RE: Question for 21 September: Can we trust the EPA?

[Tom.Hughes, Mass Environmental Library <Thomas.Hughes@state.ma.us>]

It isn't a matter of finding the data or the report more credible, it is a matter of understanding what you do and don't know about what you are looking at.  In general you can say that EPA has professionals that are capable of collecting high quality data and interpreting it.  But you also have to recognize that they do not always have the time or the resources to do everything top-notch.

You look at what you have available to you.  The primary data is what it is.  Data.  How good it is depends on the details provided. If the source provides information on the gathering technique, source, QA/QC, etc... then you have an understanding of the quality of the data.

The interpretation of the data is something built upon the foundation laid down by the data.  If you find the data questionable, then you look to see if the report recognizes any flawsin the data.  If it does, then you can get a good feel for the credibility of the report.

One thing to note:  Librarians are good, but the best test for credibility is in any field is peer review.  Peers can look at the data, how it was collected and what controls were in place.  They can look at the assumptions and support them or tear them down.  When something has been peer reviewed and the review is well documented, then you can look at that as highly credible.