{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0192090395480226, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007909604519774011, 'mean_word_length': 4.828947368421052, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
'Secret science' plan is back, and critics say it's worse.

Critics are blasting a revised Trump administration plan to give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) broad power to ignore research results when setting public health rules if officials decide the underlying data are not adequately accessible to the public. The draft document, a version of which was leaked to The New York Times this week, supplements a 2018 data transparency proposal from EPA. The agency said in a 12 November statement that the leaked document is not the final version it sent to the White House for review but did not dispute its core substance. The document suggests EPA wants to greatly broaden the policy9s scope. It also suggests the transparency rule might be applied retroactively to past studies used to support regulation, potentially opening the door to challenges of existing rules.