wet etches. sometimes it is mother's reporting dead mother's the large number of pediatric cancers they are seeing in certain communities. this work is being done at hawked by concerned citizens. -- ad hoc and concerned citizens. we must develop national strategies for developing actionable information. this is the battle against disease of our own making. when i talk about this issue, i think of my son who is fighting a fighting a war in afghanistan. if i were suddenly to find myself in the field of conflict, it would not matter how credential i was. i would take my leave from those who had been on the ground. make no mistake, i feel as if we are in a war here at home.

in this battle, we look to you as our commander. on that matter, those constituents, your troops, they are sending you a message. but we are not listening. while the map is not scientific, it shows firsthand experiences are providing us the data that we need. they are reporting to me for help because they are concerned that the pollution in their towns is what is making them and their children sick. i will continue to work diligently to gather -- to gather greater information and report what it is they are seeing. this map, i believe, but this all to do so. we must listen and learn from what these people in the affected communities are telling us. we cannot just sit back and the safety of our offices and our own homes and hear these stories and think that it is not

possible. the reports say it cannot happen. i am here to tell you today that they do happen and they are happening. in april, 2010, the president's council declared that the number of cancers caused by toxic chemicals is grossly underestimated and warns that americans face grievous harm from the largely unregulated chemicals that contaminate our air and water. i was born and raised in a very simple, beautiful lifestyle in kansas. i happen to be raised by a very strong republican and military man who actually worked for industry and the united states government as an engineer. he is the very person that taught me the value of clean water, a good land, good health, and the respect of one another. it always amuses me when someone

believes i have a certain party affiliation. i find it disturbing for those who assume the environmental activist is anti-business. i always thought that caring for the environment and public health was a conservative thing to do. i later learned it is just the right thing to do. . we all need to come together on this issue, republicans, democrats, independents, businesses, and communities. we need government, business, and the affected communities to join as one for the betterment of the hall and begin to clean up our message. we should ask no more of our cells that ask of our children. we need to work together to find solutions and learn what i believe my children and countless other children who serve our country are teaching us. we must protect, and harter, and

defend what we love and cherish the most. our families, our health, our land, our water, and our very environment. i thank you for the opportunity to share this matter with you and be a part of this presentation. i do thank you for your tireless efforts to help make our environment a better place to live. >> thank you so much. this map is really unbelievable that people call you. they did not have another place to go. you should feel really proud of your record in the past and that america feels comfortable in letting you know this. we are trying to make it easier for people to report these to us and we can therefore take the

whole community and bring together state, local, community, individuals and get to the bottom of these clusters of diseases some of which are not related to environment and many of them are. dr. belzer, welcome. >> thank you very much. i appreciate the opportunity to testify today. i would like to make a friendly correction, chairman boxer, to your opening statement. i, too, and a california native. certain imbalance on this panel. i was raised in torrance, calif.. my bachelor and a master's degree i got at the university california davis a few years ago and i subsequently earned a master's from harvard and i

sometimes regret i was not able to move back. >> we miss you. [laughter] you left us for virginia and we cannot forgive you for that. >> thank you so much. my parents sometimes feel the same way. my background is as an analyst, high risk analyst, an economist. although my 10 years spent as an economist and the office of management and budget normally would make people think i have a green eye shqade point of view, shepherded through the omb convoluted review process, the epa human exposure assessment survey, almost 20 years ago now, at the time, it was the biggest attempt to get real world represents the data on environmental exposure. i am very proud to have

shepherded it through. at least 40 papers have been published because of this project. i am happy to have played a small role in that. with that small introduction, i want to raise a couple of questions. i written testimony covers a number of scientific and technical issues. i wish to focus on four of them right now. first, how is the term diseased defined? without a clear definition of disease, almost anything could be included. we have experience with this problem. the term adverse health of fact is used hundreds of times in federal law. it is either to find circularly or not at all. this creates a number of problems for us in attempting to be responsive.

this is not clear the definition of disease either. it uses the term adverse affect but does not define it, like the existing law. second, how is the term disease cluster defined? presently, it is defined as sensitive and selected. this is the witness very few real cases which statisticians call off-. it is needed to identify the number of random cases that are incorrectly classified. false negatives are obviously not good but false positives are costly, too. they create fear and eggs id and may lead to the closure of parks, schools, and drinking water wells. they depress the market value of people's homes. this also creates a serious problem for scientists who are -- who would be investigating

petitions alleging a disease cluster. the less sensitive definition the greater will be the proportion of investigations that come up dry because there is not anything to find. when scientists, dry, people are more angry than relieved. their trust in government is damaged and sometimes beyond repair. the conventional definition has good sensitivity but really pour sealer activity. -- selectivity. it has a low rate of false negatives however it is very likely to miss-classify a lot of random house's -- cases as disease clusters. as a high rate of false positives. i have shown how the conventional definition results in the majority of random cases of disease getting ms-classified as disease clusters.

27% of fixed geographical zones have greater than expected number of cases andl they would be casesy -- they would be legislatively deemed. this does not help those who belong to a bonafide the disease cluster. substantial resources will be sent searching for environment linkages that do not exist. that takes resources away from trying to understand real disease clusters. my third concern, how is the term potential disease cluster defined? the definition is narrow but in other respects very broad. it is now because it focuses on anything subject to regulation by the epa. it is broad because it demands a scientific evidence. a chemical is a potential cause by being present.

no evidence is required that an exposure to the chemical actually occurred and no evidence is required. in short, the problem is the definition does not follow the scientific risk assessment model. finally, i am worried about the possibility of subordinating signs to law and politics. when congress attempts to legislate science, scientists compromised. that science would be compromised in the way epa would be directed by its risk assessments in a health- protected way. this is not science. it damages the credibility and integrity of risk assessment. scientists should never be told what conclusion to reach and invited to conduct research in order to support it. to be credible, risk must be estimated objectively. this is a core scientific value

and responsible scientists will not participate in a system where court-scientific values are compromise. thank you very much >> i look forward to respond to your critique. dr. gena solomon, we welcome you. >> thank you, chairman boxer and members of the committee. good morning. i am a practicing physician. i also a senior scientist at the national resources defense council and director of the occupational and environmental medicine residency program at the university of california, san francisco. most health professionals at some point in their career encounter a disease cluster. disease clusters are a mysterious excess of one or more illnesses such as cancers, birth defects, neurological disease in

a particular workplace or community over a period of time. these disease clusters are frightening for communities and often frustrating for scientists because at least in the past, there were limited tools for understanding and solving them. but, disease clusters also hold the potential, especially with the new scientific tools of today that are emerging as we move forward, these disease clusters may armlocks and of the mysteries of chronic disease. that includes birth defects and cancer. when i was a clinical fellow at harvard in the mid-1990's, i learned about a cancer cluster in nearby and wooburn, massachusetts. 12 children got leukemia over a period of a few years. most of them lived on just one street in a certain section of town. that cluster, like many, was not

discovered by a state or federal agency or scientist but was discovered by community members who recognized each other when they were sitting waiting and waiting room at the cancer institute. ultimately, this cluster was confirmed by scientists and it provided a very key clue. it was the first time that the chemical tce was linked with cancer in humans. an abundance of science since that time has multiply confirmed that link. the cluster provided a clue that helped science move forward. this senate committee held a field hearing in april, 2001, in the town of fallon, nev., where many children were diagnosed with leukemia. scientists published a paper calculations at a cluster of this magnitude would occur in

the united states by pure chance about once every 22,000 years. that cluster in nevada provided clues. testing in the community revealed that almost 80% of community members had the urinary tungsten levels above the 90th percentile of people nationwide. tungsten was not previously thought to be carcinogenic. it had never really been steady. this same metal that showed up at high levels in sierra vista, ariz., another community affected by childhood leukemia clusters. those two findings triggered a much-needed study by the national toxicology program which is ongoing today. that may advance the science and help protect public health. although it is really difficult to conclusive proof what caused

any specific disease cluster, i want to say that we can gather invaluable clues and hints from these tragic events and those can then help us solve the mystery of chronic disease. historically, disease clusters have revealed the link between cancer and asbestos, between testicular toxicity and dbcp and between liver cancer and vinyl chloride, to name a few examples. all of these chemicals are well known to be dangerous to humans and one of them come dbcp has been banned. they are still in widespread use today. my colleagues and i just released an issue paper documented 42 disease clusters in 13 states that have been

confirmed by investigations by state or federal investigations. this is attached to my written testimony. we found examples like brain cancers in children and adults at the acreage in west palm beach, fla. which was brought to the attention of this very committee by senator bill nelson one year ago. birth defects in california including 20 babies born over less than two years with birth defects and four children with birth defects so severe they have since died in a town of only 1500 people. there are numerous other examples including the well- known cluster of male breast cancer as well as childhood cancer and birth defects at camp lejeune, north carolina where more than 60 marines who lived on that base have been diagnosed with male breast cancer. this is an extraordinary and alarming finding. it is almost impossible that could occur by chance alone and it deserves urgent attention.

some of the much needed tools to solve disease clusters are found in thef-76, the legislation known as trevor's a lot. this legislation would direct and fun federal agencies to swiftly assessed state and local officials to investigate community concerns about the disease clusters and their causes. it would also create consistent science-based guidelines for a systematic and a team approach to investigating disease clusters. these guidelines would be developed in collaboration between epa, the centers for disease control, the national institute of environmental health sciences, and the national institutes of health. they would address these issues of statistical significance that are so often so difficult in disease clusters. this bill would set up local

advisory committees to improve outreach and involvement of community members. this is essential to build a trust within the community but also to learn from the community because it is often community members who point out the critical clues to on locking these clusters. the other thing it would do is encourage to plummet a powerful new scientific tools like to xicogenomics and other second screen for hundreds of thousands of chemicals in people. i am thinking today of the residents of all the many of dozens of communities across the country that are affected by confirmed disease clusters and the hundreds of communities where residents are self- identifying clusters and looking for help. these people suffered through illness and uncertainty through open and loss and they fought for answers and in most cases,

have not received them. it is not too late for these communities and others like them. when a have the scientific tools and there is an opportunity to improve and systemetize are clusters of these communities get the support they need in the answers they seek. thank you. >> thank you very much. each of us will have five minutes to question. i would ask you to keep your answers brief so we can get to all of you. i want to say to dr. belzer, on page 7 of our bill, we use a definition of how a disease is defined. it is defined exactly the way the national institutes of health to fight diseases word for word. and then we even at the next paragraph about the fact that it science improves and there is a better way to do it, we will do that.

i feel comfortable but i am happy to work with you if there are ways we can make it better. you point out that we force the epa to look at the various pollutants. we don't exploit any thing like genetics or anything else. we say they have to include these because if they don't, we will never know the answer. i really think and i appreciate your criticism that differs from trevor. the important thing is to work with us. would you be willing to do that if we can tighten this up? that would be wonderful, ok. trevor, you have testified that your family has had difficulties in the past with the tumor registry when asking for an investigation. you have problems as a family into looking into this cancer cluster which is why we wrote this bill.

can you describe the importance you place on government agencies at all levels involving family and community members and a cancer cluster investigation? what is the importance of including the families themselves? >> thank you for your question. i believe the citizens and communities want to look to their government for answers and when they have questions about what is in their surrounding environment, they would like somewhere to go where they are not told that they are statistically insignificant. that is what we were told. even if the data we had proved correct, our town was too small to warrant a study. strengthening the coordination

and accountability of federal, state, and local agencies is key to creating that line of communication. >> are bringing together, i think, a more effective way to respond by including the community so there is no frustration out there and you get the answers. ms. brockovich, you talk about ensuring accountability and transparency. what are the main benefits of the people stricken with illness and to other people in their community from increased transparency and accountability as we look at these clusters? >> i think it is clearly important to have the community involved. communities try to reach out to agencies.

it can be cancer registries or local agencies and often they are treated as a statistic and they are not heard and they want to be a part of the process. they are distressed and as a community. they want to look to agencies and they believe the ones that are overseeing them and when they find out something has slipped through the cracks, it begins a distressed process. for them to be part of a process with the companies and their agencies, it begins to reestablish trust. when you don't have that, we are not finding out the information and we need to know from them. you have to get to know the communities and they will begin to provide you with information that will give you more answers so we can begin to find a solution. it is very important that they be able to work with you and they don't feel they have been able to do that. >>, a people have contacted you

for that map to show this before? >> thousands ben can somebody hold of that map -- thousands. >> this is a map that he put together. she is known for going after these problems and people have called her. this is a rhetorical question -- don't you think this indicates that people are frustrated? it is unbelievable to me that they would call you, someone in the private sector, rather than call the epa of nih. maybe they are calling them as well but doesn't this indicate a level of frustration? >> they don't feel they are being heard. that is why i started this map. i got over 40,000 e-mails each month. what happened 48 months ago was that i kept saying from

communities that they are concerned and they are saying too many cancers. that becomes a flag for me when i have not one or five communities but 20 and 50 and 100 telling me the same thing. i created the map and they are frustrated. they want some answers. not everything when we look into it will be related to an environmental issue. in some instances, it could clearly be we may be overseeing it. these people don't naturally wake up and learn of their friend with cancer and their neighbor or they get to know each other in the hospital and they don't realize there -- they are neighbors within the same block. they are very, very frustrated. they are trying to find a way to reach out and they don't wake up and think that they should call cdc or the national institutes of health. 80% of the people in their e- mails to me have said they don't

know where else to go. >> i think the ball-officercrepo -- i think the boxer-crepo bill will address this. >> i found your testimony incredibly informative than compelling. i want to thank you for making the effort to come and be with us. one thing you said in your testimony was, you refer to your mother's experience when she went to local cancer registry in your community to raise concerns about potential disease cluster and that she was told that basically yorktown was too small to warrant an analysis -- that yorktown was too small to warrant an analysis. -- that your town was too small to warrant an analysis. what did you do next?

>> fortunately, we were able to take up ourselves to get the proper scientists to conduct studies on a personal level to find out some answers and start the ball rolling to see if there were indeed problems in our community. >> did you get assistance from any governmental agencies? in finding the scientist to help you? >> we did not, no. >> the next question was you have indicated in your testimony that you found that the government response is piecemeal to nonexistent. that is the reality ran into.

you did not have a formal government direction to turn to. >> yes, that is exactly where the statement comes from from our experience, being told we're is statistically insignificant. >> thank youe andrin, you agencyte that the cdc's for toxic disease registry -- you into cape that theatsdr has serious -- challenges in responding to disease clusters. >> from experience of 20 years and being out of the philip these communities and i talked to them and as they are trying to track whether there are clusters are not, we inquire whether astr has been with them.

they indicate that agency has made no such effort to find out from the community what is happening. one thing i think is important and that we think might be a flaw how we are identifying these is these registries and these groups don't come in and watch the movement of where these people argo. e going. if we find out we live in macon -- contaminated community, we move that we have lost track of where these people have gone. when people come down with cancer, they reported to state in which they reside. they don't reported to the state and where they are from. we could potentially be missing hundreds if not thousands of people because we cannot track their movements and their geographic location. i think that is important. from experience in dealing with these communities, specifically

atsdr, they are not there. they have not been to the communities. it is frustrating for them. >> dr. belzer, can you comment of how we deal with this statistical issue when you have a small town? we recognize how you have small numbers. what do you do to deal with this problem? express is not something i am familiar with but the term statistical significance should normally be used only after an analysis has already been done, when data has been collected. it is not something that should be said of anything or anyone before data is collected. it is an odd thing to imagine. i believe that the terminology

which is normal in classical statistics is deeply offensive to many people varibecause they understand the term in significance to mean that they are insignificant. this problem probably could be addressed if the s p ideo [unintelligible] they are probably superior tools. epidemiology understands all that. that is a case of scientists communicating in their own jargon in ways that the non- scientists don't fully understand. they could be far more sensitive about it. >> my time has expired. >> trevor, you said something in your commentary and we so much

appreciate you being here. you said you were glad to be alive. we are all all glad that you are alive. i look at you -- i am a professional grandfather. i have 10 grandchildren and i know i want for them. so far, the conditions that they run into are relatively mild compared to cancer. one thing that i find so disturbing is that in this place of contemplation and legislation, we often hear sympathy for those who are afflicted with cancer or other threatening diseases. but somehow or other, we separate the heart from the mind here because we will get into a talk about costs and what does it cost to save a child's life.

it does not matter what the cost is. there is not a family in the world who could dispose of -- who wouldn't dispose of all their assets to save a grandchild or a child's life. i have been fortunate enough to be involved in some cancer research. dr. solomon, have you heard of that thejimmy fund? >> jimmy anderson was one of the first children diagnosed with leukemia and woburn and he passed away. >> in a physician's l namedan drigan? >> yes. >> he is a close friend of mine. he supports legislation that i propose. that is to find out whether these chemicals that are being introduced in products is a very

important first step. i appreciate the fact that all of you are here to sound the alarm and let people know they are not exempt, no one is exempt. we do a lot on this committee, the environment committee led by senator boxer, to protect children's health and that includes clean air, getting rid of toxic materials coming out of smokestacks and that kind of thing. do you see communities rising up and saying that xyz company down to their waist here? they should pay the price that cleanup demands. do we ever did identify, ms.

brockovich, the companies that have fouled the air and the water and violated our children's health? is that ever brought to attention. ? i ran a business before i came here. what did you call your company? >> regulatory checkbook. >> i ran a company called adp. i have been fortunate enough to be able to respond to the early deaths of my father, 43, my uncle and the same family, 52, my grandfather, 56, all from cancer, all work in thesilk

mills of paterson, new jersey. when the chance came along, i was able to help start a cancer research facility and it is supported by a ji doctorm holland. do you know him? >> i know the name. >> he did a lot in childhood leukemia. i have several questions that i would like to put to you. and keeping time discipline, it is not easy for a senator. dr. solomon, the investigation into unusually high cancer rates in toms river, new jersey language because the new jersey cancer registry was out dated when the investigation began. looking at the bill proposed by senator boxer, the disease

cluster bill, wouldn't that have a good effect on a situation like this? we have to get ahead of the curve on this. i think it would be a terrific thing to do if we can move it. i have proposed a piece of legislation here that we would like to see all chemicals that go into products that are then circulated throughout our world identified as being safe for children health before it goes into the product so we then don't have to look at toxic reform. that said that we should investigate chemicals and see what kind of harm they bring.

we have investigated 200 chemicals out of 80,000. it is not good to have the good idea to have epa searching for those things as opposed to jumping on the bandwagon and getting this done before. keep in touch with your senators and make sure they understand the problems. trevor, you are a soldier in this battle and we wanted to keep fighting, thank you very much. >> thank you for pointing out that the boxer-crepo bill deals with the problem after the fact. nothing in this bill will prevent cancer clusters. we are saying if one occurs, let's have a way to respond and tell our communities the best way we can what of the probable causes. it is most of all to protect other people and also to resolve their questions.

you're talking about a new way to make sure that before these chemicals are introduced, even more chemicals, that the burden changes so that the person or the company or group that wants to introduce the chemical must prove it is safe before introduction. that is a very different and important move and i will support you 100%. these are different approaches to the same issue. they are complementary. issue, but they are complementary. thank you for being here, senator. >> thank you, madam chair. this is certainly very, very important problem. i guess it's fun because of the nature of communication being so much easier now, the ability to perhaps keep track of things is so much easier, it is something we can address. i guess my concern is really two or three things.

again, i believe very strongly that we need to deal with the problem. on the terms some of the things we have in place come in the registry program evidently is not doing a good job. and also, i guess i'm concerned that we are talking about it being under epa as opposed to i guess my question would be why not the cdc or the nih or the fda or all of these things that they're involved in a similar way. were talking a lot about cancer and cancer is a devastating disease. there's lots of neuromuscular diseases, you know, afghan fighters so scheduled for this sort of thing. i'd really like for you all to talk a little bit about that. to me there's no excuse if we've got a registry problem need to get it fixed. i think that would have a great deal. we may be to totally revamp it. there's lots of diseases now that we need to be following that were not following three can do a much better job of

that. i do have concerns also about perhaps duplication and maybe there's a better way to do this through some of the agencies that are set up really to investigate. because along with this, you have these clusters, but the cluster might be some pain that we are eating not enough software to much of what besides the environmental can do that has been raised. so i appreciate the testimony. i think it very, very helpful. your written testimony got to look at last night and i do appreciate it. again, it's something we desperately need to work on. so don't misunderstand. i'm committed to helping, but i just want to make sure they were doing this right or we don't have, you know, more duplication and spending resources in the way we can get very, very aggressive. those accountable authority to

netscape to to do a better job. does anyone want to comment quite yes, ma'am. >> i will. he got a couple of points than they just wanted to hit upon then i found interesting in dealing with all these communities and their reporting to me. there doesn't appear to be any national people's registry where they can report what more often than not if someone asking it here, but i've learned from communities and those with cancer. if their doctors or an agency that will do the porting, they do the reporting, which is why they started to bring information to me. one phenomenon in the scene happening in the facebook world we live in now is e-mails coming from people that are facebook have now found their old high school made, but they've all been dispersed throughout the u.s. or other parts of the world. once they are stitched back together, they are learning all of them have can't or come a

similar types of cancer and were able to pinpoint the mac one location. so i know there's been each of these up there that are involved, but there's one particular type reported and compiles data and then are the actual people and actual sources as this map would kind of indicate. so they need a specific place to report to come and not just cdc come this summer they can report actual cancer. not necessarily where they currently reside. and being able to possibly share of the data because i don't know what exists that cdc ordered atsdr does, but to be able to share data between local, state and agencies to have and see what we are missing because we're not reporting it to agencies who were supposed to

making the words. the information is getting lost. >> i agree. and i think again the sharing of data and as you say were in the face of a cage that does make this so much easier. ms. solomon. >> yes, your points, senator, were very important. the problems with tracking diseases in this country are quite serious. the cancer registries have gaps in many states and many diseases that are very important, especially some diseases that appear to be rising such as parkinson's disease are really not tracked at all. so that is an important and related issue. but i also want to speak about the issue of duplication because it's a tricky issue, because in my view coordination of

resources is very, very important and making sure that the approved the expertise is uploaded to address these clusters is also very important. up until now, the fact that it's really been atsdr or the states that have responded to clusters means that not all of the necessary resource is part the table, especially some of the environmental sampling approaches. in addition, when we were involved in researching report on clusters, we contact did the atsdr, which is housed in cdc, assuming that they would be tracking disease clusters simply tell us where clusters are. they told us that not only do they not track disease clusters and have no information about where they are located, they told us furthermore that they are no longer investigating disease clusters.

and so we said if that's the case, who is? they said this is the role of states and local governments. those entities don't have the knowledge skills. so that's why legislation like this will bring all those resources together. >> thank you. i don't want to kick out full time, but i think the point you make about coordination is a good one. and again, i guess i just have to look further to see if the cdc is not doing that, you know, should they be the lead agency in doing it versus the epa? you see what i'm saying? the other team, madam chair and again, this is something that were really concerned about spending money these days. improving registries is getting these things under control really with david tremendous

amount. that's the point we need to make. >> senator, thank you for coming. michael and i are very hopeful he'll join us in a look at this bill. i want to answer your one could treat, also mention and ask unanimous consent to put into the record this report from cancer facts and figures sent by the american cancer society. they say about 1,529,000 plus new cancer cases are diagnosed in 2010. the estimate does not include noninvasive cancer or it also doesn't include skin cancer. and later on they talk about the cost in here. and it just is mind-boggling. the nih estimates the overall cost of cancer in 2010 of

$263.8 billion. that is 102.8 billion for direct medical costs, 220 billion for and direct morbidity costs. that last part is duty. the 144 drag laws of productivity due to premature deaths. your point is so well taken. i think if our bills and we can get to the bottom as an lets say we go into a place and find there is no connection to the environment. if there's something to the soil, air or water, and now you're going to prevent a lot of these cancers from happening. i think our bill at the end of the date is called for efficiency as we move forward. i want to talk about why epa. i think it's a fair question.

it says all the agencies are going to coordinate. if they find it is an environmental issue, cpa that has ever, water and soil. they will find out what the cause is, but they can't move to fix it. so we wanted to give the agency to fix the problem if there's a problem delays so that this isn't just an exercise. it actually has to follow through. if you're concerned about this, if you want to spell that, let us work together because i've got to save face and trevor knows this and he makes the point he's both a minority witness in the maturity witness. in this days we have so much rancor. i would hope we would come together around a very simple idea that if there's something really troubling new or bothering you and you want to work with us in a positive way, that would be fine. we want to get this out.

we want to show america were not happy to see karen popovich was a private -- you're an attorney now, yes? you never did do that? she's an attorney by esme says. and that the best and an advocate for community. people are calling him because they are frustrated with their response. i would also make knowledge meant. the california epa express the u.s. epa for providing consultation as they look at causes of purtzer faxon cattleman. now the jury is out. we don't know whether this is a cancer cluster i think the epa can be very effect did and it's nice to get this comment from my state, selected the type and the

record. so i guess -- i have to say, this was written in december december 2010. so this was before jerry brandt took over. this is written by arnold schwarzenegger. it is a bipartisan thank you. trevor, i would like to give you the last comment of the day from the panel. if there's one thing you can tell senator bows and because he missed her testimony, if you could sum up why you supported the boxer crapo bill, if you could look them in the eye and tell him what it is, that would be wonderful. >> well, thank you i'm a senator for being here. i have known many children who have lost their lives and lost limbs to cancer and it's heartbreaking to see that and i think that's why we're all here today, it should do we can as

chair boxer said, if there is a problem that we address that. and i would also like to say that the medical community tumor registry come in cdc, overburdened with data and may think that this would streamline and consolidate the process. so thank you. >> thank you very much. i want to see thank you to the entire panel. all of you have just topped us enormously. >> madam chair, can i just say one thing? >> of course. >> i guess what i was thinking, the british navy had a problem and the old days because they are sailors developing scurvy, okay. so they were able to discover that was from lack of getting

vegetables when they were on board, fruits. and so, i guess what i would like is a situation where would we have a problem in a cluster, regardless of the disease, that when we go and investigate, we investigated figure out the cause, which is the epa came out and again i am not claiming to epa at all, but you tend to think in terms of your training and whatever. they established the paint on the boat was good, decking was good and there is no environmental cause in that way, then we wouldn't have discovered that people needed to be eating more fruits. so i guess that's my only concern is we were going and what agency. >> this is what we're trying to say. well, that's the whole point of the bill. it's the entire response is

coordinated. it includes the epa, the atsdr, the nih, the cdc. everybody is involved. and in addition, we pull in the state apparatus. we pull in the local city county. you're exactly right. you don't send and epa. that's not what our bill does. our bill says were going to coordinate this response, so everything you said is what we do. and it's high time we did it because i don't want to see a private citizen getting calls because of no faith in the government because we just not coordinated. so i hope you'll take a look at this. i think you like what you see. and again, if you want to make it more clear, when they get more clear. i want to thank so much this panel. you have been excellent witnesses. i look forward to the daily pass traverse the part of the

committee and bring it down to the floor. we have everyone's support and remove it through. and trevor, you know, life takes so many twists and turns and it's a mystery why. but clearly, your life took a twist and a turn in a way that is giving you the power to communicate your story and the empathy and compassion that you bring to this. and frankly your common sense site is slow. it's extraordinary. and just thank you. you know, you could have gone on with your world and put this behind you and said, well, i doubt this in my life, but i'm closing the chapter. what you are doing is so anonymously hope: we are so grateful. and your senators are so proud of you and we thank you and we stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> if you missed any of this hearing on disease clusters, you can hear the entire session online at c-span.org. the senate appropriations energy subcommittee will look into another environmental issue this morning. in a hearing on the safety of nuclear power plants in light of the situation in japan.

members will hear from the head of the nuclear regulatory commission. that is on c-span 3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. also on cspan 3 tonight at 8:45 eastern, we will be live from the annual congressional correspondents dinner. speakers are scheduled to include senator rand paul of kentucky and representatives anthony wiener of the york, ben quayle of arizona, and frederick wittman of louisiana. in a few moments, today's headlines and your phone calls live on "washington journal." members of the house will be back in session at 10:00 a.m. eastern for general speeches for a legislative work continues at noon with a bill that would reduce government regulation of pesticides. in about 45 minutes, we will talk about energy policy with democratic rep jean green