Toxin Agency Official Hollers Back
John Steward, a former public health official for the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, read our two-part report on the CDC agency and took issue with a few points. Steward carried out the 2001 health consultation for Athens, Ga. resident Jill McElheney, mentioned in the piece. He's now at Georgia State University's Institute of Public Health. Here's what he had to say:
ATSDR/CDC is far from perfect, but doesn't cover up, mislead, or ignore public health problems. There are real differences among scientists, both outside and within the agency in methods, philosophy, and perspective. Among ATSDR's biggest problems is lack of resources to do all of the research and investigation that could be done. It frequently has severe deadlines. And it occasionally has political constraints (it is within the government structure). Just like citizens, scientists are frustrated when the available data and the science base are not sufficient to draw firm conclusions; thus, many of the results are "inconclusive." ATSDR scientists don't have the power to force agencies to do all the things that could be done on a precautionary basis.The articles put together a number of unrelated events and make it appear that there is a pattern, when in fact there isn't likely to be. The same occurs with disease clusters- startling occurrences put together look related, but they may not be related at all.The article also leaves the impression that the cases of polycythemia vera were caused by environmental exposure. Although I am not an expert, I believe most scientists feel that the causes are unknown (it is a genetic disorder).To ATSDR's credit, they do review and respond in some way to every request from a citizen, whether it is an individual, congressman, or large group. They really do try to be objective and use science to evaluate concerns. Anytime one steps out of the research/academic/laboratory environment and into the "real world," the job gets messy. Many times ATSDR is asked to do the impossible. Because they listen to the community, often they actually try to respond. There are many reasons for the limitations on ATSDR's work, but lack of knowing, trying or caring isn't among them.
The only point I want to refute is Steward's claim that polycythemia vera couldn't be caused by environmental exposure because it's a genetic disorder. The disease is caused by a genetic mutation, yes, but time and time again, oncologist-hematologists familiar with the rare disease have said that environmental factors can cause the mutation. More importantly, they've said that the eastern Penn. clusters in question strongly suggest environmental influence -- because heredity and occupational factors were ruled out. It's also well documented that environmental factors can cause cancer, generally speaking.
Comments:
Posted 04/01/2008 02:20pm with
John Steward has made a couple of good points. He states “political constraints” are a factor. Herein lies the problem. It appears political pressures at federal, state, and local levels mandate, “Never allow public health to trump industrial and corporate goals.” There is no issue when you go after a virus or bacteria, but when you go after an industry the stakes are much different.
I want to emphasize that it is not our intent to demean our public health agencies because most of the employees have shown commitment when it comes to combating disease – except when it implicates industry.
By political design, looking for a link between industrial toxins and public health issues is not a priority in this country. Although we understand the difficulties in establishing this link, there appears to be an organized systematic effort by agencies (at the local, state and federal levels) charged with protecting public health to discourage the identification of environmental factors that may be adversely impacting public health.
Mr. Steward is in denial when he states, “ATSDR…doesn’t cover up, mislead, or ignore public health problems. Refer to statement by US House Committee on Science & Technology, subcommittee on investigations & Oversight, “At the same time, FEMA was publicly using the February Health Consultation to justify maintaining the status quo and keeping people in trailers. …Yet, the leadership of ATSDR remained silent. They did not publicly or privately correct the record, seek a “revised” Health Consultation or take other appropriate actions.”
We understand that the science of environmental health is still evolving and that it is extremely difficult to definitively link environmental factors to illness and disease. There is a preponderance of circumstances that leads the public to conclude a reluctance to even attempt to design studies that might identify an association between the environment and a variety of public health issues for fear that they may actually find problems that point to industry.
Unaware of the political pressures on ATSDR to embody a philosophy geared to the non-identification of problems potentially associated with industry, many communities have naively turned to ATSDR for help. ATSDR white-washed conclusions serve only to put another nail in the public’s coffin. The community loses its leverage to negotiate for better public health conditions for their families after the ultimate health agency (CDC/ATSDR) has given them a clean bill of health in an effort to protect industry. Most communities do not have the knowledge, resources and expertise to successfully challenge the reports of this perceived “ultimate authority” (ATSDR).
Mr. Steward is correct to assert, “ATSDR scientists don’t have the power to force agencies to do all the things that could be done on a precautionary basis.” However they do have the responsibility to state the true scientific facts.
If our public health agencies cannot acknowledge that industrial toxins (proven by science to cause diseases manifesting in the public) may be responsible for a variety of public health issues, they cannot be relied upon to be part of a solution. Rather they become part of the problem. Until political intervention is halted and ATSDR is allowed to complete its mission to serve the public by using the best science, taking responsive public health actions, and providing trusted health information to prevent harmful disease-related exposure to toxic substances they should be prevented from issuing any further public health assessments/consultations.