Shooting the messenger: the vilification of Irving J. Selikoff

Our plain-English summary of Shooting the messenger: the vilification of Irving J. Selikoff, by J. McCulloch, G. Tweedale (International Journal of Health Services, 2007).

The study

• Authors: J. McCulloch, G. Tweedale
• Journal: International Journal of Health Services
• Published: 2007;37(4):619-34
• Type of article: Historical article
• Cited by: 3 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Dr. Irving J. Selikoff (1915-1992), a New York physician based at Mount Sinai Hospital, was the leading American medical expert on asbestos-related diseases between the 1960s and early 1990s. In a country that had been the world's greatest consumer of asbestos, he was also at the center of the key controversies connected with the mineral. In these controversies, Selikoff was consistently demonized as a media zealot who exaggerated the risks of asbestos on the back of bogus medical qualifications and flawed science. Since his death, the criticism has become even more vituperative and claims have persisted that he was malicious or a medical fraud. However, most of the attacks on Selikoff were inspired by the asbestos industry or its sympathizers, and for much of his career he was the victim of a sustained and orchestrated campaign to discredit him. The most serious criticisms usually more accurately describe his detractors than Selikoff himself.

In plain English

This article is a historical account, not a medical study. The authors examined efforts to discredit Dr. Irving J. Selikoff, a Mount Sinai Hospital physician who studied asbestos-related diseases. They drew on the Selikoff Archive and on industry documents revealed in litigation. They described three phases: the mid-1960s to early 1980s, the late-1980s and early-1990s debate over asbestos in buildings, and historians' assessments after his death in 1992. They reported that Johns-Manville and industry lobby groups ran an orchestrated smear campaign. This included a 1973 confidential memo titled "Discredit Selikoff" and a 1974 industry meeting that sought a medical man "capable of standing off Dr. Selikoff." The authors wrote that his research division did not depend on unions for money, that he never testified in litigation after the early 1970s, and that they found no evidence he proposed a "one-fiber" theory. They reported that some critics had industry ties, including undisclosed consultancies or litigation income. The authors concluded that the most serious criticisms more accurately described his detractors than Selikoff himself.

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: Historical analysis and commentary based on archival and litigation documents (not a medical or epidemiological study)
• Who was studied: Dr. Irving J. Selikoff (1915–1992) of Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, and the industry representatives, scientists, journalists and historians who criticized him, from the 1960s to the 2000s
• Exposure: Not a health exposure study. The article concerns disputes over asbestos hazards, including asbestos in the environment and in buildings.
• Main results:
  • The authors reported an orchestrated campaign against Selikoff led mainly by Johns-Manville and industry lobby groups.
  • In 1973 a confidential memo titled "Discredit Selikoff" was produced, listing his statements alongside point-by-point rebuttals.
  • At a January 1974 meeting of U.S. and U.K. industry representatives in Montreal, finding a medical man to counter Selikoff was a priority matter.
  • According to the authors' reading of the Selikoff archive, his research division did not depend on unions for funding, and he did not testify in litigation after the early 1970s.
  • The authors found no evidence that Selikoff proposed the one-fiber theory attributed to him.
  • Authors of 1989 and 1990 articles in NEJM and Science that criticized removal policy were found to have undisclosed asbestos-company consultancies or to have been defense expert witnesses.
  • Historian Peter Bartrip, who claimed Selikoff had no medical degree, testified to substantial litigation-related earnings.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that the most serious criticisms of Selikoff, namely links with "interests" and involvement in litigation, more accurately describe his detractors than Selikoff himself.

Related studies

• Science is not sufficient: Irving J. Selikoff and the asbestos tragedy — J. McCulloch, G. Tweedale (2007)
• Irving John Selikoff and the strange case of the missing medical degrees — P.W. Bartrip (2003)
• The long-lasting legacy of industrial carcinogens: the lesson of asbestos. Irving J. Selikoff Memorial Lecture, 1995 — C. Maltoni (1997)
• The use of insulin like-growth factor II messenger RNA binding protein-3 in diagnostic pathology — J.J. Findeis-Hosey, H. Xu (2011)
• Implication of active oxygen species as second messengers of asbestos toxicity — B.T. Mossman, J.P. Marsh, et al. (1987)
• Insulin-like growth factor II messenger RNA-binding protein 3 expression in gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumors — H. Yamamoto, K. Arakaki, et al. (2014)

Browse more research in International Journal of Health Services, or return to medical research.