IMPORTANT - Advocacy Groups Call for Senate Investigation

[Guest guest]

PRWeb

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/1/prweb500703.htm

Toxic Mold -- Wall Street Journal Uncovers Medical Association's

Alleged Conflicts of Interest -- Advocacy Groups Call for Senate

Investigation

Advocacy groups say they applied mathematical calculations to make

the leap that human illness could not plausibly occur if one is

exposed indoors. The leaders of ACOEM put their imprimatur on the

statement. The insurance industry and its surrogates have since

brandished it like the biblical jawbone of an ass. Advocacy Groups

see this as an abuse of political clout and power that has harmed US

Citizens.

Washington, DC (PRWEB) January 29, 2007 -- After years of working

together to enlighten the public of the serious illnesses caused by

mold, advocacy groups are thankful to the Wall Street Journal for

bringing the matter to greater light. Upon completing a six month

investigation, veteran Wall Street Journal reporter,

Armstrong, wrote of the leaders of the American College of

Occupational and Environmental Medicine, ACOEM, permitting a

litigation defense corporation, Veritox Inc (aka GlobalTox Inc) to

author the association's policy paper regarding mold induced

illnesses. The two Veritox authors were not prior members of the

physician trade association. They are not physicians.

Highly unlikely at best, even among the most vulnerable of

subpopulations

The Wall Street Journal article, Page One, January 9, 2007. " Amid

Mold Suits, Experts Wear Two Hats " may be read at:

online.wsj.com/article_print/SB116831654647871083.html -or-

www.ciphi.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?

p=6500 & sid=000cd0970ddb9be8716b84ba3baf8f9c

The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine mold

policy paper is at the heart of the contention over the Toxic Mold

Issue. The paper claims to prove humans could not plausibly be

exposed to enough mold toxins within a damp indoor environment to

cause symptoms of ill health. " Highly unlikely at best, even among

the most vulnerable of subpopulations " is what the non-physician

authors wrote.

As referenced by the WSJ, to make this key finding, the authors

borrowed data from one rodent study in which mold was forced into

the trachea of rats. They then applied calculations to make the leap

that human illness could not plausibly occur if one is exposed

indoors. The leaders of ACOEM put their imprimatur on the statement.

The insurance industry and its surrogates have since brandished it

like the biblical jawbone of an ass. The finding carries much weight

within the courts as it is portrayed to be the opinion of thousands

of environmental physicians.

But the EPA and the Institute of Medicine, Damp Indoor Spaces

Committee, have both identified the technique used by ACOEM to make

the key conclusion, as non-acceptable methodology for determining

existence or absence of human illness from indoor mold toxin

exposure. The finding represents an affront to anyone with

rudimentary logic skills. It is a complete non sequitur, where the

premise does not support the conclusion.

Since the ACOEM mold paper's publication in November of 2002, it has

saved worker's compensation insurers, property insurers, general

liability insurers and building stakeholders, hundreds and hundreds

of millions of dollars. Insurance industry surrogates - the paid

witnesses - including some ACOEM members themselves - and the

lawyers, have earned millions in fees. Of more importance, the sick

receive no medical treatment and no compensation for devastated

lives and financial ruin.

ACOEM is a medical trade association made up of approximately 7000

physicians. The organization writes evidence based protocol for the

treatment of injured workers under the platform of Workers Comp

Reform. Several of their evidence based conclusions are currently

being used to determine what illnesses and injuries will and will

not be treated and/or covered under workers compensation insurance

guidelines.

In California, under State Senate Bill 889, ACOEM evidence based

guidelines are also known as Medical Treatment Utilization

Schedules, MTUS, and are the law that physicians must follow when

determining treatment for their patients. ACOEM affiliated clinics,

American Occupational and Environmental Clinics, are government

funded through the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry

and a branch of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the

National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health. (NIOSH).

The article points out several members of ACOEM serve as experts for

the defense in mold litigation. They promote the legitimacy of the

mold policy paper while billing as much as $700 per hour. The US

Chamber of Commerce has promoted the document throughout industry by

trumpeting it as scientific proof that serious mold induced

illnesses are merely a result of " trial lawyers " , " media reports "

and " Junk Science " .

When interviewed for the WSJ article, Dr. Borak, overseer

of the mold policy peer review process, indicated he was unaware the

authors had conflicted interests. Yet, within the subpoenaed

documents referenced within the WSJ article, was an email authored

by him in Sept, 2002, Dr. Borak acknowledged he was aware the paper

would have " currency in other ways and other places " for the

authors. The email also referenced concern that the ACOEM mold paper

was a " defense argument " that would be turned into " garbage " if

rejected by the Board of Directors.

Although reported to exist, the mold policy paper authors' conflict

disclosure statements were never made available to the members of

ACOEM, even when requested. Within the subpoenaed emails referenced

within the WSJ article, was one written in 2003. An ACOEM member

wrote, " Related to this topic, some weeks ago many of us on the list

were anticipating the conflict of interest statements from the JOEM

[Journal of ACOEM in regard to the authors of the 'Mold Statement'

adopted by the ACOEM. It seems they got lost in the mail. This

question arises if this is just an oversight, or if such a

disclosure of conflicts is purposeful, as many of us who are members

of ACOEM who actually see patients with mold exposure were excluded

from the discussion. "

Needless to say, consumer, worker, health and environmental advocacy

groups are calling for a senate investigation and will be on the

Hill this week requesting the investigation.

Sharon Kramer

Mycotic Disease Awareness

760-822-8026

###