Science, Medical Groups Criticize âBanned Wordsâ in Federal Budget Documents
While government officials downplayed the impact of a list of banned words received by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other agencies, groups in the science and medical industries used the incident to underline the value of âscience-basedâ and âevidence-basedâ decision makingâas those two phrases were part of the ban.
Heads up: this content is over 5 years old, so some information may be out of date.
A report last week that suggested that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)Â received a list of âbanned wordsâ for official budgetary documents (opens in a new tab) led to a major outcry in the science and medical worlds over the weekendâparticularly from the association space.
Federal officials have since tried to downplay these claims (opens in a new tab), calling them a âmischaracterizationâ of what was taking place.
âHHS will continue to use the best scientific evidence available to improve the health of all Americans,â the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said in a statement to ABC News (opens in a new tab). âHHS also strongly encourages the use of outcome and evidence data in program evaluations and budget decisions.â
However, that failed to calm the uproar over the report, which suggested that the words âvulnerable,â âentitlement,â âdiversity,â âtransgender,â âfetus,â âevidence-based,â and âscience-basedâ would be discouraged from use in CDC budgetary documents. A later Washington Post report (opens in a new tab) suggested that another agency within HHS was told to use âObamacareâ in all references to the Affordable Care Act, and that the State Department would use âsexual risk avoidanceâ in reference to sex education.
Whatever the case, a variety of groups made it known that this approach flew in the face of how science and medicine work. In particular, the leaders of The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine spoke in the toughest terms against what appeared to be an attack on science.
âWe are especially stunned that âevidence-basedâ and âscience-basedâ are reportedly among the barred terms,â the presidents of the three groups said in a statement Monday (opens in a new tab), adding that these approaches were fundamental to the groupsâ creation. âEvidence-based advice to inform policymakers and public discourse has been the foundation of National Academiesâ counsel since the creation of the NAS more than 150 years ago by Abraham Lincoln. Evidence-based advice drove American prosperity, health, and national security throughout the 20th century, and continues to do so today.â
In comments to the Post, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) CEO Rush Holt echoed this sentiment in a tough statement of his own: âAmong the words forbidden to be used in CDC budget documents are âevidence-basedâ and âscience-based.â I suppose one must not think those things either. Hereâs a word thatâs still allowed: ridiculous.â
Public health officials also spoke out against the move, with Laura Magaña, the president and CEO of the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health calling on White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney to âimmediately and publicly withdraw this censorship order regardless of where or how it originated.â
âWe are particularly incensed that this act of censorship first came to light at the CDC. The CDC is our nationâs leading public health agency, tasked with the critical mission of protecting the nation from âhealth, safety, and security threats,ââ Magaña wrote in a letter (opens in a new tab) [PDF] to Mulvaney and leaders at HHS and CDC. âOn its website, the CDC promises in a âPledge to the American Peopleâ to âbase all public health decisions on the highest quality scientific data that is derived openly and objectivelyâ and to âtreat all persons with dignity, honesty, and respect.ââ
Even a group focused on the words used in government documents cried foul in response to the Post stories. The Center for Plain Language (opens in a new tab), a nonprofit that encourages federal agencies to use simple language in their documents, said in a news release (opens in a new tab) that âthese proposed changes discourage clarity and transparency, and could create public harm.â
The backlash to the move caps off a year when many scientific groups felt compelled to respond to a political climate that appeared to stand in opposition to science by taking part in a March for Science in April. At the time of the event, groups such as AAAS and many others pledged to take its lessons and put them in their advocacy strategy.
CDC’s Edward R. Roybal campus in Atlanta. (Wikimedia Commons)
Comments
Comments are for ASAE members. Learn more about comments on this site.
Log in to your member account or join ASAE!