This piece was co-authored with Izzy Pacenza, a project coordinator at the Environmental Data & Governance Initiative.
A year has passed since the White House’s Office of Science Technology and Policy (OSTP) released guidelines to implement President Trump’s “Restoring Gold Standard Science” executive order. Over the past year, federal agencies have used this flexible and highly subjective “gold standard” to justify removing scientific data from public view, casting doubt on established science, and letting political agendas influence research outcomes. Agencies have also used “gold standard science” to devalue scientific expertise, eliminate federal science offices and advisory boards, and centralize research under political appointees, potentially increasing the suppression and distortion of science available to the public.
The Trump administration has also engaged in significant suppression of information on federally funded websites. These websites serve as the main communication channel between the federal government and the public, shaping public understanding and actions. The Environmental Data and Governance Initiative (EDGI), where we work, has recorded over 1,000 cases of information suppression under the second Trump administration, covering areas like environmental justice, climate change, public health, and clean energy. Here, we explore how the administration has used “gold standard science” to alter, undermine, and manipulate scientific content on agency websites to support a broad deregulation agenda.
Reducing and censoring science
For 15 years, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)’s primary climate science communication site, climate.gov, provided reliable, accurate, and accessible climate change information to the public and policymakers. However, in June 2025, NOAA unexpectedly shut down climate.gov and redirected users to noaa.gov/climate, displaying a banner that stated: “In compliance with Executive Order 14303 (“Restoring Gold Standard Science”)… you have been redirected to NOAA.gov.”
The Trump administration has not explained how climate.gov violated the “gold standard science.” Science integrity expert Jacob Carter points out that climate.gov actually embodied the scientific principles of transparency, reproducibility, and peer review mentioned in the executive order. Instead of promoting high-quality science, the Trump administration appears to be using “gold standard science” to suppress it.
Creating doubt in science
Under the guise of scientific rigor, the Trump administration is promoting the misleading notion that the “gold standard” for science is absolute certainty. This narrative undermines the careful analysis and precision scientists use in interpreting their findings, while also holding scientific research to unrealistic standards. By comparing actual scientific findings to these impractical expectations, the administration could essentially dismiss nearly every scientific conclusion ever reached.
A notable example of the Trump administration using “gold standard science” to undermine confidence in established research is found on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website. Since at least 2024, the CDC’s “Autism and Vaccines” page has clearly stated that vaccines do not cause autism. Before assuming his role as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS, which includes the CDC), Robert F Kennedy, Jr. promised not to remove this assertion. However, as of November 2025, the page title “Vaccines do not Cause Autism” has been surrounded by statements that challenge its validity. The page states, “…the statement ‘Vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim. Scientific studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines contribute to the development of autism.” It further questions epidemiological evidence, stating that it “cannot prove causality.”
These claims are extremely misleading; the assertion that vaccines do not cause autism is based on decades of comprehensive scientific research. Rigorous research involves nuanced hypothesis testing and interpretation, building a body of evidence rather than definitively “proving” or “ruling out” all factors. For more than half a century, epidemiologists have refined guidelines for evaluating evidence to infer causation, the core of epidemiology. To declare that saying “vaccines do not cause autism” is not “evidence-based” misrepresents the scientific record.
Political influences on science
The Trump administration has also employed “gold standard science” to selectively promote or dismiss scientific findings. In March 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to significantly weaken ethylene oxide (EtO) regulations “to ensure consistency with the law and gold standard science.” According to a fact sheet on the proposed EtO regulation changes, the EPA describes the scientific evidence demonstrating EtO’s highly toxic nature as “outdated,” and in a section titled “Trump EPA’s Commitment to Gold Standard Science,” it suggests that new epidemiological studies discredit the research supporting the Biden EPA’s strict EtO regulations.
However, it is not mentioned that the few newer studies indicating that EtO is less toxic were carried out by chemical industry consultants and funded by organizations like the American Chemistry Council, Vantage Specialty Chemicals, and the opaquely funded Center for Truth in Science. Many other recent studies confirm EtO as a carcinogen and further explore its toxic mechanisms. This distortion of the scientific record on EtO coincided with widespread information suppression on the topic. EDGI documented the removal of over 60 federal webpages related to EtO, which contained information on its toxicity, risks to communities, EPA regulation, and more.
The Trump administration’s EPA also cited “gold standard science” to reject scientific findings about formaldehyde’s toxicity and selectively use industry-funded studies to weaken formaldehyde regulations. In a contradictory move, the EPA claims to consider the peer review history of the existing formaldehyde risk evaluation to justify developing a new risk calculation, while simultaneously asserting that peer review is not required for its new draft risk assessment. The Trump administration is using its unchecked discretion to discount credible research and promote politically driven science.
Introducing political interference
The Trump administration’s extensive reorganization of federal science offices and boards is likely to intensify patterns of suppressing and manipulating scientific information. In February 2026, the EPA dismantled its Office of Research and Development (ORD), the agency’s primary research division. EPA spokesperson Carolyn Holran stated it was a “science-centered decision” made “based on gold-standard science.” This rhetoric obscures the reality of a decision that undermines the EPA’s role as an independent scientific authority. ORD was replaced by the Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions (OASES), with approximately 1,200 fewer employees than ORD. While ORD was an independent entity, OASES falls under political appointees within the Office of the Administrator. An EPA memo on OASES’ “Science Actions and Deliverables” states that scientific research and projects “must be supported by appropriate political leadership,” echoing concerns from experts about increased political interference in agency science under the guise of “gold standard science.”
The Trump administration has also significantly reduced independent scientific oversight at federal agencies. An analysis by Nature shows that the administration has dissolved over 100 science advisory committees, groups of independent specialists who support agency decisions with the best available science. The administration has also reduced the transparency and independence of the remaining committees. The Department of Energy (DOE) has been notably affected, for example, through eliminating its specialized scientific advisory committees and merging them into a single Science Advisory Committee. An agency press release cites “gold standard science” as the reason for the change and presents it as a step toward evidence-based decision-making. However, this shift actually weakens scientific oversight by moving input from specific expertise to a more general board and reducing scientific advisory board members from about 150 to 22. By invoking “gold standard science,” the DOE is reducing essential oversight on the science the agency produces and depends on.
The deepening of ignorance
By eliminating scientific research findings, creating doubt in established science, and manipulating the scientific record to align with its political agenda, the administration is exploiting “gold standard science” to undermine credible science now and in the future. While these tactics have been largely discretionary, piecemeal, and inconsistent, the issue is becoming more deeply ingrained in governance systems as the administration dismisses and dismantles scientific expertise and establishes political approval as a requirement for science across the government.
A particularly alarming development is a recent proposed rule by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that risks codifying attacks on science by granting political appointees the authority to reject science that does not align with the administration’s priorities.
As producers and consumers of evidence-based scientific information, we all stand to lose when it is deprioritized and politicized. This proposed rule is open for public comment until July 13, and we urge you to submit comments to help defend high-quality, independent science and research. The Trump administration’s “gold standard science” undermines and stifles the real, robust science that is the foundation of our lives. It is crucial to safeguard the science that safeguards us.
