COMARE minutes 10th June 1999: extracts.
FOR MEMBERS' USE ONLY
Meeting:
Agenda No 2 (iii)
COMARE 56 10 June 1999
For information and discussion
Paper enclosed:
Author(s): Mr M Meacher and Prof B Bridges
ITEM 7 Childhood LEUKAEMIA IN WALES
7.1 The Chairman welcomed Dr John Steward and Mr David Adams Jones of
WCISU. He noted that Mr Adams Jones used to be the Information Services
Division (Scotland) Assessor to COMARE but is now acting as a consultant to
WCISU.
7.2 Dr Steward outlined the background to their paper, "Results of a
preliminary study to test the Irish Sea proximity hypothesis of Busby et al"
(COMARE 99-8). Dr Chris Busby of Green Audit had visited WCISU in 1998.
Discussion had touched on a possible protocol for testing the hypothesis that
leukaemia rates increase with proximity to the Irish Sea. The subsequent study
aggregated small geographical areas into bands of increasing distance from the
Irish Sea and identified a reducing gradient of relative risk for the incidence of
leukaemia in children under 5 years for the 16 year period, 1974 - 1989.
Although the work does not appear to have been published in any scientific or
medical journal, the Guardian carried an article reporting the results on 31
December 1998 and the study was also discussed in a BBC Wales documentary
on 9 February. The results are also available on the Low Level Radiation
Campaign web site.
7.3 In view of public interest in the study, the Welsh Office instructed WCISU
to carry out a preliminary analysis to test for evidence of the effect. Dr
Steward contacted Dr Busby requesting a copy of his report. In his reply, Dr
Busby explained that he was unable to provide a copy without permission of the
Irish Government for reasons of confidentiality. However, Dr Steward was able
to obtain a copy of the leukaemia and population data used as well as a summary
of the methodology.
7.4 Dr Steward decided to repeat the analysis of Busby et al using data from the
current WCISU database. Data for each distance band was reconstructed using
information on 1991 wards supplied by Dr Busby. The analytical method used
was checked and agreed by Dr Busby.
7.5 Dr Steward found no evidence to support Dr Busby's hypothesis. The
general level of relative risks for leukaemia were in line with those expected for
England and Wales and there was no evidence of a decreasing gradient of
leukaemia risk with distance from the Irish Sea
7.6 Dr Steward explained that Dr Busby's work was flawed by a significant
error. For urban areas of Wales, Dr Busby had originally identified 400 cases of
leukaemia. but corrected this after publication to 118. For rural Wales, Dr Busby
found 138 cases of leukaemia in the 0-4 years ago group for the period 1974-89,
whereas only 48 cases had been identified on the WCISU database for the same
area and period. Dr Steward believed that this discrepancy arose from a data
input error which added counts from other age bands to the 0-4 age group.
Therefore the problem with the study stemmed not from the epidemiology, but
the data. Furthermore he was convinced that Dr Busby was aware of the data
problem but would not acknowledge or correct the mistake. In Dr Steward's
view, this amounted to scientific fraud. [Dr Steward has denied saying this -- see note below.]
7.5[Note: the non-sequential numbering is in the original]
7.6 The Chairman thanked Dr Steward for his presentation and asked Members
to consider whether there is a raised incidence of childhood leukaemia in the
coastal regions of Wales and, if so, whether there could be any association with
Sellafield discharges. The Chairman opened the discussion.
7.7 Dr Draper wished to declare an interest. He had discussed Dr Busby's work
with the Welsh Office and had unfortunately been the subject of personal attacks
by Dr Busby. Dr Draper was happy with the methods adopted by WCISU to
reconstruct Dr Busby's analysis, however, he recommended that Dr Busby be
asked to provide a copy of the dataset he had used in order to establish where
the error in the number of leukaemia cases had occurred.
7.8 Dr Cartwright reported that he had also been discredited by Dr Busby and
agreed with Dr Draper's assessment and recommendation. He mentioned that
there had been a number of studies which looked at the incidence of leukaemia in
relation to increasing distance from coasts, estuaries and the confluence of rivers.
7.9 Professor Clayton questioned Dr Busby's use of very narrow distance bands
and the fact that they were defined by a non-linear scale. He also noted that
mean distances of each band from the sea should be included in. the WCISU
paper to facilitate a more direct comparison.
Dr Steward said that he had replicated Dr Busby's methodology and mean
distances of each band could be included to add clarity. In future analyses he
would prefer to compare specific data points. Professor Clayton observed that
coastal areas tend to be more urban than areas inland and this could give rise to a
possible confounding effect.
7.10 Professor Eden questioned whether the Committee should be wasting its
time on a scientifically suspect paper which had not been peer reviewed.
Professor Little asked whether the Welsh Cancer Registry data had been
checked against the National Childhood Cancer Registry. Dr Steward said that it
had. Professor Little noted that Dr Busby had redefined his distance bands in
terms of 1991 census wards and asked whether 1991 population data had been
used. Dr Steward said the study had not been adjusted for 1991 population
statistics or the social and economic status of subjects.
7.11 The Chairman explained that soon after the Committee had received a copy
of the paper by Dr Busby it became clear that the data was at odds with that held
by WCISU. The Chairman therefore decided to undertake an independent,
"blind" check. He asked Dr Busby to provide leukaemia data for Dyfed, Mid-
Glamorgan and Powys. Dr Busby sent him data for 1979 as requested. The
Chairman then asked Dr Draper how many cases were registered for these
regions on the National Childhood Cancer Register. Data for Mid-Glamorgan
and Powys were consistent, but for Dyfed, Dr Busby reported 48 cases whereas
the National Registry reported only 8. There appeared to be an error in the data
held by Green Audit and until this problem was corrected, the paper by Dr Busby
should be discredited.
7.12 The Chairman summarised the information before the Committee. Dr
Busby had noted that the number of leukaemia cases for Wales was too high to
be credible and had corrected the figure from 400 to 118. It was likely that the
data had been corrupted by the format in which it was transferred. This should
have prompted a re-examination of the source data originally supplied by the
Welsh Cancer Registry. However, the Chairman suggested that the Welsh Cancer
Registry should not escape blame since they failed to keep a record of the data
supplied to Dr Busby. In order to resolve the issue and to overcome what
appeared to be a conspiratorial mentality, the Chairman recommended that Dr
Busby should he urged to provide a copy of the data to COMARE or WCISU
who would try to establish how the data came to be corrupted. On the basis of
the WCISU study led by Dr Steward, COMARE could find no evidence for a
decreasing gradient of leukaemia risk with distance from the Irish Sea coast.
Green Audit had therefore aroused needless concern and should be asked to
withdraw the report since it was clearly invalid. The Chairman added that a
conclusion derived from work which replicated a flawed study would lack
credibility. Therefore, the only way to proceed would be to carry out further
research. The key question was whether this was justified.
7.13 Professor McMillan asked whether it was possible to be sure that there
was no coastline effect on the incidence of leukaemia. Professor Clayton also
thought it was premature to say that the coastline effect does not exist. He would
support further coastal analysis but not for the reasons put forward by Dr Busby.
Dr Adams Jones said that he could supply data and grid references for all cases
along the coastal fringe as input to an independent project. Mr Crawley
questioned whether the Welsh Office should support more work in this area. The
Chairman
noted his request for a steer from the Committee. Professor Boddy commented
that the public would think that COMARE were not carrying out their duties
unless further action was taken to address Dr Busby's hypothesis.
7.14 Professor Little wondered whether there was scope for the issue to be
addressed by the Geographical Assessments Group, (GAS). Professor
Cartwright was concerned that the group would not be able to respond within the
time scale required. The Chairman thought there was little scientific justification
for the study but as part of the Committee's remit to keep the public informed,
the political pressures could not be ignored. He was also mindful of implications
for COMARE of recommending expensive and scientifically unjustified research.
Mr Crawley wondered how much it would cost to fund a project to clear up
these issues. The Chairman said that this would depend on what the research set
out to achieve, but the average cost of a research paper was about £10K.
7.15 Professor Haites wondered whether a study confined to the coast of the
Irish Sea would identify any recognisable trend and whether, to be meaningful,
research should consider other important coastal areas. The Chairman
acknowledged the need for a large enough dataset, however, if the scope of the
study was too wide, the costs would be prohibitive. He asked the Committee
whether they would wish to recommend a further study to test Dr Busby's
hypothesis.
7.16 Dr Hamlet said that this would raise Dr Busby's credibility and would open
the door for others to lean on COMARE to recommend research. Professor Eden
could not support the recommendation for further research; Dr Busby's work had
not been peer reviewed, it contained known errors and there was no scientific
justification to test the hypothesis further. Professor Boddy added that by
seeking to obtain the data from Dr Busby and comparing this with the National
Registry of Childhood Cancers, COMARE had fulfilled its role as watchdog. Dr
Sharp agreed that there were no sound scientific reasons to suggest the need for
further research. Dr Harrison said that under normal circumstances, the
Committee would not concern itself with work that had not been reviewed and
published.
7.17 Mr Crawley assumed from the discussion that COMARE would not
recommend further investigation of the Busby hypothesis for the 0-4 year old age
group because the number of cases was too small. He wondered whether the
same argument applied to other age groups and malignancies. Dr Draper said
that Dr Busby had referred to brain cancers and noted that other published papers
had failed to identified a positive link with coastal effects.
7.18 The Chairman concluded that COMARE's recommendation not to pursue
further research was wholly defensible and on the basis of current evidence there
was no public health problem.
[Action: Secretariat]
ITEM 8 ANY OTHER BUSINESS
8.1 The Chairman wished to report recent progress of the Advisory Group on
Ionising Radiations (AGIR) which he also chairs. He explained that NRPB set up
AGIR in 1995 to run in parallel with the Advisory Group on Non Ionising
Radiations, (AGNIR) chaired by Sir Richard Doll. AGIR was initially assigned
four areas of work for which appropriate subgroups were set up. Some groups
were slow to start and the rate of progress has varied.
...
8.4 When the group last met on 18 February a number of key issues emerged
for the future work programme. Professor Little will lead a team looking in detail
at the risks associated with radon and Professor Goodhead's group will aim to
keep abreast of recent developments in
genomic instability and its implications for radiation protection. Dr Roger Cox
and Dr Alan Edwards of NRPB are currently reviewing Chris Busby's "second
event" theory which suggests that cells are more sensitive to chemical and
radiological exposure than previously thought. There is limited scientific support
for Busby's hypothesis and political pressures have brought this issue before
AGIR. The review paper will be considered by AGIR at the next meeting.
Dear Mr Bramhall,
Dear Dr Steward,
Thankyou that would be fine my me. I did not say it.
If you are seeing this page full screen (i.e. without a navigation bar on the left) you can't see how the rest of the site is organised.
The material on this page (along with other interesting correspondence)
was received by LLRC 23rd July
in a plain brown envelope
COMARE PAPERS
COMARE 99-12
Correspondence with Mr Michael Meacher MP, Environment Minister
Welsh Office covering paper (COMARE 99-7) the Welsh Cancer Intelligence
Surveillance Unit (WCISU) report (COMARE 99-8)
Report by Chris Busby (COMARE 99-9)
In conclusion, Dr Steward wondered whether COMARE might be able to
assist in obtaining copies of the dataset used by Dr Busby in order to demonstrate
how the number of leukaemia cases in rural Wales came to be trebled.
Here is an exchange of emails between LLRC and Dr Steward from 11 - 12 July 2000
> ... regardign the Website, I note that it contains "leaked"
>minutes from a COMARE meeting of March 1999 which I attended as an external
>speaker. I note that the minutes attribute me as saying that there has been
>a deliberate scientific fraud:-
>
>Section 7.6 of COMARE minutes 10th June (received by LLRC 23rd July)
>states:-
>
>Furthermore he (Dr Steward) was convinced that Dr Busby was aware of the
>data problem but would not acknowledge or correct the mistake. In Dr
>Steward's view, this amounted to scientific fraud.
>
>These minutes are quite inaccurate in this respect, I do not hold that view
>and have never stated it. On the contrary, it is my view, and it always has
>been, that there has been some sort of computer error either on the
>extraction of the original dataset by Health Solution Wales or on the
>reading in of the data by Green Audit, but without seeing the original data
>as supplied it is difficult to say which is true (why not send it to us as
>requested?). However, in the light of the aggregated spreadsheet supplied
by
>Dr Busby I now tend towards the data extraction error hypothesis. We have
>very high agreement between us on the conventional data columns, the
>difference is entirely attributable to the nonsensical "All Leukaemias"
>column. This is now a matter for COMARE to investigate.
>
>We continue to investigate the very interesting epidemiological hypothesis
>of an Irish Sea effect on cancer incidence and welcome any information you
>can supply to throw any further light upon the evidence for increased
levels
>of exposure of the population to low level radiation.
>
>John Steward
>________________________________________
>Dr J A Steward MBBCh BA MSc PhD FFPHM
>Director
>Welsh Cancer Intelligence & Surveillance Unit
>14 Cathedral Road
>Cardiff CF1 9LJ
>_______________________________________
>tel:- 029 20 373500
>fax:- 029 20 373511
...
I note your disclaimer on the COMARE minutes. What can I say? I assure you
that our transcription is entirely faithful to what we received in the brown
envelope. How would it be if I pasted your comments [i.e. what you have
written in this email ] onto the website? Would that be acceptable to you?
yours
Richard
John Steward
This Home page link takes you to the index page, which has links to all the topics we discuss on the site [only use it if this page is full screen]
Use the Flawed Epidemiology button to see what else we have to say on this topic.
Send email to: SiteManager@llrc.org with questions or comments about this web site.