Reactions: Safer Choice label, mobilizing for science, and federal layoffs

Letters to the editor

Safer Choice label

In response to Craig Bettenhausen’s business Concentrates piece on the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Safer Choice labeling, I would like to point out other problems with this designation. I am conducting an aquatic ecological risk assessment for road deicers, one of which is calcium magnesium acetate (CMA), which the EPA believes to be a safer choice.

This material may be safe for human health, but it is not environmentally safe. Published peer-reviewed literature contains toxicity data for CMA exposure by numerous species, such as zooplankton, terrestrial and aquatic plants (J. Soils Sediments 2003, DOI: 10.1065/jss2003.07.080), macroinvertebrates (Environ. Pollut. 2019, DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.12.033), and amphibians (Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2011, DOI: 10.1002/etc.544). CMA is definitely not safe for these organisms and can result in acute impairment, including mortality. It has no clear safety advantage compared with other deicers, such as sodium or calcium chlorides. Unfortunately, the “safer” designation has led to the application of CMA while misrepresenting its aquatic toxicity.

Paul Chrostowski
Takoma Park, Maryland

Mobilizing for science

Your editorial in the Feb. 24, 2025, issue of C&EN (page 2) was correct. We need to convince public health agencies to support science-based policies. This plea, however, is too little and way too late. You should have been shouting this message before the election. Why didn’t you? Don’t tell me that you don’t want to get involved in politics. When you advocate a position that any public agency should follow, you’re getting involved in politics.

Norm Howe
Ann Arbor, Michigan

Federal layoffs

The Feb. 24 report on the dismissal of employees from US regulatory and science funding agencies (C&EN Feb. 24, 2025, page 14) highlights ongoing concerns about the impact of antiscience sentiments. For the sake of brevity, I’ll illustrate the real-world consequences of such a misguided view by focusing on Donald J. Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

During the blizzard of ’78, I struggled more than a mile uphill through an intense snowstorm, battling 50 mi/h (80 km/h) winds that were pummeling my face and body with freezing snow, and trudging through snowdrifts—some as high as my waist—to get to the laboratories of Worcester Foundation in Massachusetts. My steadfast focus was on preventing the loss of more than a year’s worth of research; missing but a single day of injecting the animals would have delayed a project that ultimately delivered a life-extending drug to women with breast cancer.

Last month, in stark contrast to the efforts above, DOGE carelessly and needlessly shut the funding spigot for medical care and research, delaying treatments for childhood cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, cardiovascular disease, infectious disease, mental health, and diabetes research. Even worse, DOGE’s uncaring termination of the US Agency for International Development, created by John F. Kennedy in 1961, risks that highly contagious lethal diseases will spread worldwide.

It’s a simple task for one of Elon Musk’s whiz kids to lean forward in an easy chair—perhaps while sipping a brew—going about the task of slashing the US debt, giving no more thought to their actions than crushing an ant underfoot.

Quite to the contrary, both before and after my 1978 trudge, scientists have worked diligently—sometimes at great personal sacrifice—to achieve medical breakthroughs that have benefited both the US and the world.

The current administration should be carefully assessing the potential consequences of its policy changes to ensure the continued advancement of medical research and the protection of public health. It obviously is not.

The root cause of this ignorance is the underlying antiscience rhetoric. The proliferation of misinformation has become a dangerous trend, eroding public trust in scientific endeavors and undermining critical advancements. This ignorance is perpetuated by a myriad of sources, each contributing to the chaos.

We scientists must find ways to make our voices heard.

David Allen Marsh
Bonita Beach, Florida