![\"blog_HEI_20100406\"](\"http:\/\/blog.epa.gov\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/04\/blog_HEI_20100406.jpg\" "\\"blog_HEI_20100406\\"")
\u201cHEI began because there was a need for independent science that could be trusted by everyone,\u201d said Dan Greenbaum, HEI\u2019s president.<\/p>\nThe Health Effects Institute (HEI) is one of the most respected research organizations in air pollution science.<\/p>\n
The Institute was founded in 1980 through an unprecedented partnership between the EPA and the automotive industry. With equal funding from agency and industry (by market share), HEI is in a unique position to provide \u201chigh-quality, impartial, and relevant science,\u201d on air pollution health effects, according to their website.<\/p>\n
\u201cHEI began because there was a need for independent science that could be trusted by everyone,\u201d said Dan Greenbaum, HEI\u2019s president.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat we find is that with industry, EPA, and environmentalists at the table, they are really asking the same scientific questions\u2026even though they may not always want the same answers.\u201d<\/p>\n
To maintain objectivity, HEI\u2019s review committees are staffed by participants who are not involved in any advocacy for industry or the environment. The Institute also avoids making regulatory recommendations.
\n\u201cWe don\u2019t make policy here,\u201d Greenbaum said. \u201cWe deliver relevant science to the doorsteps of decision-makers so they can do their jobs.\u201d<\/p>\n
Greenbaum is known for communicating well across business, environmental, and political realms. He has applied this savvy at the helm of HEI and steered the Institute toward the highest standards of scientific integrity.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe scientific review process can be a little intense,\u201d Greenbaum admitted, \u201cbut it\u2019s so important to have research that is above and beyond reproach.\u201d<\/p>\n
Because of the integrity of HEI\u2019s research, their data is often used in important decision-making processes.
\nIn 1997, for example, the EPA reviewed national standards for PM and ozone. To ensure the review incorporated the best-possible information, HEI was asked to reanalyze large datasets from two major air pollution studies.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey trusted us to treat the data well,\u201d Greenbaum said, \u201cand after tearing it apart and putting it back together again, we confirmed the results and found higher effects of air pollution in people with lower socioeconomic status.\u201d<\/p>\n
HEI continues to push the research envelope. Through a new committee, HEI is identifying needed research on the potential health consequences of new fuels and engine technologies.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are forecasting a range of new technologies and looking to see whether they could have unintended consequences for public health,\u201d Greenbaum said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a great example of research to fill gaps in understanding. The key thing we do is listen to what information people need and then do the research to get it.\u201d<\/p>\n