Government guidelines let public check on researchers

By Hemesh Patel
Daily Bruin Senior Staff

The White House Office of Management and Budget released a new
set of scientific research guidelines last week that may impact
university researchers.

The guidelines allow the public to express their concerns on
research results released by government agencies. Scientists who
receive federal funds and those whose research data the government
uses will be affected.

“Researchers conducting studies with funds from government
agencies are responsible to present their data if it is challenged
by the government,” said Michelle Dimarob, communications
director for U.S. representative Jo Ann Emerson, one of the main
proponents of the legislation.

Emerson became involved with the issue when she saw a study on
global climate change that contradicted a study published by the
Environmental Protective Agency.

According to Dimarob, the EPA’s study published
“glowing” findings regarding the current state of the
global climate, but another study refuted those findings.

To prevent such events from happening again, Emerson helped
spearhead the new set of guidelines that allow the public to
respond to research they do not agree with.

White House officials at the OMB said they have received about
100 comments, most of which came from academic institutions
concerned about the implications the new rules may have on research
done for the government.

According to the guidelines, agencies are to respond to
complaints from the public by identifying problems and seeking
corrective action, which may require federal agencies to repeat
studies.

Leonard Rome, senior associate dean for research at the School
of Medicine, said complex research projects could be difficult and
expensive to reproduce.

The OMB said it has received a large number of comments from
researchers concerned about the section of the legislation that
discusses how data should be “substantially
reproducible.”

OMB officials said they are attempting to clarify this part of
the new guidelines, which will not require scientists to
independently reproduce their research. Instead, the federal
government will repeat the study.

Disagreement to the guidelines comes from researchers who think
the current process of peer review already thoroughly checks the
validity of the research.

“It’s ludicrous,” said Cheryl Ann Zimmer, a
biology professor who is funded by the National Science Foundation,
a federal agency. “The public is in no position to judge the
quality of university research.”

In the first step of peer review, researchers must submit a
proposal for review. When it is approved, scientists can proceed to
collect data and write a draft of their paper.

In what takes at least a year to complete, the draft is then
reviewed a second time by scientists in the same field of
study.

“In the academic setting there are a number of checks and
balances,” said Dan Blumstein, a biology professor.
“This may not always be true with the federal
government.”