| Summary: | Part of a special issue on science in the regulatory process. The science underlying existing federal agency regulations is far from perfect, but such a situation is far better than it would be should various reform proposals be implemented; because “good science” reforms have the potential to cause significant damage to already crippled administrative processes. Instead of directing administrative attention toward assessing individual studies and determining whether they are scientifically acceptable, as “good science” reforms do, attention should be focused on addressing the issue of when the cumulative weight of scientific evidence is sufficient first to justify, and then to rebut, a protective policy.
|
|---|