SPSG #7: The Sociology of Technocracy

This chapter is like a sociology of science essay, except that it is really about politicians in lab coats, with most of it being concerned with toxicology. Many of the roots of the SPSG can be found in academia. First, there is a discussion of the Information Quality Act of 2002 that sought to make the information used by the federal government more objective. Yet the Office of Management and Budget interpreted "objectivity" as meaning "peer reviewed". While that could potentially subject scientific claims to cross-examination by outside experts, without separation of science and policy, peer review can also be used to prevent cross-examination altogether. While toxicology initially was primarily associated with the drug industry, it has become increasingly concerned with environmental regulation. The growth of environmental toxicology programs that are almost entirely concerned with government as a career path are a prime example. As a result, environmental toxicologists can potentially complete their careers by only talking among themselves. Although the Society of Toxicology did not have a Code of Ethics when it was formed in 1961, it does now. Many of the recommendations seem to be political statements that on closer examination aren't necessarily ethical at all. In particular, members are required to be "advocates of public health" and "Abstain from professional judgments influenced by undisclosed conflict of interest". Both of these statements favor the interests of public sector members (i.e. technocrats) over those with private interests. Nutritionists can be technocrats too, and when nutrients are also toxic, that can create a clash of technocratic cultures. While nutritionists don't use safety factors, when it comes to considering dose-response relationships, their tradition is quite limited, perhaps by design. In the “Risk Analysis Paradogm”, Risk Communication is often recognized as a third component of the regulatory decision process, along with Risk Assessment and Risk Managment.  However, the roots of the discipline lie in the study of consumers responses, which makes it well suited for selling a decision that has already been made. Quantification can be part of the SPSG too.  Because of their ability to seemingly automate a decision process, often by ignoring or assiduously hiding theoretical probability, statisticians can play the shell game too.  Since they often equate the behavior of scientists with science, sociologists sometimes seem to backhandedly endorse the shell game.

Note

Although it wasn't my original intent, this chapter does read like a populist manifesto.