By Elizabeth M. Whelan, Sc.D., M.P.H.
Posted: Sunday, February 13, 2005
ARTICLES
Publication Date: February 13, 2005
This article appeared in the New York Post:
February 13, 2005 -- Can a novel change the public's view of environmental risks? The answer is yes and the proof is Michael Crichton's latest blockbuster, "State of Fear" (HarperCollins, 603 pages, $27.95).
In this techno-thriller, Crichton (a Harvard-trained physician) confronts the threat of pseudo-science, the selective use of data to support politically-driven views -- in this case, the belief that careless human activity (the burning of fossil fuels) has made the world too dangerously warm, causing death-dealing weather changes and human misery. But Crichton's critique applies to many baseless health scares -- including ones focused on saccharin, "endocrine disrupters," deodorants, cell phones, pesticides, and more.
Crichton creates scenarios that seem to offer no hope for the book's heroes, including heart-stopping glimpses of characters caught under ice or at the mercy of killer lightning. But there is a serious theme here: Many of those purporting to do good do harm by distorting science to achieve their political goals.
Crichton explains his concerns in the author's notes and in the novel itself. A few examples:
--The precautionary principle -- a basic part of radical environmental dogma -- says that if there is even a hint of a health or ecological problem associated with a form of technology, that technology should be discarded.
But Crichton notes: "The current near-hysterical preoccupation with safety is at best a waste of resources and a crimp on the human spirit, and at worse, an invitation to totalitarianism."
--Organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council are dogmatic in their view that all environmental and health woes can be traced directly to the door of "industry."
Crichton opines: "I have more respect for people who change their views after acquiring new information than for those who cling to views they held for thirty years. The world changes. Ideologues and zealots don't."
--Activists often attack the motives of those who challenge them.
When Crichton's hero Dr. Kenner informs an environmentalist lawyer that there are many studies that do not support the theory of global warming, the attorney responds: "these studies are probably financed by the coal industry."
Kenner responds by asking the lawyer who pays his salary (environmental advocates who are clients of the law firm): "are you a paid flunky for the environmental movement...a mouthpiece for a...media machine with a multi-billion dollar industry in its own right?"
The lawyer is offended, but Dr. Kenner explains, "Now you know how legitimate scientists feel when their integrity is impugned by slimy characterizations such as the one you just made."
--The chemical DDT was vilified as a public health and environmental threat and was banned in 1972 despite the protests of scientists.
Crichton's Dr. Kenner notes that DDT was the best defense against malaria-causing mosquitoes: "altogether, the ban has caused more than 50 million needless deaths...[B]anning DDT killed more people than Hitler...and the environmental movement pushed hard for it."
Kenner does find reason for hope, though, since some people with whom he matches wits change their minds as the evidence accumulates.
Crichton's novel may have a similar effect in the real world.
Elizabeth M. Whelan is president of the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH.org), which recently released "America's War on 'Carcinogens': Reassessing the Use of Animal Tests to Predict Human Cancer Risk."
