Dioxin

Abstract

Jonathan Watts' news item (April 17, p 1337)1 about reporting of dioxin on Japanese television says that the reports were in error but that they look “like one of the best things to happen to the environment and health in Japan in years”. He cites one error: dioxin concentrations in spinach and green tea leaves were overstated. He ignores mistakes in the “many media reports” that have “spelt out the dangers” of dioxins. The dangers are overblown. Residents of Seveso, Italy, and many former chemical workers are walking around, healthy and disease-free, with concentrations of dioxin far higher than those reported in Japan. No human cancer has been linked to dioxin, nor any decrease in sperm counts, birth defects, or chronic diseases.The International Agency for Research on Cancer decided that there was sufficient evidence to list dioxin as a human carcinogen but it acknowledged that the actual evidence from the studies of exposed individuals did not support that conclusion. IARC's decision is based on indirect evidence, and, in the opinion of many experts is incorrect. Significantly, the US Environmental Protection Agency, which has to pass its risk assessments before its Science Advisory Panel in public sessions, has yet to redraft its risk assessment for dioxin 4 years after SAB rejected it as overstating risks.The good news in the story from Japan, according to Watts, is that government at all levels is going to pile on commissions, inspections, regulations, and fines. What is to be gained from fines, more restrictions, more fear when there is no evidence all that dioxin, at far higher levels, has never harmed human beings? Jonathan Watts' news item (April 17, p 1337)1 about reporting of dioxin on Japanese television says that the reports were in error but that they look “like one of the best things to happen to the environment and health in Japan in years”. He cites one error: dioxin concentrations in spinach and green tea leaves were overstated. He ignores mistakes in the “many media reports” that have “spelt out the dangers” of dioxins. The dangers are overblown. Residents of Seveso, Italy, and many former chemical workers are walking around, healthy and disease-free, with concentrations of dioxin far higher than those reported in Japan. No human cancer has been linked to dioxin, nor any decrease in sperm counts, birth defects, or chronic diseases. The International Agency for Research on Cancer decided that there was sufficient evidence to list dioxin as a human carcinogen but it acknowledged that the actual evidence from the studies of exposed individuals did not support that conclusion. IARC's decision is based on indirect evidence, and, in the opinion of many experts is incorrect. Significantly, the US Environmental Protection Agency, which has to pass its risk assessments before its Science Advisory Panel in public sessions, has yet to redraft its risk assessment for dioxin 4 years after SAB rejected it as overstating risks. The good news in the story from Japan, according to Watts, is that government at all levels is going to pile on commissions, inspections, regulations, and fines. What is to be gained from fines, more restrictions, more fear when there is no evidence all that dioxin, at far higher levels, has never harmed human beings?