By Gilbert Ross, M.D.
Posted: Sunday, August 18, 2002

LETTER
Publication Date: August 18, 2002

Of course advocates involved with breast cancer on Long Island were disappointed in the results of the recently completed federal study "What Next?" Aug. 11 . They had been told so often by environmental activists that there must be some relation between breast cancer rates here and one or another chemical pollutant that it became received wisdom; no doubters were tolerated.

That's what happens when science is made subservient to policy and politics, especially when millions of dollars in financing is also at stake. Despite many efforts to tie cancer causation to trace levels of environmental chemicals, especially pesticides, no such relationship has ever been shown, scientifically. In any event, the cancer rate on Long Island is not significantly higher than the national norms, and the slight discrepancy can be explained by socio-demographic factors. Why keep wasting tax money on these studies -- money that could be put to much more effective use in public health areas crying out for financing, like anti-tobacco education for our young people, messages aimed at improving adult immunizations and increased use of seat belts and bike helmets? These are measures that would save lives, not fit some activist agenda.

Gilbert Ross, M.D.
Medical Director
American Council on Science and Health

Source Notes:  
The New York Times