Regulatory parallels to Daubert: Stakeholder influence, "sound science," and the delayed adoption of health-protective standards

R.A. Neff and L.R. Goldman

American Journal of Public Health, 2005, vol. 95, issue S1, S81-S91

Abstract: There is broad agreement that regulatory decisions should be based on evidence. But interested parties have used the "sound science" mantle to demand extended research, analysis, and review of evidence for the sole purpose of delaying health-protective regulation. This historical review shows how the forces behind the "sound science" reasoning leading to the Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc decision on science in the courtroom have operated in parallel in environmental regulation. Like Daubert, certain "sound science" regulatory tools can be used to improve decision quality. However, these tools can also challenge the federal government's ability to safeguard the public's health and well-being. Most recently, political tampering with science provides the foundation for some policymakers to disregard science completely in the environmental regulatory process.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2004.044818

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2004.044818_2

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.044818

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().