[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 137 (Saturday, September 28, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S11638]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               CRS REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, on November 14, 1995, the Congressional 
Research Services issued a report authored by C. Stephen Redhead and 
Richard E. Rowberg entitled Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer 
Risk. This report was prepared in response to multiple requests from 
congressional offices and presents an analysis of the potential health 
effects of environmental tobacco smoke [ETS].
  Consistent with statutory requirements for CRS work, this report was 
prepared in a nonpartisan, unbiased manner and is an excellent example 
of the professional and academic quality of CRS work. The report calls 
into question some of the findings of the Environmental Protection 
Agency with regard to ETS. Not surprisingly, some of the conclusions 
contained in the report have proven controversial.
  Subsequent to the release of the report, one of the authors of the 
report made statements to the press regarding the conclusions of the 
report. Reports of the author's statements have appeared in several 
newspapers. It appears that his statements have been either 
misconstrued or taken out of context in an apparent attempt to 
discredit the results of the report.
  In a letter to me, dated March 19, 1996, Daniel P. Mulhollan, 
Director, CRS, clarified that, based on conversations with the author, 
news reports were either misleading or inaccurate. Further, Mr. 
Mulhollan stated that CRS continues to stand by the findings of the 
report.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this letter from Dan 
Mulhollan, dated March 19, 1996, be inserted in the Record at this 
point.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                   Congressional Research Service,


                                      The Library of Congress,

                                   Washington, DC, March 19, 1996.
     Hon. Wendell H. Ford,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Ford: This is in response to the questions you 
     raised yesterday concerning an article that appeared last 
     month in the Kitchener-Waterloo record about the CRS report, 
     Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer Risk. Based on my 
     conversations with the analysts involved, the article was 
     misleading and inaccurate. I can assure you that we continue 
     to stand by the findings of the report.
       I am advised that the article contains three specific 
     statements about the content of the report which were 
     attributed to one of its authors. First, it states that the 
     report ``does not dispute the claim that second-hand smoke is 
     a known, class A (human) carcinogen.'' In fact the report 
     takes no position regarding the Environmental Protection 
     Agency's classification of ETS as a class A carcinogen. The 
     relevant sections in the report appear on page 1 (paragraph 
     3) and the last two paragraphs on page 16.
       The article also states that the ``number of [ETS] 
     deaths....likely ranges anywhere from several hundred to 
     several thousand a year in the United States.'' The report 
     cited several possible values ranging from zero to as high as 
     5,500 depending on the level of risk selected from those 
     appearing in the published literature (see page 2, paragraph 
     2).
       Finally, the article states that the CRS report attempted 
     to ``point out the uncertainties of determining what level of 
     exposure to ETS is likely to cause cancer.'' This statement 
     is misleading and incorrect. The report presents an analysis 
     of the uncertainties in performing a quantitative risk 
     assessment of the ETS-lung cancer risk using epidemiologic 
     data.
       Notwithstanding any comments that have appeared in this or 
     any other press articles or other published comments about 
     the CRS report, we have not changed our position on any of 
     its findings. We also believe that these findings are clearly 
     expressed in the report.
       I am also enclosing a copy of a March 18 letter from the 
     Acting Chief of the Science Policy Research Division that was 
     E-mailed to Ms. Martha Perske. The letter states that we have 
     not changed our position on any of the findings of the report 
     on ETS.
           Sincerely,
                                              Daniel P. Mulhollan,
                                                         Director.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Frahm). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________