chromium-- their use in the back. he was with the environmental protection agency at the time, a very good study of this and found not surprisingly increased one cancer risk of people exposed to chromium and the question of the regulatory interested people were exposed at 1 microgram per cubic meter they had excess risk of lung cancer. the old standard was 52 micrograms per cubic meter so even that 1 microgram, people exposed for their lifetime at that level would develop an increased risk of lung cancer so powerful evidence. they tried to get ahold of this study epa was doing to get the raw data but they could not do it so what they did and this was fascinating because there were essentially trying to stop this lawsuit, to force the osha standard, the invented a simulated population and then conducted a study on it. they said on the basis of what we know about this, this is what we think the work should look like and they concluded there was no risk of lung cancer. well, then eventually, through freedom of informatio

the chromium chemical health committee from the industrial foundation. what is that? late one night i did some grupo and it just by luck because only on the web for a brief period of the industrial health foundation had gone bankrupt and there is a fight over chromium files and fortunately we were able to get the data from that and by cold calling the various creditors in the bankruptcy case, one holds role of information including and this was most remarkable a study done by the chromium industry of the low-level exposures an excellent study looking at four facilities and finding in fact, low levels of exposure their life was six micrograms per year. little higher than a level at issue was -- osha was talking about and people at higher levels, above six has twentyfold excess risk. this is a while finding but not surprising we know is a powerful carcinogen but here's an industry claiming you cannot move forward because you do not know the steady but they had the study and sat through 11 days of hearing with ocean never mentioning it existed. so the research group who

most of your examples are specific chemicals like tobacco or vioxx and chromium. i am just wondering if you are pretty to any information about the public relations in the/mercenaries scientist industrial complex about nanotechnology? >> i do not follow those and there is an interesting story of carbon block that has been steady a long time there is a lot of studies say that it is a carcinogen causing lung cancer there were a couple of studies showing excess lung cancer the research on the agency of world cancer of the categories as carcinogens was scheduled to have a meeting in a couple years ago to consider carbon block. and it was only peer review studies they have the panel together but the weekend before the panel was about to meet, overnight mail, at 62 p review studies are right they were peer review into we switch's un psat -- i heard of and put in a journal that is questionable and was paid extra money all showing the original studies were wrong. as a result perhaps in the international agency research on cancer said there was a probable carcinogen but no

i think even the one of the studies you should came up with it validated response, the chromium industry but it got squashed by the industry so i'm wondering how we confine that could work in validated? >> evin moreso most scientists-- what happens is when an industry is facing a crisis and they see it chemical has been implicated in harm, they will use their own scientists. they often go outside and find consultants who really are sleazy and know how to work the regulatory system so i think the most important thing though is essentially what i would call regulation by shamming. people lafta have the name on the document and there has to be a public conversation around this work. there was a very well-known professor of the university of alabama was pushed on behalf of some lincoln's in chromium sits, steady essentially showing that chromium apparently causes lung cancer and does not cause stomach cancer. it is the aaron. the series of cases. i would fail one of my students that they turned out a paper like this. is very important to talk about this and essentially point fingers. it is s