This is Ironic, posted on the Occ board by Fredric Gerr

[Guest guest]

These two doctors, Fredric Gerr and Frumkin were two of the

environmental doctors that were referred to me in the beginning.

Frumkin was the head MD of the office and passed me off to Gerr,

both worked for Emory University, which is interchangable with the

CDC and ATSDR, PathCon Labs, which was the " independent lab " that

did part of the investigation in the mid 90's on the Cleveland

study, where children lost their lives and experienced many cases of

pulmonary hemorrage. What was failed to be mentioned that

this " independent lab " was started by the CDC. Owner Shelton.

I sat with Sharon for one hour listening to Gerr's garbage and

denial that inhalation of these toxins can cause many conditions. He

called Dr.Johanning, " The Stachybotrys Nut " and tell him I said

hello because we went to school together. He refused to the fungal

panel I requested. A day we both will not forget. Three years later

I had been informed he (Gerr)was speaking at a conference on

chemical toxicity and the effects it had on the neuro system. I

found this very interesting since he was in complete denial of

mycotoxin toxicity. So I decided to give " Mr " Gerr a call. He didn't

remember who I was or my wife. I stroked his ego about him speaking,

then I dropped the bomb. I asked him if he would be speaking, if

any, on mold induced illnesses. He said maybe not because that's a

whole different subject, but he may touch on it. BUT WHAT HE DID SAY

AT THAT TIME IS THAT MOLD WAS VERY DANGEROUS THROUGH INHALATION AND

COULD CAUSE A MULITUDE OF SYMPTOMS AND INFECTIONS. I said oh

really, then why didn't you speak of that when I had my wife in your

office. Then he knew where I was coming from and said, I don't have

time to debate this. I didn't know there was a debate since he had

just mentioned how dangerous mold is. " Mr " Gerr all of a sudden

became tongue tied and had nothing more to say, click.

KC

From: " Gerr, Fredric E " <fred-gerr@...>

From the Atlanta Journal Constitution, regarding the CDC study of

formaldehyde and FEMA trailers: " Today, senior CDC officials

acknowledge that the study was based on a fundamental scientific

error and that it failed to mention that formaldehyde can cause

cancer. "

Full link to AJC article:

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/news/stories/2008/10/05/formaldehyd

e.html

Fred Gerr, MD

Professor

Director, Occupational Medicine Residency Program

The University of Iowa

Department of Occupational and Environmental Health

College of Public Health

100 Oakdale Campus 140 IREH

Iowa City, IA 52242

319 335 4212 voice

319 335 4225 fax

------------

CDC report `marred by … flaws'

By Joaquin Sapien

ProPublica

Sunday, October 05, 2008

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/news/stories/2008/10/05/formaldehyd

e.html

The Centers for Disease Control study sounded reassuring when it was

made public in 2007. Hurricane Katrina survivors didn't have to

worry about reports that there were harmful levels of formaldehyde

in their trailers. The air was safe to breathe and the contamination

would not reach a " level of concern " as long they kept the windows

open.

Today, senior CDC officials acknowledge that the study was based on

a fundamental scientific error and that it failed to mention that

formaldehyde can cause cancer.

An agency standard says that people exposed to as little as .03

parts of formaldehyde per million parts of air for more than two

weeks can suffer constricted airways, headaches and rashes. The

trailers all measured well above that level.

But the scientists who conducted the study used a much different

agency standard to evaluate the formaldehyde present in the

trailers: Instead of .03 parts per million, they said health dangers

wouldn't occur until the substance reached .3 ppm, 10 times greater

than the long-term standard.

According to the CDC, exposure to that amount for just a few hours

can trigger respiratory problems and other ailments.

The story of how Katrina survivors suffered in their government-

provided trailers has been told many times in congressional hearings

and in the media. But it has been unclear until now why government

officials continued reassuring residents that the trailers were safe

at least a year after they should have been warning them to get out.

ProPublica, an investigative journalism organization based in New

York, reconstructed how CDC and other government agencies handled

the formaldehyde problem by examining hundreds of pages of

documents, interviewing former and current CDC officials and

obtaining an advance copy of a congressional report.

The documents and interviews show that government officials began to

worry about lawsuits and legal liability soon after trailer

occupants began complaining about the strange smells in their

temporary homes.

(On Friday, a federal judge in New Orleans ruled that there is

evidence that FEMA delayed its response to the concerns about

formaldehyde because the agency was worried about lawsuits, The

Associated Press reported. U.S. District Court Judge Kurt

Englehardt, who is hearing cases brought by about 800 storm

evacuees, also ruled that the government is not immune to such

lawsuits. The AP report said that attorneys representing the

plaintiffs are asking the judge to certify a class action on behalf

of thousands of people.)

The 40-page congressional report, scheduled to be released this week

by Democrats on the Science and Technology Committee's subcommittee

on investigations and oversight for the U.S. House, concludes that

the CDC's reaction to the formaldehyde problem was " marred by

scientific flaws, ineffective leadership, a sluggish response to

inform trailer residents of the potential risk they faced and an

abysmal lack of urgency to actually remove them from harm's way. "

The report also chronicles the efforts of De , a

senior CDC toxicologist, to warn top officials that the report was

flawed.

Joe Little, one of the CDC scientists who conducted the study, said

they chose the higher .3 parts per million standard because it is

the lowest level that is likely to cause a health " effect. " The .03

level, he said, is a " risk " level, meaning that illness is less

certain. " Risk and having an effect are two different things, " he

said.

The first warning that the study was flawed came from De —- who

at the time headed the Division of Toxicology and Environmental

Medicine within the CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease

Registry (ATSDR) —- on Feb. 27, 2007.

As soon as De saw the report, he sent an e-mail to

Frumkin, director of ATSDR, and his deputy, Tom Sinks, warning that

the report downplayed health risks because it didn't mention the

long-term and potentially cancer-causing effects of formaldehyde

exposure. He attached a letter to the e-mail, suggesting they send

it to Rick Preston, the FEMA lawyer who had asked ATSDR for the

report. It said that " failure to communicate this issue is possibly

misleading, and a threat to public health. "

De told congressional investigators he was so alarmed by the

report's omissions that he didn't see the bigger error: That it used

the wrong safety standard.

Eventually De 's warning made its way to Preston, who said he

put it in his file and " never shared it with anyone. "

FEMA continued telling the public that the formaldehyde would not

harm people as long as they kept their windows open. And ATSDR never

corrected those misstatements. " I was not aware of how FEMA was

using the information in our report until the middle of `07, "

Frumkin said. " We really don't and can't routinely monitor what

other agencies and organizations say or do with our information. "

De sent more e-mails to Frumkin and other CDC officials, urging

them to do more to warn trailer residents of the dangers. In October

2007, De was removed from his job and reassigned. He is

contesting that reassignment in ongoing mediation hearings.

When questioned about De 's status, Frumkin told Congress

that " the reassignment of Dr. De was not in any way retaliation

for his actions in this case. His reassignment was a result of

personnel actions that are best not discussed in a public forum like

this. "

Throughout his 27-year CDC career, De had received positive

performance evaluations. But in 2007, his bosses criticized his work

on two controversial projects, one on industrial waste in Michigan's

great lakes and the other on a cancer-causing chemical found in some

cosmetics.

Although Little and the other scientist who conducted the

formaldehyde study normally reported to De , they told the

subcommittee investigators that Frumkin had instructed them to send

all their Katrina-related studies directly to his office in order to

get them out faster. But Frumkin told Congress that the scientists

still should have sent the report to De and that De missed

opportunities to play a stronger role in the process.

Sinks told Congress that he should have noticed that the report used

the wrong standard to evaluate the risk to the trailer occupants. " I

believe everybody who reviewed that document had the opportunity to

see that, and we missed that, " he said.

In February of this year, the CDC revealed preliminary results of

new tests showing that formaldehyde levels in many of the trailers

were high enough to increase the risk of cancer and could cause

respiratory illnesses. The final results showed levels surpassing .1

ppm —- more than three times the .03 ppm standard for yearlong

exposure —- in 41 percent of the trailers tested.

FEMA began moving people out of the units in February. Today more

than 100,000 of the trailers sit unused at sites across the country.

ABOUT PROPUBLICA

> ProPublica is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces

investigative journalism in the public interest. For a more detailed

explanation of how the flawed CDC report came to be written, go to

www.propublica.org.

[Guest guest]

lot of back peddling going on, eh?

In a message dated 2/25/2009 6:58:57 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

tigerpaw2c@... writes:

>

> These two doctors, Fredric Gerr and Frumkin were two of the

> environmental doctors that were referred to me in the beginning.

> Frumkin was the head MD of the office and passed me off to Gerr,

> both worked for Emory University, which is interchangable with the

> CDC and ATSDR, PathCon Labs, which was the " independent lab " that

> did part of the investigation in the mid 90's on the Cleveland

> study, where children lost their lives and experienced many cases

of

> pulmonary hemorrage. What was failed to be mentioned that

> this " independent lab " was started by the CDC. Owner Shelton.

[Guest guest]

--- In , " tigerpaw2c " <tigerpaw2c@...>

wrote:

>

> These two doctors, Fredric Gerr and Frumkin were two of the

> environmental doctors that were referred to me in the beginning.

> Frumkin was the head MD of the office and passed me off to Gerr,

> both worked for Emory University, which is interchangable with the

> CDC and ATSDR, PathCon Labs, which was the " independent lab " that

> did part of the investigation in the mid 90's on the Cleveland

> study, where children lost their lives and experienced many cases

of

> pulmonary hemorrage. What was failed to be mentioned that

> this " independent lab " was started by the CDC. Owner Shelton.

>

> I sat with Sharon for one hour listening to Gerr's garbage and

> denial that inhalation of these toxins can cause many conditions.

He

> called Dr.Johanning, " The Stachybotrys Nut " and tell him I said

> hello because we went to school together. He refused to the fungal

> panel I requested. A day we both will not forget. Three years later

> I had been informed he (Gerr)was speaking at a conference on

> chemical toxicity and the effects it had on the neuro system. I

> found this very interesting since he was in complete denial of

> mycotoxin toxicity. So I decided to give " Mr " Gerr a call. He

didn't

> remember who I was or my wife. I stroked his ego about him

speaking,

> then I dropped the bomb. I asked him if he would be speaking, if

> any, on mold induced illnesses. He said maybe not because that's a

> whole different subject, but he may touch on it. BUT WHAT HE DID

SAY

> AT THAT TIME IS THAT MOLD WAS VERY DANGEROUS THROUGH INHALATION AND

> COULD CAUSE A MULITUDE OF SYMPTOMS AND INFECTIONS. I said oh

> really, then why didn't you speak of that when I had my wife in

your

> office. Then he knew where I was coming from and said, I don't have

> time to debate this. I didn't know there was a debate since he had

> just mentioned how dangerous mold is. " Mr " Gerr all of a sudden

> became tongue tied and had nothing more to say, click.

>

> KC

>

> From: " Gerr, Fredric E " <fred-gerr@...>

>

> From the Atlanta Journal Constitution, regarding the CDC study of

> formaldehyde and FEMA trailers: " Today, senior CDC officials

> acknowledge that the study was based on a fundamental scientific

> error and that it failed to mention that formaldehyde can cause

> cancer. "

>

>

>

> Full link to AJC article:

>

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/news/stories/2008/10/05/formaldehyd

> e.html

>

> Fred Gerr, MD

> Professor

>

> Director, Occupational Medicine Residency Program

> The University of Iowa

> Department of Occupational and Environmental Health

> College of Public Health

> 100 Oakdale Campus 140 IREH

> Iowa City, IA 52242

> 319 335 4212 voice

> 319 335 4225 fax

> ------------

> CDC report `marred by … flaws'

> By Joaquin Sapien

>

> ProPublica

>

> Sunday, October 05, 2008

>

>

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/news/stories/2008/10/05/formaldehyd

> e.html

>

> The Centers for Disease Control study sounded reassuring when it

was

> made public in 2007. Hurricane Katrina survivors didn't have to

> worry about reports that there were harmful levels of formaldehyde

> in their trailers. The air was safe to breathe and the

contamination

> would not reach a " level of concern " as long they kept the windows

> open.

>

> Today, senior CDC officials acknowledge that the study was based on

> a fundamental scientific error and that it failed to mention that

> formaldehyde can cause cancer.

>

> An agency standard says that people exposed to as little as .03

> parts of formaldehyde per million parts of air for more than two

> weeks can suffer constricted airways, headaches and rashes. The

> trailers all measured well above that level.

>

> But the scientists who conducted the study used a much different

> agency standard to evaluate the formaldehyde present in the

> trailers: Instead of .03 parts per million, they said health

dangers

> wouldn't occur until the substance reached .3 ppm, 10 times greater

> than the long-term standard.

>

> According to the CDC, exposure to that amount for just a few hours

> can trigger respiratory problems and other ailments.

>

> The story of how Katrina survivors suffered in their government-

> provided trailers has been told many times in congressional

hearings

> and in the media. But it has been unclear until now why government

> officials continued reassuring residents that the trailers were

safe

> at least a year after they should have been warning them to get out.

>

> ProPublica, an investigative journalism organization based in New

> York, reconstructed how CDC and other government agencies handled

> the formaldehyde problem by examining hundreds of pages of

> documents, interviewing former and current CDC officials and

> obtaining an advance copy of a congressional report.

>

> The documents and interviews show that government officials began

to

> worry about lawsuits and legal liability soon after trailer

> occupants began complaining about the strange smells in their

> temporary homes.

>

> (On Friday, a federal judge in New Orleans ruled that there is

> evidence that FEMA delayed its response to the concerns about

> formaldehyde because the agency was worried about lawsuits, The

> Associated Press reported. U.S. District Court Judge Kurt

> Englehardt, who is hearing cases brought by about 800 storm

> evacuees, also ruled that the government is not immune to such

> lawsuits. The AP report said that attorneys representing the

> plaintiffs are asking the judge to certify a class action on behalf

> of thousands of people.)

>

> The 40-page congressional report, scheduled to be released this

week

> by Democrats on the Science and Technology Committee's subcommittee

> on investigations and oversight for the U.S. House, concludes that

> the CDC's reaction to the formaldehyde problem was " marred by

> scientific flaws, ineffective leadership, a sluggish response to

> inform trailer residents of the potential risk they faced and an

> abysmal lack of urgency to actually remove them from harm's way. "

>

> The report also chronicles the efforts of De , a

> senior CDC toxicologist, to warn top officials that the report was

> flawed.

>

> Joe Little, one of the CDC scientists who conducted the study, said

> they chose the higher .3 parts per million standard because it is

> the lowest level that is likely to cause a health " effect. " The .03

> level, he said, is a " risk " level, meaning that illness is less

> certain. " Risk and having an effect are two different things, " he

> said.

>

> The first warning that the study was flawed came from De —-

who

> at the time headed the Division of Toxicology and Environmental

> Medicine within the CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease

> Registry (ATSDR) —- on Feb. 27, 2007.

>

> As soon as De saw the report, he sent an e-mail to

> Frumkin, director of ATSDR, and his deputy, Tom Sinks, warning that

> the report downplayed health risks because it didn't mention the

> long-term and potentially cancer-causing effects of formaldehyde

> exposure. He attached a letter to the e-mail, suggesting they send

> it to Rick Preston, the FEMA lawyer who had asked ATSDR for the

> report. It said that " failure to communicate this issue is possibly

> misleading, and a threat to public health. "

>

> De told congressional investigators he was so alarmed by the

> report's omissions that he didn't see the bigger error: That it

used

> the wrong safety standard.

>

> Eventually De 's warning made its way to Preston, who said he

> put it in his file and " never shared it with anyone. "

>

> FEMA continued telling the public that the formaldehyde would not

> harm people as long as they kept their windows open. And ATSDR

never

> corrected those misstatements. " I was not aware of how FEMA was

> using the information in our report until the middle of `07, "

> Frumkin said. " We really don't and can't routinely monitor what

> other agencies and organizations say or do with our information. "

>

> De sent more e-mails to Frumkin and other CDC officials,

urging

> them to do more to warn trailer residents of the dangers. In

October

> 2007, De was removed from his job and reassigned. He is

> contesting that reassignment in ongoing mediation hearings.

>

> When questioned about De 's status, Frumkin told Congress

> that " the reassignment of Dr. De was not in any way

retaliation

> for his actions in this case. His reassignment was a result of

> personnel actions that are best not discussed in a public forum

like

> this. "

>

> Throughout his 27-year CDC career, De had received positive

> performance evaluations. But in 2007, his bosses criticized his

work

> on two controversial projects, one on industrial waste in

Michigan's

> great lakes and the other on a cancer-causing chemical found in

some

> cosmetics.

>

> Although Little and the other scientist who conducted the

> formaldehyde study normally reported to De , they told the

> subcommittee investigators that Frumkin had instructed them to send

> all their Katrina-related studies directly to his office in order

to

> get them out faster. But Frumkin told Congress that the scientists

> still should have sent the report to De and that De

missed

> opportunities to play a stronger role in the process.

>

> Sinks told Congress that he should have noticed that the report

used

> the wrong standard to evaluate the risk to the trailer

occupants. " I

> believe everybody who reviewed that document had the opportunity to

> see that, and we missed that, " he said.

>

> In February of this year, the CDC revealed preliminary results of

> new tests showing that formaldehyde levels in many of the trailers

> were high enough to increase the risk of cancer and could cause

> respiratory illnesses. The final results showed levels

surpassing .1

> ppm —- more than three times the .03 ppm standard for yearlong

> exposure —- in 41 percent of the trailers tested.

>

> FEMA began moving people out of the units in February. Today more

> than 100,000 of the trailers sit unused at sites across the country.

>

> ABOUT PROPUBLICA

>

> > ProPublica is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces

> investigative journalism in the public interest. For a more

detailed

> explanation of how the flawed CDC report came to be written, go to

> www.propublica.org.

>