Piketon radiation testing turns scientific squabble

The fight over whether a middle school in Pike County is safe from radiological contamination has devolved into a battle over whose science is better, reports Jessica Wehrman of the Dispatch Washington bureau.

After Northern Arizona University scientist Michael Ketterer on Thursday questioned the methodology of federal tests of Zahn’s Corner Middle School conducted over Memorial Day weekend, the U.S. Department of Energy fired back Friday, saying Ketterer “chose a unilaterally-determined and unverified analysis approach that neglected to test for all potential radioactive risks in the school.”

The dispute comes down to whether contamination exists. Splits of the samples taken Memorial Day were given to the Department of Energy, the Ohio Department of Health and Pike County, which handed it over to Ketterer for testing.

Both the feds and state

said last week they found no evidence of contamination and the school could safely reopen next month. Ketterer, however, said he found the presence of enriched uranium.

Rather than dispute the difference, though, Ketterer questioned the energy department’s methodology to Wehrman, criticizing the filters used to conduct surface sampling at the school as both too small and as contaminated with naturally occurring uranium. He used baby wipes to gather samples in his original research that found radiation in the school.

Energy officials replied that the wipes they used were the industry standard, and that they provided both their sampling and methodology to ODH and Pike County representatives before the testing “with the understanding that all three parties would perform similar analyses to allow for a true ‘apples to apples to apples’ comparison of results.”

But Matt Brewster of the Pike County General Board of Health said that the DOE did not communicate their methodology, and “this lack of communication led to the use of different testing methods and techniques resulting in conflicting results between DOE, ODH, and the health district.”

Does anyone agree on anything?

Yes: All parties involved agree that independent third-party testing to determine whether contamination exists is necessary before they can move forward.

PC talk

Don’t call it a heartbeat law, say some ardent abortion rights activists.

“‘Heartbeat law’ is a propaganda term from Republican forced birthers. find a different way to describe the bill,” admonished a tweet Friday of a Dispatch story about a new poll showing most Ohioans oppose the measure, signed into law April 11 but blocked by a federal judge this month.

Indeed, Planned Parenthood’s political arm condemns such terms as “heartbeat bill” or “fetal heartbeat” because they “evoke false images in people’s minds — false images meant to make people view common and accepted health care as immoral and shameful. In truth, the ‘fetal heartbeat’ talking point is nonsense: disinformation intended to deceive the press and public.”

The group quotes gynecologist Jen Gunter saying “The politicians know exactly what they are doing as a ‘heartbeat’ bills is a way of making a 4 mm thickening next to a yolk sac seem like it is almost ready to walk.” She says the “heart” is merely a “thickening next to a blob.”

Interestingly, U.S. District Court Judge Michael R. Barrett adopted the language favored by abortion rights advocates in his ruling, referring to “cardiac activity” instead of a heartbeat, “cells that form the basis for development of the heart later in gestation” instead of a heart, and the movement’s preferred “abortion care” term instead of just abortion.

Supporters of the heartbeat law say while they were expecting a ruling against them, they did not anticipate such language from a judge. “Abortionists could hardly have asked for more if they had drafted the judge’s decision themselves,” said one of the drafters of the Ohio law, Walter Weber of the American Center for Law and Justice.

Technically, both sides are wrong about the name of Ohio’s law; officially, it’s called the Human Rights and Heartbeat Protection Act.

drowland@dispatch.com @darreldrowland