Discredited scientist’s Vw-funded diesel study shaped Britain’s air-pollution policy
Ban on diesel cars ruled out by NICE after citing results by group that ran rigged tests on monkeys
A VOLKSWAGEN-FUNDED study that found little merit to banning diesel cars from cities helped to develop British health policy on air pollution, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
The scientific paper, co-authored by a now discredited scientist, questioned the benefit of “low emission zones” to restrict the most polluting vehicles.
The study was co-authored by Dr Michael Spallek, the former Volkswagen chief medical officer who ran the lobbying group that conducted rigged experiments on monkeys to try to prove modern diesel engines were safe.
Dr Spallek’s research was cited in a subsequent review published by the National Institute for Clinical Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The organisation provides official advice on health policy in Britain. Officials from NICE wrote in the draft evidence review on air pollution in August 2016 that “no evidence (or very limited evidence) was found” that low-emission zones were effective “in reducing the health impact... of traffic air pollution”.
NICE’S final guidance published in June 2017 recommended that local authorities consider introducing clean air or low-emission zones. But it stopped short of any stronger advice “because the evidence was uncertain”.
The 2014 German study was one of six considered by NICE as part of its examination of low-emission zones. Its study of pollution levels in low-emission zones in German cities found only a small benefit, with noxious particles cut by between two and four per cent.
Volkswagen, along with BMW and Daimler, bankrolled the European Research Group on Environment and Health in the Transport Sector (EUGT), which funded Dr Spallek’s research.
Dr Spallek, the EUGT managing director, was instrumental in setting up rigged monkey tests that have plunged the German car industry into renewed turmoil, two years after it emerged VW had installed a cheat device on diesel cars to pass emission tests.
Dr Peter Morfeld, the study’s lead author, was also a member of EUGT, but later resigned after the VW emissions scandal came to light.
The 2014 study claimed to be the first “comprehensive” investigation into low-emission zones. It concluded that it had found only a “rather small reduction” of nitrous oxide gases, at best a four per cent drop. It was peer reviewed and published in a highly respected scientific journal.
NICE stated in its final report that the six studies it looked at “were all at some risk of bias” and pointed out that its guidelines on air pollution drew on a further 21 published scientific papers, producing a series of recommendations for decision makers. NICE said it reviewed its guidance again yesterday with the Spallek study removed and concluded that it would have reached the same decision on low-emission – or clean-air – zones.
Prof Mark Baker, NICE’S director of the centre for guidelines, said: “We reviewed 27 published papers when considering the recommendations for clean-air zones. The committee recognised the risk of bias in some of the studies but concluded that the evidence that clean-air zones do reduce emissions was sufficient to support the recommendation that local authorities should consider introducing them. Removing a single paper would not change the recommendation.
“The guideline makes more than 30 recommendations, which together have the potential to significantly improve air quality and to reduce deaths associated with air pollution.”
Environmentalists said clean-air zones were vital to reduce diesel pollution. James Thornton, chief executive of Clientearth, said: “The UK has a problem with illegal and harmful levels of nitrogen dioxide, and the main cause in towns and cities is diesel vehicles. Car manufacturers are desperate to convince governments that there’s no problem with new diesels but the Government’s own evidence shows the contrary.”
Sadiq Khan, London’s mayor, said “VW’S obscene disregard for our air and public health with the deliberate
‘Car manufacturers are desperate to convince governments that there’s no problem with new diesels’
roll-out of cars fitted with pollution defeat devices is well documented. Today’s revelations show how much more work needs to be done by ministers to get a grip on the toxic air crisis.”
Dr Morfeld, the study’s lead author, said: “Our study is solid, methodologically sound, and was published after having been independently peer-reviewed in two scientific journals. There was no influence of VW or any car producer on material, methods, and results of our study. Nor was the discussion influenced by the car producers. We did not deliberately play down the effectiveness of low-emission zones for diesel cars as an attempt to influence, among other governments, UK policy on diesel.”
Dr Spallek was a leading advocate of diesel cars. As early as 2000, he was invited to the UK by the trade body, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), to help boost diesel car sales. He told the leaders of Britain’s car industry, according to reports at the time, that “no medical evidence exists to prove a significant link between diesel and ill health”.
A spokesman for VW said Dr Spallek had worked for the car maker from 2007 until 2017 but had been exempted from his job there while chief executive of EUGT. He said EUGT was dissolved for “organisational” reasons in 2017.
Mike Hawes, chief executive of SMMT, acknowledged the body had hosted a presentation from Dr Spallek in 2000, adding: “SMMT has always sought to present government with the latest technological developments in vehicles which have helped cut emissions of all kinds.”