February 26, 2004 The New York Times by Donald G. Mcneil Jr.

In particular, the scientist said, approval to resume importing Canadian beef was given in August before a study could be done confirming that it was safe. Beef imports from Canada were banned after mad cow disease was found there in May.

Several scientific groups, including the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Government Accountability Project, contend that the Agriculture Department has pressured scientists to protect industries or countries favored by the Bush administration.

The Union of Concerned Scientists directed a reporter for The New York Times to the senior scientist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of dismissal. The union, an independent organization that has opposed the Bush administration on environmental policies and the Clinton administration on biotechnology, issued a report last week accusing the administration of distorting science to serve its political goals.

Alisa Harrison, a spokeswoman for Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, said the secretary did not direct scientists' findings. The administrator of the department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, Bobby Acord, said that he had never been told to make science fit a policy decision.

"If you ignore the science, you could bring in a pest or disease," Acord said. "No one in their right mind would do that."

The senior scientist said that department researchers had been pressured by Veneman's office to approve cattle from Mexico at risk of tuberculosis, pears from China with fungus problems and, in August, boneless meat from Canadian cattle, calves, sheep and goats as well as hunters' kills.

Veneman, a former food industry lawyer and lobbyist, has former representatives of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and other industry groups among her top staff members.

The scientist acknowledged that such pressures existed in previous administrations but added that they seemed more pervasive under the present one, prompting the decision to speak out.

The scientist claimed to have no other motive, and a spokeswoman for the scientists union said she knew of no other.

Critics of the department say it also uses unscientific testing standards that protect industry. Many experts say, for example, that Agriculture Department mad cow tests do not ensure that beef is safe. The testing is voluntary, it samples only 40,000 of the 35 million cattle killed annually, and it lets slaughterhouses help determine which animals are tested.

In August, while Veneman offered to lift the ban on boneless beef from Canada, she said that a "thorough scientific analysis" had been done and that "our experts have determined that the risk to public health is extremely low."

The department scientist spoke of being "really frosted" by Veneman's statement and the fact "that she said we'd done it when I knew in fact that we hadn't." Harrison, who moderated Veneman's Aug. 8 telephone news conference, said last week that the secretary had not meant to imply that her department had done its own analysis.

"The Canadians did their investigation," she said. The department relied on it because international experts were on the panel and American scientists in Canada observed it, she said.

"The secretary fully respects the judgment of scientists and would never force them by saying, 'Here's a policy decision, now make it work,"' Harrison said. "But she's very inquisitive and asks a lot of hard questions."

In the case of the Chinese pears -- round, pale yellow fruit called ya -- the department imposed a ban in 2001 because they were found to carry a fungus that can spread to American pears and apples. It lifted the ban in 2003 and then imposed it again last Christmas.

"We get pressure all the time to allow in products from China," the senior scientist said.

Describing the "horse trading" that went on, the scientist asked: "Why is this an issue for negotiations? The science ought to be allowed to speak. If the context is, 'We'll take your fungus-ridden pears if you'll intercede with North Korea and get them to cut their nuclear program,' well, O.K., maybe that's a good thing. But we're not asked to participate at that level. We're just asked to look at the science."

Richard Dunkle, a department official in charge of plant quarantines, said that decisions were based on science. A new fungus was found in 2001, Dunkle said, then imports were reauthorized after the mold was traced to a few Chinese orchards and cold treatment was ordered to stop its spread.

When it reappeared last year, he said, imports were cut off, even though the Americans and Chinese disagreed over whether it was a new, hardier species. When the Chinese were convinced it was, "they said we were prudent and reasonable," he said.