Copyright 1998 The National Post (Canada)

Merry Christmas from junk science
by Terence Corcoran
editor, The National Post
Saturday, November 21, 1998

Across Canada this week, toy retailers have been removing millions of dollars' worth of baby rattlers, teethers and soothers from store shelves. The voluntary mass product removal, which Health Canada refuses to acknowledge is a formal product ban, coincides with the latest Greenpeace toxic scare campaign. It also has all the earmarks of being another junk science adventure, one of many that is ravaging Health Canada and, over time, playing havoc with industry, the health care system and consumer welfare.

The day before Health Canada's Monday announcement of its non-ban on the baby products, Greenpeace and a dozen other extreme environmentalists had taken out full page newspaper ads warning of baby toys filled with "dangerous chemicals." The ad from the New York Times (see above), claimed that the toys, when exposed to saliva, "can leach up to seven times acceptable levels of toxic compounds called phthalates" into a baby's mouth.

This is Greenpeace's way of saying Merry Christmas. If the science won't carry the case, then pick up some cute babies and turn them into potential victims of some chemical that sounds dangerous, an easy trick in an era in which all chemicals are automatically considered deadly toxins. By Health Canada's own admission, there is essentially zero chance based on current science of any baby suffering any harm from sucking on one of the banned soothers. But still the department cajoled industry associations into joining a "voluntary" removal from the market of as many as 130 soft vinyl baby products that contain di-isononyl phthalate (DINP), a chemical that makes vinyl softer.

What happened? We'll return to details of the toxic toy story in a moment. Generally, however, the vinyl soother scare is Health Canada's latest interface with junk science, one of many over the last several years. Recently, the department has been embroiled in a conflict over bovine somatotropin (BST), an artificial hormone made by Monsanto that promotes greater milk production in cows .

In the BST case, a group of six renegade bureaucrats have mounted a campaign to smear the department for allegedly failing to investigate the health risks associated with BST. Claiming that the department is in the pocket of drug and chemical companies, the bureaucrats have enlisted a farmers union and a small herd of bovine journalists in their cause, even though BST has been studied to death and found safe.

The BST conflict has also served to revive the myth of the heroic Health Canada researcher who valiantly battles evil corporations. One such hero is Dr. Pierre Blais, the Health Canada scientist who helped create the North American breast implant scare. How Dr. Blais remains a hero in this business of bureaucratic paranoia is an indicator of the power of junk science.

For the record, here's what a judge in New Mexico had to say about Dr. Blais after he had testified. It appears, he said, that "Dr. Blais is so biased it affects his objectivity and his ability to give an honest opinion." The judge said Dr. Blais' "theories as to breast implants in general are totally unscientific and therefore unreliable. He publishes nothing, keeps no set of systematic records of his tests or observations and his opinions are peculiarly his own without any general acceptance in the scientific community and without any ability of testing or peer review." Finally, said the judge, Dr. Blais "will not be allowed to give general opinions on the manufacture or design of implants, any immunological effects of responses nor the issues of implant failure."

With Dr. Blais and the Monsanto Six running a junk science campaign against Health Canada, one wonders whether Health Minister Allan Rock is using baby rattlers as an departmental image soother.The department's own report contains nothing to suggest any genuine risk to babies who suck on toys containing DINP. It was only a "precautionary measure." A news release said babies who sucked on a soother for three hours or more a day on a daily basis might receive too much DINP. What the department didn't say is that a baby would have to suck on the same soother for years to achieve anything that could even remotely be considered risky. Even then, one Health Canada official said, the risk was "very, very small." How small? Maybe one in a million, he said.

For industry, meanwhile, the march of junk science is a growing disaster. The toy recall is the first in which Health Canada issued a report listing all the products that are safe, implying that all products not on the list are unsafe. With that principle, the government could soon be in the position of approving all toys, even all products.

Pulling baby rattlers from the market won't cause an economic meltdown. But in a speech this past week in Toronto, at a meeting of the Canadian Institute of Law and Medicine, Cornelia Baines, professor of Public Health Sciences at the University of Toronto, said "unfettered junk science" is distorting health care, interfering with industry, and causing life-saving products to be removed from the market.