[Szent_Adam_Kiraly]

"Maybe the public affairs staff would like to know what is going out the door in their behalf before it goes. That way they can check it for adherence to department policy and answer questions about it to the press once it's released."

Thats exactly whats wrong with it. Sound science has no consideration for policy, however, policy makers should take science into consideration, when forming a policy.

[rabidralph]

You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. As an example, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) appears to increase a woman's risk for breast cancer. A scientist should not release a report to the public advocating HRT for women in menopause. The agency's review board should check any scientist's findings that advocate HRT, unless that scientist has some new evidence that HRT isn't to blame and those claims should be further investigated.

Now, if the scientist's report was released without review, the MSM would be calling the public affairs office and wanting to know why the agency is putting out suspect information. That alone will damage the reputation of the agency and anything else it publishes.