Cancer report rejected by AMA
By ROHAN WADE
02mar05
A REPORT linking chemical contamination of drinking water with increased cancer rates in the state’s North-East has been rejected by Australia’s peak medical body.
The Australian Medical Association said the report, compiled by St Helens general practitioner Alison Bleaney and Sydney-based ecologist Marcus Scammell, had serious methodology flaws.
“The document fails to demonstrate increased evidence of adverse health effects, including cancer rates in the St Helens region of Tasmania,” AMA state president Michael Aizen said.
But despite dismissing the report, Dr Aizen said the AMA still wanted water quality treated as a national health issue and supported a precautionary principle of limiting chemical use in water catchments.
The full story: Cancer report rejected by AMA
David Obendorf
March 10, 2005 at 6:37 pm
The substantial concern for Tasmania would be that our human activity over considerable areas of this island, is making it ‘toxic’ and not ‘clean & green’.
Little wonder monitoring of water catchments for chemical residues has been on the backburner.
Maybe there are no unusual clusters of medical conditions in the St Helens area because chemical residues are widespread.
If humans in Tasmania had the ‘devil disease’ (cause unknown)…..now that would create some apoplexy in the average Tasmanian politican.
Brenda Rosser
March 5, 2005 at 4:49 pm
The criticism of the report appeared to revolve around perceptions that the increase in cancers and other illnesses was not just specific to St Helens but also in other places across Tasmania.
Is that correct?
Certainly there has been a significant increase in childhood diabetes in Tasmania. No-one knows why.
Barry Brannan
March 2, 2005 at 5:36 pm
If Dr Bleaney and Dr Scammell read this, perhaps they could post their side of this story on Tasmanian Times? I would like to hear what they have to say about criticisms of their research.
Barry Brannan