I'll take a look.
BTW, Im perfectly willing to acknowledge that there is a lot of questionable use of science as inputs into public policy decisions. Residential asbestos and increasingly residential radon abatement efforts are expensive public health initiatives undertaken on the basis of IMO very questionable assumptions about the relevance of data collected in industrial settings to the lives of ordinary citizens. And a lot of relevant information gets disregarded on both sides of the ideological spectrum as a result of a combination of ignorance and ideological bias, for example IMO exaggerated concerns about the health effects of DU ammunition on parts of the left, or the decades of denials of the link between smoking and cancer on parts of the right, are examples.