In this episode I speak with Andrew Johnson, Environmental Research Scientist at the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and Visiting Professor at Brunel University.

Andrew and I have a fascinating discussion about the current state of scientific research and public discourse on chemicals, and how a different approach might ultimately lead to better outcomes for wildlife. 

Our conversation covers:

• Andrew's background and research interests
• What's wrong with the way we do research on chemicals?
• Endocrine disruption and uncovering population-relevant effects
• Insights from 30 years of monitoring data on macroinvertebrate diversity in English rivers
• The issue of combined sewer overflows
• Why monitoring data is so valuable, and so underappreciated
• Problems with the Water Framework Directive 
• Risk assessment of chemicals and the mixture assessment factor (MAF)
• Are we prioritising the wrong things?
• Perverse incentives in research 
• Science in the media and improving public discourse
• Advice for early career scientists

Zinc and Copper Have the Greatest Relative Importance for River Macroinvertebrate Richness at a National Scale | Environmental Science & Technology

Review of the Classification Framework for Ecological Status/Potential under the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) England and Wales Regulations - WT15168

Are we going about chemical risk assessment for the aquatic environment the wrong way? | Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry | Oxford Academic

How to be a Better Scientist | Andrew Johnson, John Sumpter | Taylor & Francis

Visit my website for more content and insights www.embarkchemical.com