Attack of the killer toasters

Editorial Copyright 1999 Washington Times August 2, 1999

Call off the scare. It's all right to keep your electric appliances and computers after all. The findings of a study linking electric power to cancer have dissipated under the scrutiny of federal fraud investigators. So as long as you aren't in the habit of taking a shower with your toaster, it's not the killer originally feared.

In 1992, a scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory named Robert Liburdy published two studies purporting to link electromagnetic radiation to various cancers. The implications of his findings, which got quite a bit of attention at the time, were enormous. Persons living near high-tension power lines had the most to fear, but almost everyone found himself living with suspected serial killers. Electromagnetic radiation is present in home wiring, computers and more; flip on the electric blanket and you could be cuddling up with cancer. Mr. Liburdy collected a cool $3.3 million in grants from the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Defense Department to continue his research.

But a whistle-blower subsequently challenged the findings, accusing Mr. Liburdy of falsifying his data. The Berkeley lab, an arm of DOE, conducted an investigation and concluded that the whistle-blower was right. The lab, in turn, notified the Office of Research Integrity, part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Last month, the office reported Mr. Liburdy had "engaged in scientific misconduct in biomedical research by falsifying and fabricating data and claims about the purported cellular effects of electric and magnetic fields."

The scientist, who agreed to give up federal grants for three years as part of a settlement, denies wrongdoing, saying the only reason he agreed to settle was that he would not be able to raise sufficient funds to defend himself. But numerous studies trying to find a connection between electric power and cancer have been unable to find one. Aside from the obvious lessons here - don't panic over emerging "science" or the media reports that promote them - there is a more controversial one now occupying Congress: Allow access to the data from federally subsidized research, and allow other researchers to see the data and attempt to replicate the original findings. That's the way real science is supposed to work anyway.

Two years ago Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby proposed - and the president signed into law -legislation applying the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to data produced with federal funds. But critics, who said they had no idea the Shelby amendment was part of the measure they approved, have denounced it as a threat to trade secrets, the privacy of research subjects and academic freedom. They're seeking repeal of the statute. James O'Reilly, a visiting professor of law at the University of Cincinnati and author of numerous works on FOIA and disclosure, says they have nothing to fear. The law specifically exempts data for products seeking patent protection. Both FOIA and the Privacy Act block the release of data from research subjects' medical records and identifiable personal information. And because FOIA protects individual privacy and property rights, it is not a danger to academic freedom.

So don't pass the repeal. Do pass the toast.

---

Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.