Asbestos: a continuing failure of ethics by McGill University

Our plain-English summary of Asbestos: a continuing failure of ethics by McGill University, by K. Ruff (International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 2014).

The study

• Author: K. Ruff
• Journal: International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health
• Published: 2014;20(1):1-3
• Type of article: Editorial
• Cited by: 1 article, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

In plain English

This article is an editorial, not a research study, and it reports no new data. The author, Kathleen Ruff, a human rights adviser, argued that McGill University helped the asbestos industry survive. The author wrote that Professor J. C. McDonald of McGill was given a million dollars by the Institute of Occupational & Environmental Health to study Quebec asbestos miners. The author described that institute as an asbestos-industry front organization. According to the author, the dust-measuring method used was only 13% better than a random guess, and McDonald deleted data that showed asbestos as protective. The author also wrote that McDonald concluded exposure of up to 45 f/cc of chrysotile had been essentially innocuous, at a time when the UK limit was 2 f/cc (0.1 f/cc today). The author stated that at a 1972 OSHA hearing McDonald denied any association with asbestos producers, and called this untrue. The author described McGill's 2012 internal review, which dismissed the complaint, as tainted with bias. The author called on McGill to hold an independent inquiry into its asbestos history.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: editorial (opinion piece); no original research
• Exposure: No exposure was studied. The editorial discusses McGill research by J. C. McDonald on Quebec chrysotile asbestos miners.
• Main results:
  • The author stated that McDonald received a million dollars from the industry-founded Institute of Occupational & Environmental Health (IOEH) to research Quebec asbestos miners.
  • The author stated that the dust-measuring technique used (midget dust impinger) was only 13% better than a random guess.
  • The author stated that McDonald deleted all data that showed asbestos as protective.
  • The author stated that McDonald concluded exposure of up to 45 f/cc of chrysotile had been essentially innocuous. The author noted that the UK limit at the time was 2 f/cc and is 0.1 f/cc today.
  • The author stated that UK limit comparison: 2 f/cc then, 0.1 f/cc today.
  • The author stated that McDonald testified at a 1972 OSHA hearing that McDonald was not associated with any asbestos producer, which the author called untrue.
  • The author stated that McGill held an internal review rather than an independent investigation. The author said the Research Integrity Officer dismissed the complaint, and called the review biased.
  • The author stated that McGill's Research Integrity Officer dismissed the complaint.
• The authors' conclusion: The author called for McGill University to hold an independent inquiry into its asbestos history.

Related studies

• Exposing the "myth" of ABC, "anything but chrysotile": a critique of the Canadian asbestos mining industry and McGill University chrysotile studies — D. Egilman, C. Fehnel, et al. (2003)
• Professional exposure to carcinogenic substances: is occupational physicians' activity compatible with medical ethics and deontology? — B. Clin, M. Letourneux, et al. (2008)
• Science or public relations? The inside story of the Asbestosis Research Council, 1957-1990 — G. Tweedale (2000)
• Corporate corruption of science-Another asbestos example — D. Egilman, R. Monárrez (2017)
• Response to Hessel — D. Egilman (2017)
• How Our Continuing Studies of the Pre-clinical Inbred Mouse Models of Mesothelioma Have Influenced the Development of New Therapies — B.W.S. Robinson, A.J. Redwood, et al. (2022)

Browse more research in International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, or return to medical research.