We all rely on data to make decisions every day, and we trust that the data are reliable and valid when applying them to our lives. For example, when deciding where to get gas, you may consider multiple data points such as information from an app or the price at a station you pass on your commute. Paying a little more for gas might be a small consequence of incomplete data, but when data serve as the foundation for decisions made by policymakers, health care professionals, and drug manufacturers that affect the lives of millions, scientific integrity is critical to ensuring the data are trustworthy and reliable.
As earlier posts in this blog series describe, the federal government has long served an important role in facilitating the generation, analysis, and stewardship of public data, which researchers, policymakers, and the public rely on to make decisions every day. Now that the federal agency staff who traditionally held the responsibility of data collection, interpretation, and validity have been removed/reduced, users can no longer trust the information that is available; data have been temporarily or permanently taken down, threatening the credibility of the data that remain. Credible data is the backbone of scientific integrity, which previously enjoyed near universal support.
According to a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) policy, adopted in October 2024 and updated March 2025, scientific integrity is “the adherence to professional practices, ethical behavior, and the principles of honesty and objectivity when conducting, managing, using the results of, and communicating about science and scientific activities.” Per the policy, behaviors that harm or cause the loss of scientific integrity, such as political interference or failure to adhere to objectivity and transparency, undermine our ability to trust those in positions of power using data to make impactful decisions. If government data—the public's primary trusted source for health information—is censored, it loses integrity.
Public Data Support Transparency, Scientific Validation, and Policy Decisions that Benefit All
The government has demonstrated a long-standing commitment to evidence-based policymaking, informed by data collected and made accessible by agencies to policymakers as well as to the research community and to the broader population. By making data accessible and understandable to the American people, the government can demonstrate accountability and transparency, extending credibility to the research and analysis that utilizes the data—and to the decision-making of the institution itself. If, on the other hand, data are removed for non-scientific reasons, these principles are impossible to uphold.
The Trump administration in its first term even passed the Evidence Act, intended to improve access to data and enhance the federal government’s ability to make evidence-informed decisions. A 2024 survey of federal evaluation personnel found that by implementing the Evidence Act, evaluation capacity had improved and their evaluation findings were increasingly influencing agency decision-making.
Political Interference Can Undermine Transparency and Trust
The federal government has been a longtime trusted source for actionable data for researchers, policymakers, and everyday citizens. Because of the recent loss and censoring of public data, that trust has been eroded. For example, access to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was heavily disrupted. This particular dataset has been maintained and updated for 40 years and includes several key indicators aligned with the current administration’s priorities, including addressing chronic disease and obesity. Because the survey collects data from every state, it also offers valuable insights into the population health needs of rural areas or states with smaller populations. Without the availability of such data sources, those responsible for acting in the best interests of the public (e.g., doctors, public health leaders, elected officials) are unable to make informed decisions.
Data are also critical to demonstrating that a policy decision or intervention has been implemented successfully. One promise the current administration has made to the people is to make in vitro fertilization (IVF) more accessible and affordable for American families, as evidenced by a February executive order. However, the Division of Reproductive Health within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was eliminated on April 1, including the very team responsible for maintaining a federal database of clinics that provide assisted reproductive technology (ART) and their success rates in facilitating pregnancy.
The removal of data—or any other real or perceived interference with data—risks threatening the tenuous trust people have in policymakers to make decisions that are in the best interests of the country. Even if prior years’ data are reinstated and available online, HHS workforce cuts mean that future data collection is not guaranteed. This lack of clarity and transparency in the provision and maintenance of existing and future data intended to inform decision-making threatens to degrade further the public’s trust in government and science.
A Call for Scientific Integrity and Radical Transparency
Data do not have a political agenda (if collected and analyzed objectively) and are essential to every stage of decision-making—whether that is done by a policymaker or a new parent trying to pick a car seat. Data help alert us to issues, design an approach that targets the specific problem with an intervention, monitor how that intervention is applied and experienced, and assess the impact of the intended solution. This in turn generates additional data about the effectiveness of that intervention or behavior within that specific context (timing, population, intensity, etc.) and can sometimes shed light on greater generalizability.
Data represents knowledge, which in turn gives users the power to make informed decisions. Efforts to interfere with data collection or presentation disempower the people whose lives are affected by the decisions that (should) rely on such evidence. We all must be responsible data stewards —and ensure that all public datasets are fully restored and accessible to honor scientific integrity and return power and autonomy to the people.