[bcrl]

It's not entirely regulatory capture. Progress in science requires the ability to understand and accept that new information can arrive that invalidates prior decisions. In the political sphere, this is known as a "flip-flop" and is sadly considered to be a poor trait by a good chunk of the public. So long as governments represent the public, and a cross section of the general public thinks that flip-flopping is a bad thing, I don't think it's possible to have decisions driven by the best available science.

Side note: even scientists get things wrong. Businesses thrive on certainty, so some level of damping of changes in regulatory direction is required. Finding the right balance is, however, not something humans have done as well as we need to just yet.