In a letter sent to McGill University on Feb. 10, a group of 32 individuals called on McGill University to perform an independent and transparent investigation into the influence of the Quebec asbestos industry over Professor J. Corbett McDonald’s epidemiological research on the health effects of chrysotile asbestos.

This was in response to the message sent by Dr. David Eidelman, vice-principal (health affairs) and dean of medicine, on Feb. 9, stating that an investigation into Professor McDonald’s research would be conducted by Professor Rebecca Fuhrer, chair of the department of epidemiology, biostatistics and occupational health, and a Canada research chair.

“The outcome of Prof. Fuhrer’s review will determine whether there is a need for a more detailed investigation, in accordance with our standard policies and procedures,” Dr. Eidelman’s message reads.

Kathleen Ruff, a senior human rights adviser at the Rideau Institute, explained why the letter was sent to McGill.

“We have absolutely nothing to say about Professor Furher, we’re sure she is a totally wonderful person, it’s nothing to do with her,” Ruff said. “[But it’s] an inside, internal investigation with the department of epidemiology investigating itself … This sets up a tainted situation.”

In addition to the complaint that an independent investigation should be conducted, the letter raised the concern that McGill’s public statements regarding Professor McDonald and his research “show bias and misrepresent the issue in question, making an internal investigation suspect.”

The letter stated that the Quebec asbestos industry funded McDonald’s research with the aim of showing that “controlled use” of chrysotile asbestos posed no health risks. Chrysotile asbestos represents 95 per cent of the asbestos ever sold, and 100 per cent of the asbestos sold in the past two decades throughout the world.

 “[McDonald] not only did research that was very pleasing to the asbestos industry, [but he also] put forward the message that they wanted—that chrysotile asbestos is virtually innocuous,”  Ruff said.

“It is true that Prof. McDonald drew different conclusions about the possible safe use of asbestos than most authorities do today. Holding scientific views that are different from those of the majority does not constitute research misconduct,”. Eidelman’s message states. “The World Health Organization’s 2011 monograph also acknowledges that the subject of the health risks of chrysotile remains a controversy.”

“Consensus is as clear on asbestos as it is on tobacco. Chrysotile asbestos is deadly … there is no safe exposure level,” Ruff said.

“It’s just like making a fuss about the difference in fatality from falling from the 20th floor in comparison from the 16th floor,” Fernand Turcotte, Professor Emeritus of Public Health and Preventive Medicine at the University of Laval, said of the research. “In a human health point of view, it’s the same thing. Any manipulation of this fact is pure sophistry; it’s really an attempt to obfuscate the issues.”

In 2002, the same complaint was made to McGill regarding the influence of the asbestos industry over McDonald’s research. Over a year later, a two paragraph letter was received in response, explained Ruff.

“That’s not an investigation,” she said. “So because of the fact that McGill has already refused to address this issue properly, this is why right now is the opportunity for McGill to do the right thing, to finally show integrity on the asbestos issue, to stop acting in a way that looks like it’s colluding with [the asbestos industry].”

“McGill University is a famous institution and its credibility is being used by peddlers of asbestos around the world,” Turcotte said. “McGill [must] make it clear … that it has nothing to do with the shenanigans of those asbestos peddlers.”

This was the motivation not only for requesting an independent investigation, but also for calling for the resignation of Roshi Chadha, a member of McGill’s Board of Governors and director of Seja Trade Ltd., a company that exported asbestos from the Jeffrey Mine in Asbestos, Quebec. 

An additional letter was sent on the behalf of asbestos victims to the Board of Governors calling for McGill to remove Chadha as well as to “support us, as victims of asbestos, and stand strongly against the Canadian asbestos industry.”

“[The aim was for McGill] to literally clean any kind of circumstances that could be interpreted as meaning that McGill supports the asbestos industry,” Turcotte explained.

Dr. Eidelman’s message ended by stating that “McGill currently receives no research funding from the asbestos industry.”

In an email to the Tribune, McGill’s associate director of media relations Julie Fortier said that McGill will not be commenting further on the issue.

With Quebec only a few weeks away from potentially reopening the Jeffrey Mine, timing is critical.

“Everywhere [public health professionals] meet the obstacle of the powerful asbestos lobby. And what is the weapon [that] the asbestos lobby has in its hands? It’s McDonald and his studies,” Ruff said. “So it’s a very critical moment, [a] critical historical moment and it’s time for McGill to be on the side of health finally.”