Richard B. Belzer
  • Home
  • About
  • Consulting Services
  • Blog
  • Testimony
  • Information Quality
  • Presentations
  • Publications
  • Public Comments
  • Public Comments (Draft)
  • Working Papers
  • Neutral Source
  • Regulatory Checkbook
  • Curriculum Vitae
  • Contact
  • Wine Economics
  • Data Repository

Testimony on the Report on Carcinogens

4/26/2012

0 Comments

 
On April 25, I testified on the National Toxicology Program's Report on Carcinogens before a joint hearing of the Committee on Science, Space, & Technology, Subcommittee on Investigations & Oversight, and the Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Healthcare & Technology.

My written testimony is here.

My research shows that the Report on Carcinogens is not a high-quality scientific work product. There are two major reasons why.

First, although Congress might have wanted a scientific compendium of substances carcinogenic to humans it did not ask for this in scientific language. Instead, it asked for a list of substances "which either are known to be carcinogens or may reasonably be anticipated to be carcinogens." But this is highly subjective, legalistic language that is foreign to the disciplines of science: Science does not “know” or “reasonably anticipate” things. These are not scientific words. They are the words of lawyers.

Second, the NTP has implemented this language in highly nonscientific ways that maximize its flexibility to use (or reject) scientific information  however it sees fit. Among other things, the NTP's criteria for listing do not include any minimum scientific standard of causality. The NTP deems a substance a "known" human carcinogen if, in its sole and unreviewable judgment, "There is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in humans.* 

There is another highly significant problem with the way the NTP produces the Report on Carcinogens. The law establishes a second condition that must be met before a substance is listed as a human carcinogen: "a significant number of persons residing in the United States [must be] exposed" to it. The NTP simply ignores this statutory requirement.

Fixing the Report on Carcinogens will require congressional action. 

First, despite the extent to which NTP listings violate federal law by failing to satisfy the exposure requirement, it appears that no one has standing to challenge a listing in federal court.

Second, until Congress revises the law to clearly direct the NTP to produce a strictly scientific compendium of human carcinogens, the NTP will continue to produce policy determinations based on undisclosed criteria. 

​My testimony identifies six specific ways Congress can improve the scientific quality and public value of the Report on Carcinogens. Until these (or similar) reforms are made, the Report on Carcinogens will continue to be highly controversial and largely useless.
0 Comments

My Study of the Report on Carcinogens

1/18/2012

0 Comments

 
Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute published my short study of the National Toxicology Program's biennial Report on Carcinogens. In brief, I conclude that Congress must do a major overhaul before the Report will have any scientific value. As currently designed, the Report is highly misleading and thus is likely to lead to substantial resource misallocation. It may even led to decisions that, perversely, increase cancer risks.

Click to see CEI's press release or the full report.


0 Comments

    Archives

    May 2018
    November 2013
    April 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    November 2011
    September 2010


    Categories

    All
    Cancer Risk Assessment
    EO 12866
    EPA
    Gliders
    Heavy-Duty Trucks
    Information Quality
    National Toxicology Program
    NTP
    OMB
    Paperwork Reduction Act
    Report On Carcinogens
    Risk Assessment
    USPTO

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.