Via STAT: No forbidden words at FDA, agency says after report of CDC policy. Excerpt and then a comment:
The Food and Drug Administration hasn’t yet received or implemented a policy to ban words like “science-based” or “transgender,” according to an agency spokeswoman.
Analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were banned from using those and five other words, including “fetus,” “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” and “evidence-based,” in their budget documents in a Thursday meeting, according to a Washington Post report on Friday.
“We haven’t received, nor implemented, any directives with respect to the language used at FDA to describe our policy or budget issues,” the spokeswoman said in her full response.
Other agencies, including the Health and Human Services department and the National Institutes of Health did not immediately return requests for comment. A Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokeswoman directed inquiries to HHS.
Public health groups blasted the new policy over the weekend, suggesting it would have far-reaching effects on the CDC’s work and focus.
“Among the words forbidden to be used in CDC budget documents are ‘evidence-based’ and ‘science-based.’ I suppose one must not think those things either. Here’s a word that’s still allowed: ridiculous,” said Rush Holt, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Dr. Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, worries about the ban’s broader impact.
“It sends a signal to people in the agency that this is not just about the budget process,” Jha told STAT. “There’s as much of a risk of self-censorship that comes out of this than actual direct censorship. … This is the part that’s much more pernicious than any direct pronouncement.”
“So of course the administration and its defenders are going to argue that this is only about what goes into the budget,” Jha said. “But we know that the signal to the agency is much stronger than that. And it’s going to change behavior of people who work there. And that’s much more damaging than any direct censorship.”
Dr. Jha understands just how insidious this measure is. As a teacher in China long ago, I found myself choosing my words (and my course materials) with great care. It wasn't that I was afraid I'd be fired and kicked out of the country. I was afraid I'd get my students in trouble.
Similarly, US government scientists may now start to self-censor—not to save their own jobs but to save those of their colleagues. It's easy to imagine the Trumpists shutting down whole programs and agencies, just because they can make example of anyone and anything they choose.
