Scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency say they're being pressured to revise assessments of chemicals used in products such as cosmetics and household cleaners in ways that downplay potential risks to human health and the environment, reports CNN.
"What we've been told is: 'Let's look at alternative scenarios,'" one employee within the EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention told the news outlet.
The person said supervisors would sometimes look for increasingly narrow exposure scenarios that would allow a chemical to be deemed safe.
"If putting two hands in a chemical shows risk, they'll ask, 'What if it's one hand? What if it's one finger?'" the person said.
"We are considering scenarios we don't have any basis for," the employee added.
The OCSPP is the division responsible for overseeing federal reviews of industrial chemicals and pesticides, assessing their potential risks to human health and the environment before approving their use or regulating their exposure.
The office is responsible for evaluating the safety of chemicals and pesticides used in products ranging from household cleaners and cosmetics to agricultural insecticides.
A scientist who recently left the division told CNN that every decision "is going to the political level, down to the smallest detail."
"That is abnormal," the scientist said.
He added that in previous administrations, "there was a level of respect and trust that the scientists were relying on the best science."
But now, "subject-matter experts having to explain to political appointees why they chose a particular science approach, being scrutinized for what they did, and if asked to think about it differently, there's little you can do to push back if you're meeting with the top person."
Another career employee told CNN, "You have to follow instructions. Otherwise, that's insubordination."
The EPA defended its science.
"EPA is implementing the President's Executive Order on Restoring Gold Standard Science across its risk evaluations," the agency said in an email to CNN.
"In practice, that means using realistic exposure scenarios rather than defaulting to compounded worst-case assumptions, being transparent about the assumptions and uncertainties in every analysis, and ensuring conclusions are testable and reproducible."
The agency also added that its "top priority is protecting the health of all Americans, and every chemical safety decision the agency makes is grounded in gold-standard science: peer-reviewed literature, validated test methods, real-world monitoring data, and fit-for-purpose exposure and fate modeling."