A retired professor has been cleared of misconduct by McGill University, following an investigation into the funds he received from the asbestos industry while conducting research on the subject.
A report released Sept. 23 by the university concluded that John Corbett McDonald, a professor who retired from McGill in the late 1980s, had not been influenced in his research on the effects of asbestos, despite having received funding from the industry itself.
The investigation was requested in March by David Eidelman, vice-principal of health affairs and dean of medicine, after it was revealed the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association (QAMA) paid McDonald and other McGill researchers nearly $1 million between 1966 and 1972.
McDonald had led a McGill study on asbestos safety, looking into the health of 11,000 Quebec miners and mill workers from 1966 to the late 1990s.
Abraham Fuks, McGill’s research integrity officer, stated in the university’s report that “McDonald properly acknowledged financial support from the asbestos industry in his publications . . . and that there is no evidence to suggest that the sponsors influenced the data analyses or the conclusions.”
Fuks also concluded that his review “lends no credence” to allegations that McGill colluded with the asbestos industry.
The report stated that “McDonald and his research team demonstrated clearly that all forms of asbestos increase the risk of lung cancer,” and that these findings have not only “been replicated by other groups” but that “their robustness has endured many critical analyses and legal inquiries.”
But Kathleen Ruff, an anti-asbestos activist with the Ottawa-based Rideau Institute, said McDonald had not been as open about the funding he received as the report suggests.
“I provided to Dr. Fuks documentation showing that McDonald denied, on very important occasions, any connections with the asbestos industry,” Ruff said.
McGill has played “far and loose with the facts” and “failed the test” of transparency, she said. “When Eidelman announced that they would do the review, he stated even before they’d begun, he expected that the complaints would be dismissed.”
Ruff criticized the report’s “misleading” claims surrounding McDonald’s research.
“McDonald denied the level of harm [asbestos] causes,” she said. “There is not a single reputable scientist or scientific body in the world, to my knowledge, that has replicated his findings that you can be exposed to colossally high levels of Chrysotile asbestos without it causing cancer. The [World Health Organization] categorically dismisses them.”
New Democratic Party MP Pat Martin, who has been a vocal critic of the Conservative government’s support of the asbestos industry, agreed with Ruff.
“I think [McGill] has gone through a whitewashing exercise to protect its own reputation,” he said. “McDonald can’t find a single scientific peer to validate his findings and his research except for other scientists who were paid for by the asbestos industry. I think that the flaccid process that the university just went through discredits an otherwise honourable institution.”
Chrysotile, which composes 95 per cent of all asbestos used in the world, is the only form mined in Canada and while its domestic use is severely restricted, it can be exported to other countries.
“This isn’t a household product we’re talking about,” Martin said. “We’re talking about people’s lives as a result of this charade McDonald engaged in.”
Martin said he blames the Conservatives for also relying on the work of David Bernstein, who has long promoted the use of Chrysotile.
Bernstein and McDonald “peer-tested each other’s studies and both took money from the asbestos industry,” according to Martin. “They’re a pair of charlatans who supported each other.”
As an immediate response to the report, the McGill faculty of medicine “will move forward on the RIO’s recommendation to organize an academic conference on safe alternatives to asbestos, particularly in the developing world, and other topics of public interest,” Eidelman said.
“It is our role, as a university, to promote discussion and debate on issues raised by current events so as to ensure that new knowledge continues to be generated.”
