Mr. Hess ..... reference is
made to your statement to Dr. David
Lewis:
"In the New Hampshire case you were involved in
where a scientific and legal link was alleged earlier this
year, the conclusion was-- "The science developed in this
case did not prove that the sewage sludge Synagro's predecessor
applied on the Hughes Field in Greenland, New Hampshire, in October
1995 caused or contributed to Shayne Conner's death, nor did the
science prove that the sewage sludge caused any of the injuries or
illnesses the other residents of Tuttle Lane allegedly
suffered."
That statement is false. There was no "conclusion" by the
Judge or by the Jury or anyone else. Joanne
Marshall was required to sign that statement -- which was written up
by Synagro's attorneys -- as a condition to receiving the
substantial payment for the sludge death of her son Shayne
Michael Conner.
Anyone with half a brain
is well aware that self-serving statement prepared by
Synagro is scientifically and legally meaningless and represents
nothing more than a sop to Synagro to ease their pain in writing the
check!!
This was a desperate attempt
by Synagro to discredit Dr. David Lewis, probably because of
their fear and apprehension that they might meet him
again in court at some future trial over some other sludge
victim's death.
*******************************************************************************************************************************************
FURTHERMORE, regarding the veracity of your statement
regarding Pennsylvania's "scientific investigation" into the sludge
death of Tony Behun:
"With
respect to the Pennsylvania cases, scientific investigation was
hampered in both cases because allegations linking the tragic deaths
to land application of biosolids were made five or more years after
the deaths. The investigative work done by our agency after
the allegations surfaced could find no link and that's what we
reported along with the limitations of our work and anyone else who
investigated these cases. "
I call your attention to letter
dated August 7, 2000 from PA. Dept. of Health to the Honorable
Camille George:
Third
paragraph:
"Because of this and as was pointed
out by Ms. Schuyler in her June 19, 2000 correspondence to Mrs.
Robertso, The Departmet of Health was involved in a very limited
capacity in this matter AND, IN FACT, DID NOT CONDUCT AN
INVESTIGATION INTO TONY BEHUN'S
DEATH."
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************
The PA DEP prevaricated when it
said Tony Behun died of a bee sting.
The PA DEP prevaricated when it
said Staphylococcus Aureus is not a pathogen found in sewage
sludge.
The PA DEP prevaricated when its
spokesman stated on Fox TV November 15, 2000 that "NIOSH
investigated the case ad concluded Tony's death was not caused by
sludge."
FALSE STATEMENTS -- EVERY ONE OF
THEM.
***********************************************************************************************************************************************
Your malice and that of your
cohorts in the EPA and waste industry toward Dr. Lewis is
despicable and very telling as to your character or lack
thereof. You all should be so fortunate as
to have 1% of his credibility and
valor.
**********************************************************************************************************************************
Cornell has accumulated reports of
257 sludge victims .... and the total is climbing. I was
just contacted this week by some people whose animals are
dying. Their feed was grown on sludged
fields. Stay tuned . . .
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002
1:24 PM
Subject: RE: Mr. Hess's
comments
Dr. Lewis, as you know our staff has sought
out from you directly in writing and in person any scientific
information you have that would provide a valid
link biosolids applications and illnesses and deaths reported
in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.
In the New Hampshire case you were involved
in where a scientific and legal link was alleged earlier this
year, the conclusion was-- "The science developed in
this case did not prove that the sewage sludge Synagro's
predecessor applied on the Hughes Field in Greenland, New
Hampshire, in October 1995 caused or contributed to Shayne
Conner's death, nor did the science prove that the sewage sludge
caused any of the injuries or illnesses the other residents of
Tuttle Lane allegedly suffered."
But regardless of the state of science now, our agency,
like others, has consistently supported and funded scientific
research to understand the public health and environmental
impacts from land application of biosolids and in fact support the
conclusions of the most recent National Research Council report
that more needs to be done. We
think it is also important to point out the NRC report says,
"There is no
documented scientific evidence that the Part 503 (EPA's sludge
regulations) has failed to protect public health."
With respect to the Pennsylvania cases, scientific
investigation was hampered in both cases because allegations
linking the tragic deaths to land application of biosolids were
made five or more years after the deaths. The investigative
work done by our agency after the allegations surfaced could find
no link and that's what we reported along with the limitations of
our work and anyone else who investigated these cases.
And Dr. Lewis, you know the "bee sting"
remark was made before we began our scientific investigation, not
as a result of it.
As you also know since you were involved, our agency
offered in writing and in person to split original samples
with the Pennock's, but, as Pennsylvania law requires,
landowner permission was needed to provide the samples and it was
not obtained by the Pennock's or by you. In addition, our
agency requested to review the medical records of Daniel Pennock
and the family, which is their right, did not make them
available. We are also not aware that anyone with
the appropriate medical training reviewed the medical
records.
I renew our request, do you have any additional scientific
data that would help draw a direct link between the land
application of biosolids and the illnesses and deaths involved in
these allegations?
We as much as anyone want to know the truth because we are
Moms and Dads too.
-- David Hess
Shape Your
Environmental Future Now!
http://216.32.180.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=760f3ec8c026531b57f9c121bb34b788&lat=1025952159&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2edep%2estate%2epa%2eus%2fhosting%2fefp2%2f
Find Out What You're Missing! Get eNOTICE!
http://216.32.180.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=464b45dd94187bd41e3e789b5250e475&lat=1025952159&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2edep%2estate%2epa%2eus%2fenotice%2f
FROM: David L. Lewis,
Ph.D.
Department of Marine Sciences
University of
Georgia
TO: Sam Shepherd, CEO
Bioset, Inc.
Dear
Sam,
Thank you for forwarding the comments on our
research by David Hess of the PA DEP. I am copying this
response to most of the people to whom Hess's comments about our
research were sent. I hope that at least some of the
people who have occupied themselves with efforts to end our
research will find something better to do in the
future.
Our research into Staphylococcus
aureus infections associated with exposure to Class B
sewage sludge has been published in two peer-reviewed scientific
and medical journals. We found a prevalence of S.
aureus infections among individuals complaining of
chemical irritation associated with exposure to sludge. We
concluded that the nature and timing of the infections linked
them to sludge exposure, and that the prevalence of S.
aureus infections among people exposed to sludge is
similar to the prevalence of S. aureus infections
among infants with diaper rash.
Mr. Hess claims that a
"scientific investigation" into Tony Behun's death discredits
our published research. I assume that Mr. Hess is speaking
of the report released by his department several years ago when
the PA DEP apologized to the Behun family for first claiming
that their son had died of a "bee sting." The so-called
scientific investigation by Mr. Hess's department and the state
epidemiologist concluded that Tony could not have died from
exposure to sludge because the organism causing his death
(Staphylococcus aureus) is not found in
sludge.
When PA DEP officials investigated a second death
from S. aureus (Daniel Pennock), they sampled the
soil in the biosolids-treated field. The DEP contacted me
for any information I had relating to Daniel Pennock's death,
and notified the Pennocks that they planned to sample the
soil. I sent the DEP copies of our draft
manuscripts. I also met with DEP officials on one occasion
in Washington, DC, and I requested that they provide me with
samples of any S. aureus isolates from soil
samples taken from the treated field across from the Pennock's
house.
The DEP reported that Staphylococcus was
among the prevalent bacteria present in soil samples, but
claimed that it was an unidentified, non-aureus species.
Mr. Pennock immediately contacted the DEP and asked that they
provide me with samples of the cultures to verify that they were
indeed non-aureus. Mr. Pennock was told that the DEP did
not keep any of the cultures. The DEP never responded to
my direct request to make the isolates available so that others
could verify their identifications.
From what I gathered
in my discussions with DEP officials when the soil was being
sampled and tested, they only used biochemical tests to
establish identifications. Such tests were designed for
clinical isolates and are notoriously unreliable for most
environmental isolates. We were prepared to perform DNA
sequencing on their isolates, just as we did on the
Brevundimonas isolates from the New Hampshire sludge
discussed in our paper published in the British public health
journal.
It is completely disingenuous for Mr.
Hess to take the position that our published research does not
include any samples of Staphylococcus aureus
linking Daniel Pennock's death to sludge when it was his
department that refused to share their samples which they claim
proved that the Staphylococcus present was
non-aureus.
The decision by the PA DEP not to provide me with samples of
their "non-aureus" Staphylococcus isolated from the
Pennock site, or even store any of the samples so anyone could
perform DNA analyses on them, is unjustifiable. It is just one
more chapter in the completely unscientific and less than open
manner that the DEP has conducted its inquiries into
sludge-related deaths from Staphylococcus in PA.
Our peer-reviewed scientific articles, the latest
National Academy of Sciences report, and an EPA Office of
Inspector General report all concluded that illnesses associated
with sludge need to be taken seriously, and that EPA and the
states have not been doing a proper job overseeing this
problem.
I am saddened to learn that the PA DEP
under Mr. Hess has not changed in the face of all of this, and
still wants to disregard Tony and Danny's deaths based on their
own "scientific" investigations and the ridiculous position that
S. aureus, commonly found in the lower human
colon, doesn't occur in sewage sludge. The people of
Pennsylvania would be far better served if Mr. Hess and the DEP
would use their resources to address problems associated with
applying sewage sludge in residential areas rather than trying
discredit scientists who document
them.
So far, both
Synagro and the WEF have written letters to the EPA
Administrator asking that EPA's support of my research end and
that I be investigated for alleged policy violations in
presenting our research at scientific meetings. Others
both inside and outside of EPA have vigorously joined their
cause over the past several years.
Almost all of their
efforts have been in vain in that EPA has not established that I
have ever violated a single policy and all of my research has
now been published in the peer-reviewed scientific and medical
literature for everyone to see.
I do concede,
however, that it appears that they have succeeded in putting
enough pressure on EPA's Office of General Counsel for OGC to
insist that I resign my government job within the year. It
is beyond me how any of them could possibly be proud of what
they have done, but I know they will pat each other on the back
and say to one another "job well done" when I
leave.
All I have to
say is that this is not what America is supposed to be about.
When we travel to China later this year, I will have a different
perspective on our government. How will I explain to the leaders
of Communist China that I will not be able to continue my
research at EPA because I lost my job for criticizing government
policies?
Those who
have taken pleasure in attacking me personally can continue to
do so, and I am sure they will. I have to think, however,
that somewhere down the road thier words will have to leave a
bitter taste in their mouths. I have to think that deep in
their hearts they know that they would feel better about
themselves if they had handled things differently.
I have to think
that they already know what their efforts to have me removed
from my position at EPA and to discredit me was all about.
It had nothing at all to do with any virtuous goals, such as
promoting good science and fostering the recyling of wastes for
the public good and a cleaner environment. Such virtuous
goals rest within the scientific peer-review process that
weighed the merits of our research and deemed it to be
scientifcally sound and worthy of publication.
There is no virtue
in the goals of those both inside and outside of EPA who
have sought to prevent me from speaking at scientific meetings,
or publishing our work, or from ever working at EPA again.
They may rejoice in obtaining some of their goals, but, surely,
they can never feel in their hearts that there is any virtue in
anything they have done.
-David Lewis
