We seem to have an admission that the “fix is in” concerning EPA’s secret effort to have the National Academy of Sciences whitewash the agency’s illegal human experiments.
Last month I wrote to the National Academy of Sciences board overseeing the review of EPA’s illegal human experiments. I asked how the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology (BEST) would ensure its deep ties to EPA did not affect the outcome of the review of EPA’s human experiments. Below is BEST’s response.
So BEST tries to wave off the absence of a conflict of interest policy by denying it will play a role in the review of the committee‘s report.
Here is what the link to the NAS peer review process states:
It seems all quite vague and anonymous.
But what is the role of BEST? Here’s what the NAS says on its web site:
BEST is “organizing and overseeing” the NAS committee’s work. Hmmm…
The bottom line is EPA hired the NAS to whitewash its illegal conduct. We spoiled the secrecy, but not necessarily the fix. As I wrote in the Washington Times in July:
The corruption of Federal Agencies and Federally sponsored agencies is depressing.
An interesting reply, for sure……
1. ‘Your email concerning the academies committee…………boards….are not subject to the same conflict of interest policies that are applicable to our committees’……….
Steve’s question was about committees, not boards …..
Why have you just shot yourself in the foot here, Riya?
2. ‘Your email contains a number of factual inaccuracies.’……What approximately is this number?
What are the actual figures and how much smaller are they than the amounts you would see as inviting accusations of the possibility of conflict of interest?