Mcgill’s asbestos report denounced as whitewash
Activists contend ex-prof shouldn’t have been cleared
“This has been a public relations operation, not a credible investigation, and it brings dishonour on McGill.”
RIDEAU INSTITUTE’S KATHLEEN RUFF
The investigation into misconduct charges aimed at a former McGill University professor’s asbestos research was biased and a “whitewash,” a group of doctors and anti-asbestos activists say.
McGill’s report, released last Wednesday, cleared retired professor John Corbett McDonald of allegations of misconduct related to his research into the health of Quebec asbestos workers.
McGill research integrity officer Abraham Fuks said McDonald acknowledged he received financial support from the asbestos industry. In his report, Fuks said McDonald’s research was replicated by other groups and that its “robustness has endured many critical analyses and legal inquiries.”
Fuks also found there were no grounds to allegations the university colluded with the asbestos industry to promote asbestos use. Fuks also said he found no reason to further investigate the allegations against McDonald.
But the anti-asbestos activists say Fuks’s conclusions were wrong and that he didn’t take into account all the evidence provided to the university.
“When the McGill report says that McDonald’s research was robust and has been replicated by other scientists, and there is much controversy in the world about the safety of chrysotile asbestos, that’s just patently wrong,” said Colin Soskolne, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Alberta’s School of Public Health, and one of four doctors to publicly criticize Fuks’s report.
“No one, to my knowledge, has been able to replicate the findings other than if they were funded by the asbestos industry.”
By the standards of the time, McDonald’s research may not have violated any rules, Soskolne said, but McGill should have acknowledged that by 2012 standards of integrity and research, he made “grievous offences.”
In his report, Fuks said Mc- Donald’s research generated information that led to “the near complete disappearance of the asbestos industry in the developed world and the universal recognition of the toxicity of the product.”
In fact, Soskolne said, McDonald’s research is being used in legal proceedings in the United States to downplay the risks of asbestos ex- posure.
The activists say McGill’s review was “self-serving and without transparency.” They said McGill refused to disclose the terms of reference of the review, rejected concerns that the review process was flawed and excluded “crucial damning information.”
McGill should have an independent panel conduct an investigation, said Kathleen Ruff, a senior adviser with the Ottawa-based Rideau Institute.
“This has been a publicrelations operation, not a credible investigation, and it brings dishonour on McGill,” Ruff said. “If McGill is confident about the quality of McDonald’s research, an independent panel will be helpful to them. However it is clear that they can’t handle the truth.”
A spokesperson for McGill said Tuesday the university would not comment on the issues raised by the doctors.
Fuks began work on the report in March, after the university received a formal complaint from dozens of academics, researchers and physicians who said McDon- ald’s research is still being used today as evidence that asbestos use causes no harm to human health.
McGill will follow one of the recommendations of Fuks’s report, which was that the university organize an academic conference to review the current evidence on asbestos, look at safe alternatives, particularly in the developing world, and the engineering challenges of dealing with it in old buildings.
Two weeks ago, the owner of Quebec’s last asbestos mine, the Jeffrey Mine in Asbestos, announced it would not reopen. Quebec Premier Pauline Marois cancelled a $58-million loan the previous Liberal government had given the mine to reopen.