Letter to the editor in response to a Charleston (W.V.) Gazette story on a Johns Hopkins University health study on PFOA, also known as C8.
As a scientist who heard Dr. Lynn Goldman's presentation at the Society of Toxicology conference last week, I was astounded to read the story by Ken Ward Jr. characterizing the findings of the study as showing harmful effects (“New C8 study finds baby development problem,” February 22, 2007). Dr. Goldman was very careful to point out that all the babies in the study were healthy and the variations observed in birth weight and head circumference were small and within the normal range. In fact, the presentation did not claim harm of any kind. By failing to include these important facts, the article is misleading and may have needlessly alarmed your readers. A correction to the article is needed.
John Heinze, Ph.D.
Environmental Health Research Foundation
Study shows no link between C8 and babies’ weight
The Marietta (Ohio) Times/Associated Press
February 24, 2007
DuPont’s science director said a study conducted by the University of Minnesota found no relationship between mothers’ exposure to C8 and the birth weight of their babies.
Preliminary research conducted at Johns Hopkins University showed newborns exposed to ammonium perfluorooctaonate, also known as PFOA or C8, or perfluorooctane sulphonate anion, or PFOS, and other items weighed slightly less and had slightly smaller skulls. DuPont has long maintained that C8, used in the manufacture of Teflon and found in various concentrations in some local drinking water, is not harmful to human health.
“Many chemicals were detected in the (Johns Hopkins) study’s sample,” said Dr. Robert Rickard, DuPont’s science director, “and it is important to note that the observations from the study were very small and well within normal ranges.”
Rickard cited the Minnesota study, which focused on mothers exposed to PFOA and PFOS at their jobs.