Search post-gazette.com:
Text Size:
A|
A|
A
Email
PrintDr. Devra Davis chat transcript
Thursday, October 11, 2007
ManyQuestions: On NPR's Fresh Air, I believe you said Aspartame might not have been approved had it not been for the intervention of Donald Rumsfeld, then the head of G.D. Searle. Can you elaborate on what role he played in getting it approved?
Dr. Devra Davis: I don't know what his precise role was. I only know that prior to his becoming CEO of Searle aspartame had been turned down by every scientific group reviewing its safety and that the General Counsel of the FDA asked the U.S. Attorney's office to convene a grand jury to decide whether to indict the producer for knowingly misrepesenting findings... The grand jury never acted. Those working on this for the government went to work for Searle. The day after Reagan's inauguration, the company resubmitted a request for approval. Within five months of Reagan's presidency, aspartame was approved.
ManyQuestions: Have any of the subjects of your writings threatened you with legal action?
Dr. Devra Davis: no but I am aware that some publications that were planning to review my book have been pressured not to do so
ManyQuestions: In the P-G article, you discuss a number of different items people regularly come into contact with that you feel are dangerous. Is there any one of those in particular that you believe represents the biggest threat to human health? Why?
Dr. Devra Davis: people have to take steps one at a time with things they are comfortable changing in their lives. Most people understand the importance of the foods they consume, but few think about the personal care products or cleaning products that they use. Children should not: pump gasoline, use cell phones except in emergencies, eat aspartame, or have unnecessary CT scans.
ManyQuestions: Do you believe the dangers you have outlined come from a "culture of deregulation" at the national level? Are the Democrats any better than the Republicans on this issue?
Dr. Devra Davis: This issue transcends party politics. as Tom Friedman has written, green is the new red, white and blue.
ManyQuestions: Should our regulatory structure be changed to prevent these types of products from coming into widespread use? If so, how would you change it?
Dr. Devra Davis: yes. FDA, CPSC, EPA, OSHA, lack budget and authority to monitor and control suspect agents domestically and internationally. The adversarial system does not work well enough. We would need 500 years to clean up Superfund sites that are known, and 200 years to regulate known workplace carcinogens, even if we had the political will to do so.... which we do not. Therefore, I advocate a truth and reconciliation approach to toxic hazards that immunizes cooperating institutions from punitive damages, in return for providing information on toxic hazards that they have produced.
ManyQuestions: You wrote a book about the deaths/illnesses related to the Donora, Pa., pollution incident in 1948 that killed 18 people. When this incident occurred, did it happen so fast that people were overcome before they could try to leave? (Did they die in their sleep, for example?) Or did people not recognize a very dangerous situation had developed and therefore did not attempt to leave?
Dr. Devra Davis: By the time people realized there was a problem, they were trapped. Some died in their homes, others succumbed on the sidewalks. Most had been sickened before by the slow steady rain of polluted air over the years. People were unable to see their feet on the street. Some sheltered themselves in their basements.
ManyQuestions: Is there any way for the average person to keep up with what other countries are doing/saying regarding product safety? Is there any source where someone could go to learn, for example, that chemical X has been banned in 17 countries, but it is allowed in the U.S.?
Dr. Devra Davis: our web site www.preventingcancernow.org can direct you to others with information on this. One that provides information on the European Union activity is www.ewg.org
Dr. Devra Davis: The CPSC Reform Act of 2007 (S.2045) has a final paragraph mandating a national CPSC furniture flammability standard by June 2008. The CPSC draft standard could result in putting tens of millions of persistent, bioaccumulative, potentially toxic chemicals into American homes each year when there are better ways to reduce fire hazard. The Act had a hearing with the full Commerce Committee last week and is on a very fast track as it bans lead from children's toys for the first time . The CPSC Reform Act of 2007 and a Furniture Flammability Standard 1. A Congressional mandate for furniture flammability standard is premature given the many unanswered questions regarding human and animal health and environmental impacts of the millions of pounds of potentially toxic chemicals that would be used to meet the standard at this time. Section 25 of S.2045 should be deleted from the CPSC Reform Act of 2007. 2. If Congress wants to impose a deadline for a furniture flammability standard, it must first assess the human and animal health impacts from the toxicity, carcinogenicity, and endocrine disruption of the fire retardant chemicals that would be used to meet the standard. 3. Full disclosure and full data from the chemical manufacturers is needed Currently, safety cannot be evaluated by a review of the available scientific data and literature because there are huge data gaps for the fire retardant chemicals that would be used to meet the standard. They cannot be properly assessed until the chemical industry discloses to government regulators and scientists the components of their proprietary mixtures of chemical fire retardants. 4.. Following that disclosure, extensive studies must be conducted regarding bioaccumulation and persistence, especially in children, and also endocrine disruption, carcinogenicity, and reproductive and neurological toxicity. 5. California, the only state in the country with a furniture flammability standard, has current legislation, (AB706), to alter their standard due to serious human health and environmental concerns. Most major environmental organizations and a number of the largest firefighter organizations in California support the legislation. None are opposed. 6. The same fire retardant, chlorinated tris, that was removed from children's sleepwear 30 years ago is being used to meet the California standard. Tris is a mutagen and a carcinogen and CPSC studies predict 300 cases of cancer per million people exposed to tris in furniture. If tris were used across the US, 90,000 cases of cancer would be predicted.. 7. Dozens of scientific studies are under way looking at the relationship of other fire retardant chemicals to birth defects, autism, hyperactivity, reduced fertility and sperm counts and other neurological and reproductive conditions. A study was just published linking these chemicals to a new epidemic of hyperthyroid disease in pet cats. 8. To put tens of millions of persistent, bioaccumulative, potentially toxic chemicals into American homes when changing fabric design and construction can offer better, cheaper and less dangerous ways to reduce fire hazard is an irresponsible action on the part of Congress and a violation of the public trust. (The foam industry estimates 17 to 70 million additional pounds of potentially toxic chemicals.) This is far too serious an issue for the health of Americans and their environment to be tacked on as the last eight lines of a 52 page-long bill.
Dr. Devra Davis: I don't know what his precise role was. I only know that prior to his becoming CEO of Searle aspartame had been turned down by every scientific group reviewing its safety and that the General Counsel of the FDA asked the U.S. Attorney's office to convene a grand jury to decide whether to indict the producer for knowingly misrepesenting findings... The grand jury never acted. Those working on this for the government went to work for Searle. The day after Reagan's inauguration, the company resubmitted a request for approval. Within five months of Reagan's presidency, aspartame was approved.
ManyQuestions: Have any of the subjects of your writings threatened you with legal action?
Dr. Devra Davis: no but I am aware that some publications that were planning to review my book have been pressured not to do so
ManyQuestions: In the P-G article, you discuss a number of different items people regularly come into contact with that you feel are dangerous. Is there any one of those in particular that you believe represents the biggest threat to human health? Why?
Dr. Devra Davis: people have to take steps one at a time with things they are comfortable changing in their lives. Most people understand the importance of the foods they consume, but few think about the personal care products or cleaning products that they use. Children should not: pump gasoline, use cell phones except in emergencies, eat aspartame, or have unnecessary CT scans.
ManyQuestions: Do you believe the dangers you have outlined come from a "culture of deregulation" at the national level? Are the Democrats any better than the Republicans on this issue?
Dr. Devra Davis: This issue transcends party politics. as Tom Friedman has written, green is the new red, white and blue.
ManyQuestions: Should our regulatory structure be changed to prevent these types of products from coming into widespread use? If so, how would you change it?
Dr. Devra Davis: yes. FDA, CPSC, EPA, OSHA, lack budget and authority to monitor and control suspect agents domestically and internationally. The adversarial system does not work well enough. We would need 500 years to clean up Superfund sites that are known, and 200 years to regulate known workplace carcinogens, even if we had the political will to do so.... which we do not. Therefore, I advocate a truth and reconciliation approach to toxic hazards that immunizes cooperating institutions from punitive damages, in return for providing information on toxic hazards that they have produced.
ManyQuestions: You wrote a book about the deaths/illnesses related to the Donora, Pa., pollution incident in 1948 that killed 18 people. When this incident occurred, did it happen so fast that people were overcome before they could try to leave? (Did they die in their sleep, for example?) Or did people not recognize a very dangerous situation had developed and therefore did not attempt to leave?
Dr. Devra Davis: By the time people realized there was a problem, they were trapped. Some died in their homes, others succumbed on the sidewalks. Most had been sickened before by the slow steady rain of polluted air over the years. People were unable to see their feet on the street. Some sheltered themselves in their basements.
ManyQuestions: Is there any way for the average person to keep up with what other countries are doing/saying regarding product safety? Is there any source where someone could go to learn, for example, that chemical X has been banned in 17 countries, but it is allowed in the U.S.?
Dr. Devra Davis: our web site www.preventingcancernow.org can direct you to others with information on this. One that provides information on the European Union activity is www.ewg.org
LaurieMann A question - I know you have concerns about kids' exposure to X-rays. I had a number of kidney and head X-rays back in 1962 when I was five. Is there anything I should be on the lookout for?
Dr. Devra Davis: Good nutrition can counteract the effects of much pollution, including the damaging impact of x-rays. Young people have excellent repair systems. Radiation to the central cavity of the body does place women at risk of breast cancer. Regular physical exams of the breast with a health professional, with appropriate use of mammography can find breast cancer early in women who are menopausal.
ManyQuestions: What motivated you to write this book and is there any particular reason why you have written this book now?
Dr. Devra Davis: It's taken me twenty years to write this book. My first try ended in 1986 after I explained to Frank Press, my boss at the National Academy of Sciences, that I had been offered a hefty advance to write about the fundamental misdirections of the war on cancer. With support from Press, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and universities and research institutions in Europe and the U.S., my colleagues and I had published a series of papers showing that cancer had actually increased and it couldn't all be explained by smoking, improved diagnoses, or aging. Judged by this standard, the then two-decade-long War on Cancer wasn't going well . Our work, released at conferences of Danish, Dutch, Swedish, German, British and American cancer researchers, made headlines. It felt like we had some serious scientific mojo. The book contract seemed to confirm that judgment....
Dr. Devra Davis: The modern critique of our failure to ferret out and act on preventable causes of goes back more than four decades, to Murray Bookchin and Rachel Carson. Valiant, and little heeded, efforts were mounted right before or during the Reagan revolution by Larry Agran, Sam Epstein and Janette Sherman. In 1996, Robert Proctor published a book called Cancer Wars, taking the title from my own waylaid effort at the time. He chronicled the successes of the producers of tobacco and other cancer-causing materials in crafting scientific doubt about their hazards and the politically problematic efforts of the Carter Administration to reign in tobacco and industrial chemicals. Sandra Steingraber drew well-deserved attention with her haunting, sometimes humorous books Living Downstream and Having Faith -- the latter about becoming a mother as a cancer survivor in a world full of chemical risks. People understand that imports from China can contain dangerous materials. as a result, Congress is rushing to pass new laws to give the government authority to act. But, there is a Trojan Horse within the proposed legislation, as it would lead to unnecessary exposures to toxic agents in America that are mostly banned in Europe and Sweden.
Q: What has been the reaction to your book from regulators and politicians?
Dr. Devra Davis: The CPSC Reform Act of 2007 (S.2045) has a final paragraph mandating a national CPSC furniture flammability standard by June 2008. The CPSC draft standard could result in putting tens of millions of persistent, bioaccumulative, potentially toxic chemicals into American homes each year when there are better ways to reduce fire hazard. The Act had a hearing with the full Commerce Committee last week and is on a very fast track as it bans lead from children's toys for the first time . The CPSC Reform Act of 2007 and a Furniture Flammability Standard 1. A Congressional mandate for furniture flammability standard is premature given the many unanswered questions regarding human and animal health and environmental impacts of the millions of pounds of potentially toxic chemicals that would be used to meet the standard at this time. Section 25 of S.2045 should be deleted from the CPSC Reform Act of 2007. 2. If Congress wants to impose a deadline for a furniture flammability standard, it must first assess the human and animal health impacts from the toxicity, carcinogenicity, and endocrine disruption of the fire retardant chemicals that would be used to meet the standard. 3. Full disclosure and full data from the chemical manufacturers is needed Currently, safety cannot be evaluated by a review of the available scientific data and literature because there are huge data gaps for the fire retardant chemicals that would be used to meet the standard. They cannot be properly assessed until the chemical industry discloses to government regulators and scientists the components of their proprietary mixtures of chemical fire retardants. 4.. Following that disclosure, extensive studies must be conducted regarding bioaccumulation and persistence, especially in children, and also endocrine disruption, carcinogenicity, and reproductive and neurological toxicity. 5. California, the only state in the country with a furniture flammability standard, has current legislation, (AB706), to alter their standard due to serious human health and environmental concerns. Most major environmental organizations and a number of the largest firefighter organizations in California support the legislation. None are opposed. 6. The same fire retardant, chlorinated tris, that was removed from children's sleepwear 30 years ago is being used to meet the California standard. Tris is a mutagen and a carcinogen and CPSC studies predict 300 cases of cancer per million people exposed to tris in furniture. If tris were used across the US, 90,000 cases of cancer would be predicted.. 7. Dozens of scientific studies are under way looking at the relationship of other fire retardant chemicals to birth defects, autism, hyperactivity, reduced fertility and sperm counts and other neurological and reproductive conditions. A study was just published linking these chemicals to a new epidemic of hyperthyroid disease in pet cats. 8. To put tens of millions of persistent, bioaccumulative, potentially toxic chemicals into American homes when changing fabric design and construction can offer better, cheaper and less dangerous ways to reduce fire hazard is an irresponsible action on the part of Congress and a violation of the public trust. (The foam industry estimates 17 to 70 million additional pounds of potentially toxic chemicals.) This is far too serious an issue for the health of Americans and their environment to be tacked on as the last eight lines of a 52 page-long bill.
Anthony: What surprised you the most when researching this book?
Dr. Devra Davis: How much was known by some scientists and industry for so long about the cancer-causing properties of some widely used materials and agents. How well that information was kept from health professionals and the public. And how much encouragement I got from individuals in industry, especially those leading the green revolution that cuts across all sectors, to tell these stories. Remarkable and surprising documents that constitute the historic archives of the book will be available at www.preventingcancernow.orgResources:
Center for Environmental Oncology
Environmental Risks of Breast Cancer in African American Women brochure
Dr. Devra Davis???s book, The Secret History of the War on Cancer official website
Supporting Documents for The Secret History of the War on Cancer
Frequently Asked Questions:
Elevated PBDE Levels in Pet Cats: Sentinels for Humans? (Publication): http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/esthag/2007/41/i18/abs/es0708159.html
First published on October 11, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Subscribe and save
Report news to the PG
Get Email headlines
Place a Classified Ad
Subscribe to RSS feeds
Place a Celebrations Ad
Pittsburgh Mom
Post your pictures
Games
Coupons
Shop the PG store