The pursuit of science isn't fear-mongering

Letter to the Editor:

I am grateful that Dr. Disney has written this letter. He is correct to question everything, and most especially me. I am pleased to see any of the residents of Libby do so. As many of the residents know, I am always available for such inquires. I would prefer that residents question EPA and ATSDR, the very people who brought this ruinous situation to Libby, through decades of inaction in the first place. But one must start some place. I am encouraged and perfectly fine with someone starting with me. 

Sadly, the format of newspaper does not allow for references or the general paraphernalia of science, graphs, formulas, evidence, experiments or links to evidence, to be presented. Believe me I have tried. However anyone contacting me will soon discover that there are all these things, with other scientists saying similar things as me, available.

Now to Mr. Disney’s concerns. First economics: Had EPA stepped back and correctly estimated both the cost of the cleanup they planned and the time it would take, as well as admitting, as Paul Peronard did at the time, that Libby cannot be cleaned up. They estimated $70 million and three years, instead of the much closer estimate I had of $1 billion. They may have decided on a different approach. I know at the expense per Libby individual, most sane governments would have. Dr. Disney’s concerns for economy should have been solved long ago, via a different approach by EPA. 

He is correct when he says “It is not easy to get any mineral to stay in the air for any length of time.” He has no way of knowing this, but he is almost directly quoting from my research and challenge to EPA from 20 years ago, continuing today. The first challenge of its kind ever. If he applies this conviction to EPA’s current story for Libby, and the ultimate judge of exposure and risk they will leave behind in Libby, ambient air monitoring, he will suddenly have an epiphany. It is that epiphany I have sought to instill in all of my colleagues and residents similarly situated to Libby. I have gone on ad nauseam since discovering the parameters of Dr. Disney’s complaint. I have not even spared The Western News from my attempts to make this common knowledge. He has no idea how right he is and how it applies to the perplexing amphibole exposures worldwide.

Prior to Libby ever coming to public attention, in 1986, I placed two feet of clean top soil over the top of a Tremolite deposit. Covered with dense grass. During the next nine years these fibers migrated to the surface. So much so that the largest exposure ever seen on earth in animal lungs, was discovered right there on that spot. The same thing has been seen, for varying reasons in Ambler, Penn. In fact, the Superfund conducted by EPA there has almost entirely failed, and it is getting worse through state management. You may note that EPA is warming Libby residents up to this concept, in the current artilce in The Western News, “EPA initiating early last call.”

You will be interested to learn, as you are a DVM, that  dogs and cats are involved in the epidemic also. That there has been a great deal of work you could have accomplished towards helping not just Libby but other communities similarly situated during the last 15 years. Perhaps the next 15 years of cleanup and control will provide an opportunity? One of my colleagues has a proposal for you.  

Finally “fear-mongering.” My true target here is an incompetent story created by EPA, tailor made for Libby, that not only affects Libby but about 100 places similarly situated as Libby. My fellow scientists believe that it is you the people, who are supposed to correct this incompetence. I disagree with them some. It is they, my fellow scientists, who should directly speak on your behalf.

Terry Trent,

Auburn, Calif.