Clapp R, Hoppin P, Kriebel D. Erosion of the Integrity of Public Health Science in the USA. Occup Environ Med. 2006; 63: 367-368.
In this editorial, the authors highlight recent evidence indicating that political and economic interests are eroding the independence and integrity of public health science in the US, and make a proposal for a positive response to the attacks on scientific integrity.

Clapp RW and D Ozonoff. Environment and Health: Vital Intersection or Contested Territory? Am J Law Med. 2004; 30(2/3): 189-215.
In this article, the authors describe how epidemiologists draw scientific inferences about causation and contrast this with post-Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. tort practices.

Krimsky S. The Funding Effect in Science and its Implications for the Judiciary. J Law and Policy. 2005; XIII(1): 43-68. 
This article, from the third Science for Judges symposium (hosted by the Brooklyn Law School Center for Health, Science and Public Policy), discusses the effects of the academic funding structure and financial conflicts of interest on the integrity of scientific research, examines the influence of conflicts of interest on the courtroom testimony of experts, and suggests ways in which judicial and scientific methodologies can look to each other to enhance objectivity.

Michaels D. The Art of 'Manufacturing Uncertainty' an OpEd by David Michaels, Los Angeles Times, June 24, 2005.

Michaels D. Doubt is Their Product   Scientific American, June 2005.

Michaels DM, Bingham E, Boden L, et al. Advice Without Dissent. Science. 2002 Oct 25; 298(5594): 703.    
In an editorial appearing in Science magazine, SKAPP Planning Committee members and others criticized the Bush Administration for appointing unqualified and conflicted individuals to science advisory committees, thereby "...undermining the process by which scientists provide advice to the U.S. government." The authors argued that "scientific advisory committees do not exist to tell the Secretary what he wants to hear but to help the Secretary, and the nation, address complex issues."

Michaels D and C Monforton. Scientific Evidence in the Regulatory System: Manufacturing Uncertainty and the Demise of the Formal Regulatory System. J Law and Policy. 2005; XIII(1): 17-41. 
This article, from the third Science for Judges symposium (hosted by the Brooklyn Law School Center for Health, Science and Public Policy), examines the responses of the legal and regulatory systems to workplace hazards, and explores the impact of litigation and regulation on the prevention of work-related disease in the United States.

Michaels DM and W Wagner. Disclosure in Regulatory Science. Science. 2003 Dec 19; 302(5653): 2073.
In this commentary, the authors argue that "...private parties who submit scientific studies for consideration by government agencies should be required to disclose conflicts of interest that might bias their work. They should also be required to disclose whether the data were produced by scientists who had the contractual right to publish their findings without influence and without obtaining consent of the sponsor."  The authors note that "...the leading biomedical journals have established policies that attempt to ensure their published articles are transparent to commercial bias. Federal regulatory agencies, charged with protecting the public's health and environment, have no similar conflict-of-interest requirements.” In response to the paper, the American Chemistry Council wrote to Science Magazine, agreeing with the proposal (“in general, this proposal is sound”) while disagreeing with aspects of Michaels and Wagner’s characterization of the chemical industry.

Robbins A. Science for Special Interests. Boston Globe. Dec. 7, 2003.
In this Op-Ed, Tony Robbins contends that the Bush Administration's misuse of federal advisory committees and misdirected mandates for peer review have alarmed scientists and the public.

Robbins A. Science Policy and Politics: Will the Recent Past Preface the Future? Epidemiology. 2005 May;16(3):406-9.
This article, based on an an invited talk at the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology 2004 meeting in New York City, describes the Bush administration's politicized approach to science and scientists' opposition to administration actions.

SKAPP. Daubert: The Most Influential Supreme Court Ruling You've Never Heard Of (Abstract) (PDF Full Text) June 2003.
This report is a scientists' perspective on the 1993 Supreme Court decision Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.