By MIKE STOBBE
AP Medical Writer
ATLANTA (AP) — Under pressure from Congress, the government released a
controversial draft report Wednesday that suggests pollution is causing
health problems in some parts of the Great Lakes states, including cancer and
premature births.
The document was produced by scientists at the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. But CDC administrators quickly distanced themselves from the
work, saying that some of the science is weak, and that they released it
after accusations of a cover-up.
CDC officials also said they have asked an independent scientific advisory
organization — the Institute of Medicine — to review the drafts and give its
own assessment of the work’s quality.
“We’re sending it to the best scientific body in the country. They can tell
us whether we were justified or not” in having misgivings about the science,
said Dr. Henry Falk, who oversees CDC research on environmental health
hazards.
It’s unusual — but not unheard of — for the institute to review CDC research.
It is expected to finish its assessment by the end of June, CDC officials
said.
The CDC had been under fire from some congressmen for withholding the
documents and for reassigning the scientist in charge of the project,
Christopher De Rosa, to lesser duties.
Some lawmakers said they believe De Rosa was reassigned because he pushed for
release of important information.
The report compiles previously available information on measurements of
pollution and on health measures like infant mortality and cancer death
rates. The CDC on Wednesday released drafts of the report from 2004 and 2007.
CDC bosses are especially troubled by one table from a 2007 draft that shows
high rates of cancer in about two dozen areas, and greater rates of premature
births in four.
They said there are multiple problems with that. One is the health measures
are drawn from county statistics, but the report is meant to look at
pollution areas that are sometimes larger or smaller than a county. It would
take new research focused on pollution sources to show a cause-effect
relationship, they argue.
Yet another revision of the report is to be released later this month, Falk
said.
The CDC’s handling of the matter “raises grave questions about the integrity
of scientific research” at the agency, “as well as the treatment of its
scientists,” U.S. Reps. John Dingell and Bart Stupak, both Michigan
Democrats, wrote in a letter last month to CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding.
The CDC’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry conducted the
study. It was requested in 2001 by the International Joint Commission, an
independent panel that advises U.S. and Canadian officials on Great Lakes
water quality issues.
Parts of the drafts have already been available. The Center for Public
Integrity, a nonprofit journalism organization in Washington, D.C., earlier
published what it said were excerpts.
Dingell and Stupak last month asked the CDC for records involving the
decision to withhold the report. They requested copies of communications
between De Rosa, the scientist who led the study, and his superiors —
Gerberding and Dr. Howard Frumkin, director of the toxics agency.
“It is disappointing that it took a congressional investigation and intense
media coverage to prompt the release of a scientific report that has been
five years in the making,” Stupak said in a statement.
He added that there are still unanswered questions, and a congressional
review will continue into “the circumstances behind CDC’s suppression of this
report and any possible retaliation against the whistleblower who worked to
bring it to light.”
———
On the Net: CDC Great Lakes report information: www.cdc.gov/
news/2008/02/GreatLakes.htm
Posted 3/13/2008