UK cancer study questioned

A group of former semiconductor workers is questioning the British government's choice of a research group to help conduct an investigation of cancer rates among a semiconductor plant's chip manufacturing workers, arguing the group's former ties to the semiconductor industry may make it unable to conduct unbiased research.The workers' group, called Phase Two, said in a press release last week that they recently learned that the company contracted by the UK government to conduct the study, the Scotland-based Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM), has at least one employee who has done some consulting work at a UK branch of National Semiconductor, based in California. "Really, because of the sensitivity of the work… you should not have either a real or perceived conflict of interest," Andrew Watterson, a researcher on occupational and environmental health at the University of Stirling and an unpaid advisor to Phase Two, told The Scientist. The UK government decided to launch a follow-up study after conducting a smaller study, which found that former workers at National Semiconductor in the United Kingdom had a higher-than-average rate of certain cancers—specifically, lung, gastric, and breast cancers in women, and brain tumors in men.Watterson explained that when the IOM was first awarded the contract to conduct that follow-up study almost 2 years ago, they denied ever having any links to the semiconductor industry, and only admitted they had recently—a fact that makes him also question their record-keeping skills.But IOM chief executive officer Colin Soutar told The Scientist that it took a long time to discover the institute's former connection to National Semiconductor in the United Kingdom because an occupational hygienist "mentioned casually" only weeks ago he had done some work at the plant, for a third-party compressor company. Soutar explained that the IOM conducts research for government and industry groups, and has worked for a range of electronics companies. However, the recent revelation does not represent a conflict, and will not affect the research. "Our reputation, and our work, is always independent and impartial," Soutar said.In a letter written to Phase Two's Jim McCourt, a representative of the government group overseeing the study noted that they believe the IOM's former relationship with the UK branch of National Semiconductor does not represent a conflict of interest, and the IOM "is an impartial organization which practices scientific integrity."Peter Morgan, a spokesman for the UK government group, known as the Health and Safety Executive—which acts similarly to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the United States—told The Scientist that the revelation does not warrant transferring the contract to another independent organization. "I think that having reviewed the situation, they don't have any reason to change the arrangement they've come to," he said.Morgan added that the fact that the IOM volunteered this information—albeit late—was a "mark of integrity," and the final protocol for the feasibility study is currently open for public scrutiny.The protests come on the heels of another controversy over an occupational medicine journal's refusal to publish a paper that included mortality data from former workers in semiconductor plants at IBM and showed they had a higher-than-average rate of certain cancers. The journal's guest editor, Joseph LaDou, of the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, along with the other potential authors, responded by boycotting the journal, with the issue due in November.LaDou argued that it is in the government's interest to produce findings that show no link between the semiconductor plants and workers' health. Producing a study that establishes that semiconductor workers are dying of cancer at a faster rate could have a significant impact on the economy, he told The Scientist, and may embarrass government health agencies by suggesting they have not done all they could to protect citizens.LaDou noted that IBM and other companies are currently conducting their own studies into the health effects of working on semiconductors, but in every case, there are serious doubts about the credibility of the research. "If industry really wanted to know if they had a cancer problem, they would fund NIOSH and NCI to do it independently," he said. "It's so straightforward; it's just heartbreaking no one has ever done it."John Greenagel, director of communications at the Semiconductor Industry Association, said that its members are planning to fund a large-scale cancer study in the United States and will release a request for proposal next month. "We will pick researchers of the highest credentials and reputation," he told The Scientist.Greenagel explained that research into the health effects of the industry cannot be totally independent, because investigators will have to work with companies to provide company data. And the companies do not want to cover up the truth, he said. "If there is a problem, we want to know about it," he said.

UK cancer study questioned

Semiconductor workers take issue with chosen research group's former industry ties

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of