Re: "Scientific misconduct" in gov't data

["Ron L. Kathren" <rkathren@tricity.wsu.edu>]

I kinda got in on the middle of this, what with our server being down, but I
think it important to point out that the American Academy of Health Physics,
the organization of American Board of Health Physics diplomates and
associates, maintains Standards of Professional Responsibility -- basically
a code of ethics -- to which all Academy members subscribe.  These are
published in the Handbook.  And, these are no idle words, either; the
Academy rigorously follows up on complaints against CHP's and has taken
disciplinary action in those cases where violation of the Standards have
occurred.

Ron Kathren, CHP
Past-President, AAHP


-----Original Message-----
From: Kerembaev@cs.com <Kerembaev@cs.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Monday, December 20, 1999 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: "Scientific misconduct" in gov't data


>Jim,
>
>I am not surprised about that.
>Why HP community should be different from the others?
>Every industry has its "group interesses" and usually more than one group.
>HP "industry" is not special at this.
>Sometimes, I am trying to defined our "group interesses" or "groups by
>interest".
>I shell leave those thoughts of the list.
>
>Morality? Look on the doctors. They have an oath. We do not.
>
>Best regards,
>Emil.
>kerembaev@cs.com
>
>
>
>
>In a message dated 12/19/99 3:32:40 Pacific Standard Time,
>muckerheide@mediaone.net writes:
>
><<Group,
>
> FYI from Science, Dec 17, the "ScienceScope" section: Some interests
> try to pursue government dishonesty. When will the 'nuclear industry'
> learn?
>
> Perhaps they would even have/acquire the competence to assess the data
> if they get it? When will the "nuclear industry" do so?
>
> Would they also pursue "scientific misconduct" if the scientists
> "cooked" the data to meet EPA demands, like radiation health effects
> data/scientists? (recall Otto Raabe's email on the data falsified by
> Mays and Lloyd for BEIR IV).
>
> Consider allegations on a few dozen of the worst offenders. Re our
> challenge on Geoffrey Howe's appointment to the BEIR VII Committee, he
> has been removed, along with Chris Whipple. Identification of
> falsified data is welcome (privately as well as on the lsit).
>
> Regards, Jim
> ============
>
> Data Grab
>
> Hoping to pry open the Clinton Administration's narrow interpretation
> of a new law that gives the public access to raw research data, the
> U.S. Chamber of Commerce last week set the stage for a legal challenge
> by requesting data used to support several Environmental Protection
> Agency (EPA) regulations and policies.
>
> Universities breathed a sigh of relief earlier this fall when the
> White House Office of Management and Budget limited the public's reach
> to published results used in crafting a rule or unpublished data cited
> in a regulation, and said only data collected under grants made after
> 6 November were open to scrutiny (Science, 8 October, p. 209). But
> such restrictions are "improper," according to chamber vice president
> William Kovacs. His group has asked for raw data from several older
> studies used by EPA, including a 1993 Harvard University air pollution
> analysis that prompted the campaign to force researchers to share
> their data. Kovacs expects EPA to deny the requests within a couple of
> months. If so, the chamber will sue the government.
> ************************************************************************
>>
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html