The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals orders EPA to ban the neurotoxic pesticide chlorpyrifos because the evidence shows that it’s harmful.
Helping journalists, staffers stealthily collected dust samples from a busy hallway in an urban elementary school in Philadelphia. When sky-high asbestos results came back from the lab, the journalists, both Pulitzer Prize winners, faced an ethical and moral dilemma unlike any other they had encountered in their long careers.
Last week, EPA held a hearing about its proposed rule to restrict the research it can use in regulating, and scores of public health advocates attended to speak out against it.
A proposed EPA rule that would sharply restrict the studies the agency can use when regulating faces pushback from the agency’s Science Advisory Board and a bipartisan group of more than 100 Congress members. The agency has extended the comment period and scheduled a hearing, but still seems determined to move ahead with a deeply flawed rule.
Scott Pruitt announced is plan to repeal regulations designed to prevent chemical releases and explosions. Fire fighters support those rules, but Pruitt swears allegiance to the chemical industry not to local emergency responders.
Residents who live near a concentrated swine feeding operation succeeded in their lawsuit against a subsidiary of Smithfield Foods.
Last week, EPA administrator Scott Pruitt announced a proposed rule that would dramatically shrink the pool of high-quality evidence EPA can use in regulations. Pruitt claims the rule will advance transparency, but it will really just make it harder to protect public health.
A new analysis from the Union of Concerned Scientists examines the functions of federal science advisory committees over the past year and reports “an unprecedented level of stalled and disbanded scientific advisory committees, cancelled meetings, and dismissed experts” – with profound consequences for our safety and health.