Yes, I'm seeing a lot of people who say "science-based" and "evidence-based" are non-informative. If that were true there would be no need for a ban, unless you

Yes, I'm seeing a lot of people who say "science-based" and "evidence-based" are non-informative. If that were true there would be no need for a ban, unless you think this is a bold new approach to copy-editing. What's worrisome is precisely that words like "science-based" and "evidence-based" are informative in the context of this administration--which is why they're banned.