A recent report card grading 15 federal agencies found inconsistent policies for releasing scientific information to the public. The analysis also showed that several agencies stifle their scientists' communication, causing scientists to fear retaliation for speaking their minds. Although some agencies have satisfactory policies or recently improved media policies, it appears much still needs to be done to ensure scientific information gets to the public.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will revise seven of eight decisions made under the Endangered Species Act program after reviewing them for improper political interference. The four-month review came as a result of a Department of Interior inspector general's investigation of allegations that former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Julie A. MacDonald, intimidated staff and changed the scientific information agency scientists developed for decisions about listing or delisting threatened or endangered species.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a proposal that revised its criteria for determining whether scientific advisory committee members have financial conflicts of interest. The guidance, which would be nonbinding if adopted, is in its draft form and will be open for comment upon publication in the Federal Register. The guidance simplifies FDA's process for determining financial conflicts of interest. It also details exceptions agency personnel can make to allow scientists with conflicts of interest to serve on panels. The proposal comes as FDA faces increasing scrutiny over its ties to the pharmaceutical industry.