It seems that Honni Bear has not taken the time to carefully read my apology.
I apologised to Gunns Limited for taking my concerns directly to the media rather than to Gunns in the first instant, as it would have been appropriate to do.
I did not apologise for the specific comments made (these are accurately quoted above, Here) because I still have concerns about the woodchip piles in Burnie in relation to these issues.
In the course of preparing for the trial my legal team sought an expert peer review of the report on potential hazards associated with Legionella species with regard to the Burnie woodchip piles. This report was commissioned and paid for by Gunns Limited in 2002 and is the basis for suggestions that I have spread false information. It was obtained by Gunns as a result of the media attention I and Doctors for Forests brought to the issue. It is true that the report was compiled by a well regarded expert microbiologist.
The expert review which we obtained, and which will be made publiclly available in the next day or so, suggests that there are some significant methodological flaws in the earlier study and contradicts some key statements made in the earlier report. It serves to heighten my concerns about the safety of the piles.
Through all of this it is well to appreciate that I was originally approached by a well researched individual who appeared genuinely concerned for the lives and safety of people. This person told me of cases of people who had developed critical illness caused by the Legionella organism and whom lived near or worked in the Burnie CBD. At least one of these people nearly died as a result of the infection.
There had already been a number of complaints made to the relevant statutary authorities requesting investigation of this matter but there had been dissatisfaction with the response.
In addition to this I had visited the site in Burnie and was surprised and worried that such large piles of woodchips could be situated so close to where people live and work and so exposed to inshore winds. It just seemed a very unusual and risky thing to me. I urge anyone reading this who has not seen the place first hand to do so and see what they think before rushing to condemn me as a scaremongerer or worse.
Now that the legal process has been settled what is required is an completely independent and rigorous examination of the woodchip piles for the range of health issues originally flagged by Doctors for Forests which include the microbial and non microbial risks, such as asthma possibly exacerbated by dust blown off the piles, by inshore winds.
