Changes

George Carlo (Doc Index)

9,658 bytes added, 22:10, 28 December 2016

no edit summary

* [[James MacRae]], ex Dept.Admin [[Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs]] (OIRA) and Tozzi/Auchter's [[Center for Regulatory Effectiveness]] (CRE)

* [[Michael Gough]] and [[Steven J Milloy]] - [[TASSC]] and junk-science scams

* HESG Staff: [[Kelly G Sund]], [[Rebecca Steffens ]] ('Beckie'), [[James Baller ]] (lawyer)

==Various Research Associates==

* Professor [[Keith Solomon]]~~ ~~ -- Keith Solomon of University of Guelf, is probably the same K. Solomon who has worked for and with George in the HES days on a number of occasions -- and also the K. Solomon who featured in an 16 March 1997 article in the Toronto Star supporting the tobacco companies. He is quoted as saying that gun-shot wounds were more of a problem than second-hand smoke.* Professor [[Robert Squire]] ~~ ~~-- Robert Squire of John Hopkins University, is probably the RA Squire who also worked for HES. ~~Squires~~ Squire has worked with Carlo on a number of dubious projects.* Professor [[Anthony Miller]]~~ ~~-- Anthony Miller of the University of Toronto, is very probably the AB Miller who also worked with Carlo at HES on tobacco problems.* Dr [[Philip Cole]] ~~ ~~ -- There are three Philip Coles in the archives. This one worked for Dow Corning,

All above appear to be available to conduct research projects with Carlo when required. There is nothing to necessarily suggest a propensity for scientific ~~distoriation~~ distortion other than their close association with Carlo.

==Documents & Timeline==

1940s: Carlo's family migrated to the USA from Calabria in Sicily.

<hr>

1953 Aug 24 George Carlo was born in New York.His parents were Sicilians from near Palermo. [This family background closely parallelled that of [[Michael Repacholi]] who ran the WHO's EMF program: Repacholi's parents also came from the same region of Sicily.]

1971 /E Carlo earned his bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees from State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo <ref>(Carlo's online biography)</ref>

<hr>

~~1972~~ <div style=background:#eeeedd> 1972: BACKGROUND: A small group of Boston-area scientists became concerned about the failure of two experiments in emergency water-cooling of small nuclear piles. The experiments had found that in some nuclear accidents, steam was generated around the hot fuel rods to the point where emergency cool water could not contain or control the run-away heat.

They formed the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]] to publicize the problem and demand action. These fears were addressed over the following few years. </div>

Carlo's "scientific involvement with dioxins" begins this year. He reveals in a letter to the Wall Street Journal (March 27 1992) that his focus at this time was on risk management rather than basic research. He also said that he "designed protocols" which were used by the Arkansas Department of Health about this time to "monitor dioxin-exposed Vietnamese refugees". {Note that there are some major inconsistencies in his dates with claims.]

<hr>

1972: Dr Carlo's "scientific involvement with dioxins" begins. He reveals in a letter to the Wall Street Journal (March 27 1992) that his focus at this time was on risk management rather than basic research. He also said that he designed protocols which were used by the Arkansas Department of Health about this time, to monitor dioxin-exposed Vietnamese refugees. {Note that there are some major inconsistencies in dates with his claims.] ~~<hr>~~1973 Carlo was now at the State University of New York at Buffalo. He says that he became a professional assistant football coach for the Buffalo Bulls, while at the University.

<hr>

Between 1974 and 1977 the Arkansas Power and Light ran their Nuclear One power plant. When it opened, the county had a still-birth rate of 20.3 per 1000, the following year it rose to 25.4, then to 27.5, and then in 1977 it hit a highly significant figure of 26.8 per thousand. "''The combined rate seen in the control counties farther from the site had, by contrast, dropped sharply.''"

<HR>

1974 Jul 30 '''Times Beach''' dioxin scare. The Centers for Disease Control finally discovered that trichlorophenol (which had a by-product, dioxin) was the highly dangerous contaminate which were causing human problems at the Times Beach township, near St Louis, Missouri. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_Beach,_Missouri] Little was done about it until 1982.</div>

<hr>

1975 Vietnam veterans, supported by some scientists and politicians, blamed '''Agent Orange''' as the cause of their own diseases and of birth defects in their children and demanded medical treatment and monetary compensation. Their efforts received a hugh boost from two television programs. <ref>[Source: Michael Gough's book "Politicizing Science"]</ref~~></div~~>

<hr>

1976-1977: Carlo is an Epidemiologist on the staff of the University of Arkansas's Medical Sciences department when the increased rate of still-births in Pope County became common knowledge. PUFF PIECE QUOTE: <blockquote>"While at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (sic), he chaired the research committee of the Department of Family and Community Medicine and designed the acute and chronic clinical work performed by that department." (Carlo biog)</blockquote>

<table style="width=100%" bgcolor="~~eeeeee~~eeeedd" border=1 rules=all cellpadding=105><tr bgcolor=#cccccc><th>Birth problems after Seveso</th></tr><tr><td>In 1996 it was found that in Seveso there was a change in the ratios of boy babies and girls in the exposed families. (males to females 26:48 for children born between April 1977 and December 1984) A 2001 study... <BLOCKQUOTE> observed no increase in all-cause and all-cancer mortality. However, results support that dioxin is carcinogenic to humans and corroborate the hypotheses of its association with cardiovascular- and endocrine-related effects. In 2009, an update including 5 more years (up to 1996) found the expected increase in "lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue neoplasms" and increased breast cancer. </BLOCKQUOTE> However, the most important factor in the decision that dioxins were dangerous in the long-term came from laboratory tests, carried out by scientists at the Dow Chemical Company. They showed dioxin to be the most potent cause of birth defects ever found in laboratory test animals.[Source Michael Gough's book "Politicizing Science"]<Gough was a later associate of both Carlo and [[Steven J Milloy]] in Philip Morris's junk-scince [[TASSC]] scam. </td></tr></table>

<hr>

1978 Aug 2 The story triggered action. The next day Dr Robert Whalen , the New York State Commissioner of Health, visited Love Canal and said: <BLOCKQUOTE> "The Love Canal Chemical Waste Landfill constitutes a public nuisance and an extremely serious threat and danger to the health, safety, and welfare of those using it or exposed to the conditions emanating from it, consisting, among other things, of chemical wastes lying exposed on the surface in numerous places and pervasive, pernicious, and obnoxious chemical vapors and fumes affecting both the ambient air and the homes of certain residents living near such sites." </BLOCKQUOTE>Dr Whalen convened a Blue-Ribbon Panel, declared a health emergency, and ordered the relocation of women and children living in the most contaminated parts of the estate. He issued an order to country health officials to close the school and reduce accessibility to one division of the site ["keep people off"], and to begin health studies.

<hr>

1978 Aug 4--Sept 79: George Carlo was now an ~~~~ Epidemiologist ~~~~ at the ~~~~ State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Medicine's ~~~~ Research Program in Occupational and Environmental Health.

[His C/V says that he was also] Clinical Instructor , State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Medicine, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine. ''[Source: George Carlo's C/V dated the end of 1988.] [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wsm14b00/pdf] One of Carlo's puff pieces says: <BLOCKQUOTE> Dr Carlo was among the first scientists on the scene at the infamous Love Canal chemical crisis in Niagara Falls, New York in 1978 that led to the Superfund law addressing hazards from abandoned hazardous waste sites. </BLOCKQUOTE>

<TABLE border=1 width = 100% align=center bgcolor=#~~eeeeee~~ eeeedd rules=all cellpadding=5> <tr bgcolor=#~~cccccc~~dddddd> <TH>Carlo's denial of Love Canal involvement... </th> </tr> <TR> <TD>

Defending himself against later charges that he was a consultant to the land developers at Love Canal (and there is no evidence of this) Carlo later wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> "I was one of the first consultants to be approached by Lois Gibbs and the other mothers who were concerned about the risk of miscarriages. We helped them put together the study that was later submitted to the State Health Department about health risks. I helped Congressman John LaFalce with the first writings of the Superfund Act that was intended to prevent financial harm to families living on or near abandoned hazardous waste sites and this a direct consequence of the Love Canal work.

My work was used by Congress because it supported the theory that the chemicals such as Mirex or Kepone were related to cancer. " </BLOCKQUOTE> [Google turns up no evidence supporting the claim that Carlo's research information was given to Congress, or of any relationship with Congressman LaFalce. However, it could well be true that the University was approached for help by Lois Gibbs, and therefore true that he helped the activists. </TD> </TR> </TABLE>

The Radiation and Public Health Project, an anti-nuclear organization, reported a spike in infant mortality in the downwind communities two years after the accident. </BLOCKQUOTE></div>: In some of his later puff-pieces Carlo claimed to have worked helping the public who had been affected by this accident.]

<hr>

1979 Oct: The American Department of Health issued a quick study which had been conducted on the Three Mile Island incident only 6 months after the event, and Carlo claims to have been involved as a consultant.

<hr>

1980: [[Superfund]]: A special government financed fund, initially of only $1.6 billion was established for general toxic site clean-ups around the United States after Love Canal. This was funded by a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries. However, the government was trying to load a proportion of these costs back on the States and on the industries that had caused the problems -- so the fund was strongly opposed by industry.</div>

The correct name of the Superfund is '''[[CERCLA]] (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act) ''' and Carlo claims to have been consulted on the design of the ~~Superfund~~ proposal by a congressional committee.

<hr>

1980 Research biologist ~~~~ Beverly J Paigen ~~~~, who was a senior staffer doing Cancer Research at Roswell Park while Carlo was there, has produced a series of papers on Love Canal ''[but she doesn't list Carlo as a contributor or co-author] <BLOCKQUOTE>

* "Controversy at Love Canal" which was published as a Hastings Center Report, in 1982.

* "Methods for assessing health risks in populations living near hazardous waste sites" 1983

* "Assessing the problem -- Love Canal," 1983

* Use of small mammals (voles) to assess a hazardous waste site at Love Canal, 1983[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cla89c00/pdf] </BLOCKQUOTE>: [It is possible that Carlo may have made some minor contributions to early Roswell Park papers before moving back to Arkansas in September 1980.]</font~~> [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cla89c00/pdf] </BLOCKQUOTE~~>

<hr>

<hr>

1980 Carlo says he was Principal Investigator this year on "Birth Cohort Infant Mortality and Environmental Insult in Arkansas Counties," study which was being funded by US Environmental Protection Agency, <ref> ''[Source: George Carlo's 1988 C/V as sent to the Tobacco Institute]</ref> [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wsm14b00/pdf] '': [We have found no studies which match the above. There is only the Arkansas Health Department study with no mention of the EPA. However, since his Arkansas Nuclear One paper had been recent published this could well be true.] ~~[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wsm14b00/pdf]~~

<hr>

Only six dumps were cleaned up during the first five years of Superfund, and it the activity went into limbo after September 30 1985 when its revenue sources dried up, . The new compromise became a Bill for Renewal, which would require the Environmental Protection Agency to identify for future action 1,600 of the nation's worst sites by 1988. [The agency's national priority list was about half that size.]

The compromise bill also gave citizens living near toxic sites the right to sue polluters to force a cleanup if EPA is not acting against a dump, and ~~to require~~ it required chemical companies to inform communities about emissions of ''acute hazards'' from their plants. <ref>See US News & World Report article from the 1980s.</ref> [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/smk15b00/pdf] </div>

<hr>

1980 May-June ''American Journal of Public Health '' (AJPH Vol 70 No 5 1980) publishes "Cancer incidence and trihalomethane concentrations in a public drinking water system." by G George L Carlo~~, C~~ and Curtis J Mettlin <BLOCKQUOTE> ~~Four thousand two hundred fifty-five~~ '''Abstract:''' 4255 cases of esophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, bladder, and pancreatic cancer reported from Erie County, NY between 1973 and 1976 were analyzed in terms of their relationship to type of water source, level of trihalomethane (THM) and various social and economic parameters. Among white males, a significant positive correlation existed between pancreatic cancer incidence rates and THM level. No other significant correlations were observed. This research lends little or no support to the hypothesis that THM levels which meet present standards are related to the incidence of human cancer. [http://www.abstractboard.com/author/Carlo+G+L/G-L-Carlo.html] </BLOCKQUOTE>: [Trihalomethanes are chlorinated organic molecules (like chloroform and CFCs) which damage the ozone layer. Some are known to be carcinogenic. Carlo seems to have repeated this study in 1984. This report lists Carlo at the Division of Biometry, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. It says that... "At the time of the study he was with the Research Program in Occupational and Environmental Health, SUNY at Buffalo, New York.   [It doesn't say who funded the study, but Dow Chemicals and other chemical companies were under attack for releasing these chlorine-based compounds into underground acquifers.]

<hr>

1980 June 6 A '''Hill & Knowlton''' PR Advisory to its clients: <BLOCKQUOTE>The Justice Department expects to file 100 lawsuits to enforce the cleanup of dangerous hazardous waste disposal sites in 1980. It claims there are from 500 to 600 dumping sites today that could be as much of a threat to public health as Love Canal. </BLOCKQUOTE> Another report says the National Toxicology Program "''had isolated about 200 compounds at the site and was testing 70 of them."" ''

<hr>

1980 Jul Dr [[Irwin DJ Bross]], Carlo's superior when he was at Buffalo and the Director of Biostatistics at Roswell Park Memorial Institute was attacking the way the chemical companies were downplay the dangers of dioxins. He wrote to the Washington Star : <BLOCKQUOTE> Even under the best of circumstances it is hard to do competent scientific studies of health hazards at Love Canal or other chemical (or nuclear) dump sites. Only a tiny fraction of physicians or scientists have any demonstrated competence in the conduct of such studies, and have any record of acting in the public interest in these issues. These researchers soon become the targets of well-orchestrated efforts to discredit them, to disparage their findings and to drive them out of research. This has happened at Love Canal, and it has occurred over and over again in the past 25 years. It is one of the main reasons why so little has been done to protect the public against hazardous chemical, nuclear and medical technologies. </BLOCKQUOTE> Bross also criticised a federal health official who told some women, who had had disastrous pregancies while living at New York's Love Canal, that "the cure was to quit smoking". [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bwn20g00/pdf]

: [[Irwin Bross]] was an anti-smoking crusader was also worked with the then-famous tobacco researcher Dr [[Ernst Wynder]] in an attempt to develop a "less harmful cigarette". [They both advocated a switch to filter cigarettes.] Wynder accepted more and more research funds from the tobacco industry over the years, and he would later become an occasional associate of Carlo, but there's no suggestion that the two were associated at this time.]

1980 Aug The EPA issues a requirement to all makers of the herbicide 2,4-D to prove the safety of their products. This herbcide was less of a dioxin risk than 2.4,5-T, but both were components of Agent Orange and both had contributed to the dioxin contamination. Under pressure from the EPA, the chemical companies jointly set up the Industry Task Force on 2,4-D Research Data (ITF) and entered into an agrement to produce the requested data for the EPA.

The 1980 notice required the ITF to conduct oncogenicity (cancer) tests with 2,4-D on both rats and mice (they often react differently). The Task Force eventually submitted the results of completed studies in 1986. By then, the EPA was under a 'more relaxed' administration.</div><hr>

===OTA Agent Orange Assessment Panel===

1981: The [[Agent Orange]] herbicide used by the military in Vietnam had serious dioxin contamination problem also. Dioxins were both toxic and caused mutagens, and they were accidentally when some manufacturing processes were not strictly supervised.

This year Carlo begins serving on the US Congress - via the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) panel on Agent Orange . He served alongside a couple of other scientists who were to become friends and business associates~~. He~~ , and he continues on this panel for at least ten years. QUOTE:<blockquote>"[Carlo]...served in diverse scientific advisory capacities, including membership on the US. Congress Office of Technology Assessment Agent Orange Advisory Panel. (Carlo biog)</blockquote>: [[Michael Gough]], ~~leading~~ lead this panel for the OTA; he later worked with Carlo at TASSC. Gough then moved on to a life of serving in libertarian think-tanks, firstly [[Resources for the Future]] and later the [[Cato Institute]]. [[Maurice LeVois]], (Carlo's later partner), was ~~working~~ a consultant on Agent Orange ~~for~~ representing the Veteran's Administration.~~~~ ~~LeVois~~ He became a partner in Carlo's consultancy company [[Health and Environmental Sciences ]] (HES)~~, while Gough moved on to a life of serving in libertarian think-tanks, firstly [[Resources for the Future]] and later the [[Cato Institute]]~~. : They became a mutual supporting clique, ~~and this provided Carlo~~ providing each with back-up when needed~~.: [All~~ , and all three later joined forces to support [[Steven J Milloy]] in the [[TASSC]] junk-science scam for Philip Morris]

<hr>

1982The [[Environmental Defense Fund ]] published a leaked letter from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which listed 14 confirmed, and 41 possible dioxin-contaminated sites in Missouri, and also attacked the EPA's attempts to lower the dioxin cleanup protocol standards.

[[Anne Gorsuch Burford ~~Gorsuch~~]] was the EPA director and [[Rita Lavelle]] was assistant administrator ~~(both~~ . Both were forced to resign not much later). Times Beach was highly contaminated and an excavation of 800 families was ordered on December 4th. The CDC publicly ~~recommended~~ stated that the settlement must not be reinhabited.

<table ~~style=~~"width=100%" bgcolor="eeeedd" border=1 rules=all cellpadding=5><tr><th>'''WTR - Cell phone research context:'''</th></tr><tr><td> In 1982 Dr William Morton of the University of Oregon found what he regarded as a significant link between low-levels of medium frequency (MF) radio radiation from television towers, and higher rates of lymphatic leukemia, cancers of the uterus, and breast cancer in Portland residents believed to be exposed to these radiations. [Well before cellphones became popular].

There was a general climate of fear in the public, resulting from the dioxin problems. There was also suspicion that certain types of radar had increased cancer rates among operators during the war .~~.. fears~~ There were also general concerns that not enough research had been done into possible health effects of radio frequency radiation when the technologies had become widely used during World War II ... and that no one had bothered to do research when similar frequencies were later used in the densely populated residential areas.

1987: Dr Richard Stevens, writing in the ''American Journal of Epidemiology'', suggests that increased rates of breast cancer might possibly be associated with radio frequency EMFs. </td></tr></table>

1983 The American Medical Association attack the news media for creating a scare at about [[Times Beach]]~~, claiming~~ pollution. They claimed that there was no scientific evidence that dioxins were so harmful. Dr Vernon Houk the director of CDC's Center for Environmental Health, ~~later~~ came to the same conclusionlater, but only years after having recommended the permanent relocationof the Times Beach population. {They were both wrong by later evidence!] However it was 2012 before new tests confirmed that the Times Beach dioxins had eventually degraded to safe levels].

<hr>

1986: The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorisation Act (SARA) increases the Superfund to $8.5 billion, and made private cleanups compulsory. Carlo says he was consulted by a congressional committee here also.

Reaganite zealots, [[Michael Gough]] (who had moved from the government Office of Technical Assessment (OTA), to the conservative think-tank "[[Resources for the Future]]") and 'junk-man' [[Steve J Milloy]] (then working through the [[National Environment Policy Institute]] (NEPI), and through [[Multinational Business Service]] (with [[James J Tozzi]] and [[Thorne Auchter]]), -- then later the [[EOP Group]]), were also involved in spin-doctoring the Superfund problems on behalf of the large corporations and the government.: Tozzi, Auchter, Milloy and Gough all later became promoters of the anti-science, junk-science ~~message~~ messages which were initiated and funded by Philip Morris to counter claims that 'scientists said that tobacco smoking was dangerous to your health'.~~~~

At this time the US Federal Government had a its own vested interest in covering up the Agent Orange scandalbecause of the Vietnam War. And since ~~this~~ Agent Orange was ~~associated with~~ a problem or dioxins, they also 'aided and abetted' the cover-up of dioxin pollution problems. ~~The~~ Their line was simply to deny that dioxins were strongly mutagenic; that the scientists were scare-mongering to get themselves government grants. ==Health and Environmental Services==1985 Aug Carlo leaves government employment and sets up as a cash-for-science lobbyist for the polluting companies. He initially operates as [[George Carlo & Associates}} with Maurice Le Vois, supposedly his "Director of Research"<hr>1987 Aug Carlo and [[Maurice Le Vois]] established [[Health and Environmental '''Services''']] Corporation (HES) in Carlo's brownstone house in Washington DC. [[Maurice Le Vois]] leaves the VA and establishes HES-West in San Francisco. The name on the letterhead is "Health & Environmental Sciences Corporation" and Le Vois titles himself "President". [https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/lhpc0114]: Note that at this time [[Dow Chemicals]] had a division named "Health and Environmental Sciences" run by lobbyist [[Robert Moolenaar]],

<hr>

1986-90: In this period, Carlo ~~leaves government service and sets up as a cash-for-science lobbyist for the polluting companies. He establishes~~ 's Washington branch of [[Health ~~and~~ & Environmental ~~Services~~Sciences]] ~~Corporation~~ Ltd. (~~HES~~later expanded to Group = HESG) ~~in his brownstone home in~~ had offices and staff at 1513 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington DC. ~~[[Maurice LeVois]] leaves~~ His staff are now working for the Chlorine Institute (which runs a program of disinformation on the dioxin issue for the paper manufacturers. He also has some of the VA larger chemical companies as clients: he acts personally as a consultant and ~~(sometime later) establishes HES~~trouble-shooter. Meanwhile he is trying to break into the big-time shonky-~~West in San Francisco~~research business with the tobacco companies.

<hr>

~~1986-90: Carlo's [[Health & Environmental Services]] Ltd. (later expanded to Group - now HESG) had offices and staff at 1513 Sixteenth Street, NW, Washington DC.~~

~~His staff are now working for the Chlorine Institute (which runs a program of disinformation on the dioxin issue for the paper manufacturers. He also~~ 1989 Aug - Oct [[Maurice Le Vois]] has ~~some of~~ set up the ~~larger chemical companies as clients: he acts personally~~ San Francisco branch sometimes known as ~~a consultant and trouble~~HES-~~shooter. Meanwhile he is trying to break into the big-time shonky-research business with the tobacco companies~~West. At this stage ~~LeVois~~ Le Vois and Carlo ~~join~~ have joined forces to provide Philip Morris with a proposal for sham research which can be used to prove that those scientists who oppose smoking are simply 'biased'. Le Vois has written to Philip Morris with a proposal:<blockquote>The ETS topical content of the communication would depend in part on identifying areas of greatest value to PM. This is a strategic matter, not a scientific question. However, it would probably be important to know which topics are most subject to strongly biased thinking, and which topics are likely to be viewed most objectively. This information could be derived from the survey pilot work discussed above since this is part of the goal of that process as well.

~~You can find~~ As you, know, George Carlo and I would like to conduct research for PM along the lines outlined above. We propose developing a detailed research protocol for the survey portion of this ~~letter~~ work, and I believe that it would be wise to work closely with PM at this stage in order to focus our research on areas of greatest value to the ~~Philip Morris document archives (It is document No 2023547147~~client. George has already mentioned that we would request a $7500 advance payment that would be billed against by us during the start up phase of this project. [http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf. edu/tobacco/docs/khpc0114]</blockquote>: The protocols for the research ~~are also at 2023549442~~were laundered through the Newman Partnership, (run by PM in house attorney Fred Newman and ~~some other~~ his brother) [https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/hjyc0114 ]: Notes of another meeting ~~memos can be found at 2023549425~~(Borelli included via conference call)[http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/mpbb0126]. This letter records what they were really trying to do.

<hr>

~~===Tobacco Research===~~

1989 Aug 10: In a letter signed by [[Maurice ~~LeVois~~Le Vois]] to Dr [[Thomas J Borelli]] who headed the Science & Technology division of Philip Morris (which directs both the real science and the pseudo-research), Carlo and LeVois offer to run a research project aimed to show that it is the personal anti-smoking biases among epidemiologists which causes them to 'mislead' politicians and the public about the dangers of ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke). [https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/khpc0114]<hr>1989 Sep Carlo and Le Vois began using the expanded name [[Health and Environmental Sciences Group]] (HESG).

<hr>

~~1989 Sep Carlo and LeVois began using the expanded name [[Health and Environmental Sciences Group]] (HESG) - but LeVois appears to leave almost immediately.~~

1989 Oct 6 The Newman Partners (Science PR for Philip Morris) have had a meeting with Philip Morris's top science dissemblers. They are launching a three-part 'Science Communications' project.

# To anticipate, then plan strategies for the EPA's ETS Risk Assessment (due shortly) Their primary contact is ~~LeVois~~Le Vois. Their goal is to show cumulative bias by the EPA over the long term - cost $25,000# Conduct the XYZ substances survey. This is the 'Bias Study' run by Carlo Le Vois and ~~his~~ staff (see below) - cost is $60,000

# Develop and implement usability strategies to show that these studies are examples of "poor science" resulting in "Media scare stories". Support for airline smoking is important. Part B of this is also to attack the epidemiological use of meta-analysis (the statistical combination of smaller studies to strengthen conclusions). They say: "at a minimum, raise doubt of the validity of the procedure and the conclusions drawn from its use."

He then adds a couple of pages of other papers to exploit (Including those of the life-time lobbyist [[Carl C Seltzer]]) and a hint at of the project now being run by [[Steven J Milloy]], [[The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition]] (TASSC). The total start-up costs for this program are $87,200~~, with~~ and it has a $163,750 per month on-going charge. [http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/njhh0089]

<hr>

1989 Oct 17 The Carlo-~~LeVois~~ Le Vois proposal to Philip Morris has been handed to [[Larry Newman]] who runs the [[Newman Partnership]] with his brother [[Fred Newman]], an in-house lawyer with Philip Morris. They hold a meeting with Carlo and his associate [[Patricia Doesberg]] (with a conference call to Borelli) in Washington DC.

The report of this meeting to Philip Morris says that after discussion the purpose of this study was:

# Provide a basis for strategic development. (ie counter-attack on the EPA).

They also greatly extended the idea. Carlo's HESG were also to look for weaknesses on the National Academy of Science study, the Surgeon General's report, and in some original studies (Hirayama - Non-smoking wives study).

[https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/mpbb0126] : Newman Partnership was a front company run by [[Fred Newman]] and his brother Larry. Fred Newman was the main in-house lawyer for Philip Morris. The paper was actually later published with a credit saying that the funding came from the [[Institute for Regulatory Policy]] (IRP) which was run by Carlo's associates [[Jim Tozzi]] and [[Thorne Auchter]]. [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zyb19e00/pdf]

<hr>

1989 Oct 26-31 The Newman Partnership also reports to Philip Morris's top scientists, [[Tom Borelli]], [[Nelson Beane]] and [[Tom Osdene]] on a Risk Society meeting in San Francisco. They are tracking the development of the [[EPA ETS Risk Assessment]] studies. In particular ~~one~~ a study by [[Kenneth G Brown]] and [[Douglass Crawford-Brown]] of Chapel Hill NC interested them because it was looking at the possibility that lung-cancer arose from radon. It was said to show that tobacco smoke in the air actually reduced the risk of radon as a carcinogen. This study was still incomplete. However there are ~~long~~ extensive recordings of their conversations with the two scientists, especially some expressions of doubt.

They also identify [[Dennis J Paustenbach]] and [[Adam Finkel]] as potentially useful.[http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/tpbb0126]

<hr>

1989 Nov 20 A formal approach is made ~~-- BUT NOT TO PHILIP MORRIS, but~~ to their ~~newly selected~~ new public relations /laundry firm Newman Partnership Lrd. [ http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/krq32c00/pdf]. The aim is to show that anti-smoking scientists are biased ~~and~~ . Philip Morris is keen to get this research.

The DRAFT proposal for <center>"'''Studies of Scientific Standards, ~~opinion~~ Opinion and Bias: Environmental Health Risk and Environmental Tobacco Smoke'''</center> is made to ~~'''~~The Newman Partnership, Ltd. Columbia, South Carolina [https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/hjyc0114] This is proposed as a multi-part very complex series of studies on a variety of substances, which are clearly selected to hide the cigarette company interest. The budget requested is $90,000 for the actual research. [http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/hjyc0114]

Carlo has include a list of potential subcontracts to provide peer-review and data collection services. His choices demonstrate that he already had good knowledge of scientists who regularly worked for the tobacco industry. He also suggests ~~which~~ those who should be used to 'peer review' the final study:* [[Maurice E ~~LeVois~~Le Vois]] -- (his ex partner)* [[Alan J Gross]] (biostatistics) -- life-long tobacco lackey, Medical Uni of South Carolina* [[Ralph I Horowitz]] (Yale Uni) for peer review. -- (an associate of ~~wel~~tobacco's well-known [[Alvan R Feinstein]] and [[Walter O Spitzer]])[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/law88e00/pdf]* [[John L Wilson]] (ACS) for peer review -- (Probably a clean-skin, but he had taken CTR money when Dean at Stanford Uni)

* [[Frank M LaDuca]] (International Technidyne) for peer review. [Also Cardiologist, Philadelphia Heart Institute}.??

* [[Joseph Wu]], (New York Medical College) for peer review. ~~Long~~-- A long-term tobacco scientist, who worked with [[Lawrence M Wexler]] (below) and [[Alan Gross ]] (above)* [[Larry Wexler ]] (epidemiology - New York Medical College) -- tobacco 'consultant' who worked with [[Joseph Wu ]] and [[Alan Gross]]. They all provided 'witness services' and had a private company [[Epidemiology Consulting Group-NYC]]* [[William J Butler]], (Failure Analysis Associates) -- Statistics -- Long-term tobacco industry witness and helper.* [[Steven W Frantz]] (Bushy Run Research Lab) -- Toxicology --~~The~~ His lab ~~was working~~ worked for RJ Reynolds in mouse testing ~~for~~ toxic chemicals at the time. ~~~~ : Newman Partnership was a front company run by [[Fred Newman]] and his brother Larry. Fred Newman was the main in-house lawyer for Philip Morris. The paper was actually later published with a credit saying that the funding came from the [[Institute for Regulatory Policy]] (IRP) which was run by Carlo's associates [[Jim Tozzi]] and [[Thorne Auchter]]. [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zyb19e00/pdf]

Carlo and his staff at HESG will do this study in '''scientific bias''' by sending out a questionairre which asks biased, isolated, and quite deliberately-loaded questions. Carlo and four staff members of HESG are involved:

* Ms [[Patricia Doseberg]]

* Ms [[Elizabeth Sheffey]]

By the time this was sent for publication [[Maurice ~~LeVois~~Le Vois]] has split with Carlo, and three of his 'researchers' -- Patricia Doesberg, Brett Duch and Beth Sheffey -- had dropped out ~~and~~ while [[Kelly G Sund]] and [[Maureen R Jablinske]] were given the credit.

<table style="width=100%" bgcolor="ebebdd" border=1 rules=all cellpadding=5><tr><td>In this so-called '''Draft Protocol''', Carlo and ~~LeVois~~ Le Vois don't just only offer to conduct the research, they will also pre-plan the response and organise how to exploit the propaganda that ~~will~~ can be generated.

In effect, while supposedly acting as a disinterested scientist examining scientific ethics, they are performing the functions of a PR lobbyist and deliberately planning to manipulate a scientific outcome. The procedure was explained later in a Philip Morris document:<blockquote>In half of the cases, the three potential problems were identified by name. For the other half, the potential problems were simply identified by letter (X, Y, and Z). The types of scientists surveyed included epidemiologists, toxicologists, doctors, and "basic scientists."

: d. Quantitative opinion studies. [Also their...]

Deadline for Completion of Studies: ~~'''~~Prior to the Release Date of the [[EPA ETS Risk Assessment]] Report.~~'''~~</blockquote> ~~==To Here==~~</td></tr></table>

1989 Nov /E An internal list prepared by [[Newman Partners]] for the head of scientific propaganda at Philip Morris, also lists George Carlo and Maurice Le Vois as full-time consultants on the problem of passive smoking. Carlo is listed as the top consultant to be sent to London for a conference which has, as its aim, the disruption of claims that the regulators make when imposing the 'precautionary principle'. This plan was known as '''Good Epidemiological Practices''' or '''GEP'''. {This became the [[London Conference]])

Some of the 'scientific principles' which were designed by the participants (some of them may have been genuine, but gullible) at this tobacco-loaded conference were viable and acceptable, but many set the scientific hurdles so high that no independent scientist looking to prove harm from some source of pollution, would never be able to jump over it. So no independent scientist could ever claim that the case against tobacco smoke or chemical pollution had been proven.

An internal list prepared by [[Newman Partners]] for the head of scientific propaganda at Philip Morris, also lists George Carlo and Maurice LeVois as full-time consultants on the problem of passive smoking. Carlo is listed as the top consultant to be sent to London for a conference which has, as its aim, the disruption of claims that the regulators make when imposing the 'precautionary principle'. This plan was known as '''Good Epidemiological Practices''' or '''GEP''' Some of the 'scientific principles' which were designed by the participants (some may have been genuine, but gullible) at this tobacco-loaded conference were viable and acceptable, but many set the scientific hurdles so high that no independent scientist looking to prove harm from some source of pollution, would never be able to jump over it. So no independent scientist could ever claim that the case against tobacco smoke or chemical pollution had been proven. This tobacco-industry inspired "GEP" standard became known as the "[[London Principles]]" after the predicatble loaded industry conference. You can still find these London Principles at the [[Federal Focus]] web-site ~~still~~. Government imposition of such principles would have prevented the EPA, FDA, OSHA and any other environmental/health regulator from ever issuing regulations until proof of danger was accepted by ever scientist in the industry and every paid industry consultant scientist. An impossible task. : The study was to have been published in ''Environment International'' in June 1992 -- and it was typeset and the pages were fully formatted by Pergamon Press for it to appear in the magazine. [http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/ghjp0117]. However the title was later changed and it appeared instead in the Journal ''Risk Analysis'' only a few weeks later.~~~~: Someone obviously ~~ejected~~ rejected material from the first magazine at the last moment, and it was handed over (already typeset) to another magazine.

: See how this bias study was used in later reports to attack epidemiology: (June 1995) There must be 30 copies of this study in the tobacco documents, so every tobacco company had one it its files. [http://industrydocuments.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/docs/rryl0154]

<hr>

1989: Carlo received two Philip Morris payments ($70,000 + $60,000) for his 'Bias Study" paper proving that epidemiologists and anti-tobacco scientists are all biased, and are producing distorted results.

Two long-term HESG staffers, [[Kelly Sund]] and [[Rebecca Steffens]], now have their name on the paper as co-researcher -- Kelly Sund on the draft, and Rebecca Steffens on the final. Kelly Sund became a faithful employee although lacking any biomedical qualifications. She had her name listed in this year also as co-author on a dioxin-spill study on the Melbourne (Australia) water supply.

[[Maurice ~~LeVois~~Le Vois]] also managed to get a check for $25,000 from Philip Morris at the same time, and he later began to work more with another dubious scientist called [[Max Layard]] in California. The Carlo/LeVois HESG operation had split, or changed nature at this time.

The tobacco documents also mention a Canadian, Dr [[Ian Munro]], who later worked with Carlo firefighting dioxin concerns. : [Munro became Carlo's deputy Director in the cellphone industry's [[Wireless Technology Research]] (WTR) project. Later Carlo and Munro formalised a partnership in preparing environmental impact statements in Canada. Munro also runs an organisation called [[CanTox]], which is the Canadian equivalent (or maybe an "arm") of Carlo's HES group.]

George Carlo ~~Still the~~ who is still Dow Chemical's 'dioxin specialist' , travelled to Australia ~~with one~~ following a dioxin spill from a Nufarm factory sited in the Melbourne water catchment area. He was accompanied by:* staffer (Kelly Sund) ~~accompanied by~~ who had no biomedical qualifications, and* his "personal contract lawyer" and friend ([[James Baller]]) .They were flown out to conduct an 'independent audit' of the Melbourne water supply~~. This followed a~~ to ensure that the dioxin spill ~~from a Nufarm factory sited in~~ hadn't effected the Melbourne water ~~catchment area~~quality. This It is not at all clear what role Baller played, but his name is on the main report as if he was a biomedical specialist. However he probably was every bit as qualified as Kelly Sund.

.

<hr>

===Wireless Technology Research===

The Cellular Telephone has evolved through a number of stages, and the potential for harm to human health has changed with each development. The main objections to cellular phones arose in the early days with analog mobiles (AMPS) which were large, high-powered, and required the placement of obtrusive antenna 'towers', often in residential areas, where they loomed over suburban houses.

The electronics industry had just ignored the possibility of long-term harm to the health of

* users because of the proximity to the brain of a moderately powerful transmitter, and

* the potential harm to residents and their children in proximity to the 'base station' towers. Most of the suspicion rested on the potential risk to children of long-term EMF radiation effects from the towers since the towers were always on. In the early days few users also meant wider spacing of base-stations for economic reasons, and therefore higher EMF transmission powers were emitted from both the handsets and the towers to maintain connections.

As usage grew, the cellphone industry swapped to digital technology using two slightly different pulsed-strobe transmission techniques. These temporarily stored the voice and released it in short digital pulses occupying hundredths of a second -- and by pulsing the output, up to 12 different transmiitters could use the same wave-length, each being allocated its own 'time-slot'. These were the European GSM technologies, and the American Digital -AMPS (D-AMPS). The transmission power was now lower on average, but concentrated into short bursts like a strobe light at a discotheque.

Handsets were now smaller requiring smaller batteries and transmitting over shorter distances. However the antennae of the handset was now almost directly against the skull, and the inverse square-law operated to increase the now-pulsed EMF power entering the brain, and these power-pulse rates roughly matched natural neurological transmission rates. The large base-station towers disappeared and were replaced by speaker-type boxes usually positioned on the top of buildings, so these fears evaporated. However biological research showing problems with experimental animals were ignored and the epidemiological studies were largely inconclusive (it takes time for these to show up). Henry Lai and Narendra Singh at the University of Washington showed that GSM type transmissions were increasing the rate of DNA double-breaks in the brain-cells of their experimental rats -- and extrapolating from this, it was highly likely that increases in the rate of long-term brain cancer could be expected (it was never proved).

The Cellular Telephone Industry Association (CTIA) reacted by: Setting up the Wireless Technology Research group under George Carlo, and funding it by $25 million to prove that their devices were safe. This accomplished nothing; no significant research was ever done.

An alternative transmission technology called Code Division Multiple Access with no pulsed-power and working at even lower transmission levels was developed by a San Diego company, and this proved to be easy to implement. Rather than admit they had a problem, the CTIA branded the new CDMA systems "G3" suggesting that they were an evolution of the old pulsed power transmitters. Pulsed power GSM and D-AMPS were quietly abandoned.

<hr>

The published budget a year later (1994) included more than $2 million for fundamental risk evaluation research in the areas of dosimetry, toxicology, epidemiology, and electromagnetic interference. The Foundation seems to have disappeared into the mire.

<hr>

1993: At about this time the Cellular Telephone Industry Association (~~CTIA0~~ CTIA) also got the urge to demonstrate how socially responsible it was by establishing an entirely altruistic CTIA Foundation to bring joy and light into the world. Here's what they said at the time:

<blockquote>The mission of the '''CTIA Foundation''' is to meet the challenges of the 21st century in areas that are crucial to American society; education, health care, and job creation/productivity, using innovative, groundbreaking applications of wireless technology.

Founded in 1993 on the 10th anniversary of the inauguration of wireless phone service, the CTIA [[Foundation For Wireless Telecommunications ]] seeks out worthy projects that utilise wireless telecommunications technology for the benefit of their communities. As part of this effort, CTIA member companies make a fair share annual contribution to fund the work of the Foundation.

Through its hands-on support of worthy projects, the CTIA Foundation is showing the nation how wireless telecommunications can help solve society's greatest problems and improve the quality of life for the American people.</blockquote>

<hr>

1993 Dec: In order to demonstrate how independent and arm's length all this research was, the new Wireless Technology Research (WTR) under Carlo announces that research pertaining to cellular telephones would be coordinated through the [[Harvard Center for Risk Analysis]] - [[John D Graham]]'s operation ~~called~~ known as the HCRA at (but not 'of') the University).

The HCRA had originally been ~~started~~ created under the auspices of the Harvard School of Public Health. It now appears certain that the '''Harvard Center for Risk Analysis''' was essentially a private operation owned and run by Dr [[John D Graham]] and a number of his associates. They paid Harvard University an annual fee for the right to use the Harvard name, and they accepted money from the tobacco companies (even though this was forbidden by Harvard University bylaws). They bypassed this restriction by the simple expedient of having the money paid from a '''Kraft account,''' since Philip Morris owns Kraft.

<tr bgcolor="cccccc"><th>JOHN D GRAHAM AND THE HCRA </th></tr>

[[John D Graham]] later became President George W Bush's director of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which ~~gives~~ gave him oversight on the spending of the major environmental and health regulatory agencies (FDA, EPA, OSHA, etc). Like Carlo, Graham has spent his life as another science-for-sale entrepreneur, but his line was the quasi-science of [[Risk Analysis]] which attracts generous funding from industry because it can be manipulated to produce whatever outcome the client ~~requests~~requires. Graham spent a lot of time cosying up to the tobacco, food and chemical industries looking for work and grant-funding.

You'll find the Harvard group and John D Graham himself, prominentaly featured in the Phillip Morris document archives. He was also on [[Steve Milloy]]'s [[TASSC]] Advisory Board along with George Carlo, and he was involved from the beginning of the tobacco-funded Risk Assessment project called the 'Landsdown Panel' which was the foundation of the '''[[London Principles]]]'''. Graham became a favourite anti-science activist for the Republicans, and they exploited his value to big business in a range of ways. </td></tr>

</table>

When the CTIA announced that the Harvard Risk Group would audit the science conducted by WTR, they didn't spell out what was meant by the term 'independent'. It turned out that Carlo's [[Health & Environmental Sciences Group]] Ltd. (supposedly a small company owned by Carlo himself) is the sole small company listed among a few very big and wealthy foundations and government departments in list of donors to the Harvard Center~~'s list of donors~~. [~~It was said that it required a~~ A donation of $26,000 was needed to be listed.] Here is the Center's list:<table width="100%" cellpadding=5 border=1 rules=all bgcolor="~~eeeedd~~ebebdd" ><tr><th colspan=3>Restricted grants for project support have been provided by the:</th><tr> <tr><td>Alfred P. Sloan Foundation,</td><td>American Industrial Health Council,</td><td>Andrew Mellon Foundation,</td></tr><tr><td>Bradley Foundation,</td><td>Brookings Institution,</td><td>Congressional Research Service,</td></tr><tr><td>'''Health and Environmental Sciences Group,'''</td><td>National Institute of Justice,</td><td>National Science Foundation,</td></tr><tr><td>Trustees of Health and Hospitals; Boston,</td><td>US. Department of Energy,</td><td>US. Depart. of Health and Human Services,</td></tr><tr><td>US. Environmental Protection Agency</td><td>US. Department of Transportation.</td><td></td></tr></table>

Stewart Fist

4,794

edits

Changes

George Carlo (Doc Index)

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Navigation

How To

Other Info

Other Policies

Tools