally take the form of legislation or regulation, they do not simply suggest best practices for conducting scientific analyses but establish legal lines that cannot be crossed. Moreover, even though they create legal ground rules for scientific deliberations, the reforms have not been developed by the scientific community, but by members of Congress and political officials. In providing a birds'-eye view of the legal developments in regulatory science over the past 50 years, we identify just how idiosyncratic these current reforms are and why the scientific community needs to be aware of their implications.