Carlsbad Cancer Study

[CAwireman]

Well great, the one area we think we might be able to afford, and there’s a significant reason for hesitation….

But, more importantly, good that the study is getting underway to find out if there is any correlation/cluster to speak of.

I hope that a true issue, if found, won’t get swept under the rug by the government…

[eavesdropper]

[quote=sdduuuude]Seems like a doing a simple study in other areas similar to the counts done in Carlsbad would be a good, inexpensive start. WHat is the count in PB, CV, CLMT, the other CV, etc ? This will at tell you if it is a red herring or not. Looking at pet statisics may be interesting, too.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a simple epidemiological study – or a cheap one. It’s not because epidemiologists/public health scientists are full of themselves. It’s just that you cannot come up anything resembling a valid and viable conclusion unless you examine a huge number of factors and incidents that have taken place over several years. To draw conclusions from less information would invalidate any findings, and to release the findings to the media and public would be irresponsible and dangerous.

The numbers, as they stand, are well within normal limits. However, as some of you have mentioned, there may have been exposure to unusual types and levels of environmental hazards. The numbers may sound alarmingly high to the community, however, at any given time, do you know how many cases of cancer are in your town, your county, your state?

Don’t worry, because your state government does. Cancer reporting by physicians/health providers has been required in California since 1985. While some on this forum may feel that this is an invasion of their privacy, it is exactly this sort of data that can alert the state and federal governments to the possibility of a cancer cluster in Carlsbad. Data collection and analysis also aids in the development of strategies and policies for cancer prevention, treatment and control, and earlier detection – all things that save lives.

For those of you living and/or working in San Diego County, the most recent figures available for a five-year span show that the overall cancer rate for both sexes is 0.427%. Less than one-half of a percent. While this is cold comfort for current cancer victims and their families, it’s not a number that will cause people to run into the streets. And keep in mind that these are all cancers – individual diseases that are as different from each other as diabetes is from asthma.

As for Carlsbad, the expected number of newly-diagnosed cancers per year is 500, with 20 of these as pediatric cases. The parents of Chase Quartarone, who died last December at age 16, own and operate the website that HiggyBaby cited in his thread origination post. When I first read it a few days back, I was surprised that the website was so devoid of information, but I figured that there must be some significant evidence that would indicate the possibility of a cluster. However, after reading comments from other Piggs, who also expressed their cancer fears, I decided to check into the situation a little more closely. Among other things, I found that

— although Mr. Quartarone has been quoting increasingly larger numbers of cancer cases, there are only two patients listed on his website. One of them is his son. Why haven’t more people aligned themselves with the Quartarones?
–It appears that the only people really pushing this are the Quartarones. There have been other people at the meetings, but not what I’d expect from a city as large as Carlsbad. This doesn’t appear to be a large grass-roots movement populated by frightened and enraged parents and patients. I find it noteworthy that, except for the parents of the other child on the website, no other parents or patients have commented for the website, or the electronic or print media in the six months this has been going on.
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have made mention of benzene as a carcinogen on their website. Indeed, benzene is a whole lotta nasty, and, in extremely high doses typically seen only in exposures in the worst of occupational settings, can be an oncogenetic factor (but if you were getting that much benzene in your system, you’d probably die of something else before the cancer would develop to a diagnosable stage). Regardless, the Quartarones do not provide any details on why the information on benzene is on their site. So far as I can tell, it has not been linked to their son’s case. But is sure is good at scaring people!!
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have been on camera, and on the website, stating that friends and acquaintances have been “coming up to us, and telling us about all the people they know who have cancer”, and, based on this, they feel certain that the numbers are way beyond normal levels. Indeed, a former school principal weighed in, stating “that she noticed a spike in cancer cases more than 20 years ago. From 1986 to 2001, Herrera said an estimated 30 people she knew were diagnosed with different types of cancer. More than a dozen of them were students”. In actuality, the number of pediatric cases alone in Carlsbad should have been 300 during the period of time cited by Ms. Herrera.

Don’t get me wrong: I feel very sympathetic toward the Quartarones over the loss of their son. But they are putting Carlsbad and its citizens in a precarious position. It is not at all unusual to want answers when a loved one gets very sick, or dies, especially when that person is your child. And for many people, they find it easier to accept if they can find someone or something specific to blame. Hearing that the smoke coming from the powerplant stacks killed your son, for some, is more acceptable than hearing, “We have no idea why your son got cancer, or why he didn’t respond to the drugs, or why he had to suffer.” But, in all likelihood, that’s what it was.

So now you have a city that has a “cancer cluster” reputation hanging over it, even though its statistics are well within normal levels of cancer diagnoses. What will that do to already-depressed property values, and for how long? In addition, the Quartarones are campaigning to prevent construction of an updated power plant, near the site of the existing one. If they feel that the pollution generated by the existing plant was directly responsible for their son’s cancer, why would they object to a cleaner plant being built? And if the old plant is closed down, as they have also demanded, where the hell is Carlsbad going to get its natural gas power? Finally, they are reminding people that much of Carlsbad was built on former farmland, laden with agrichemicals, and that would certainly explain a “cluster”. However, they neglect to explain why significantly more Carlsbad citizens are not developing cancer from exposure to the farm chemicals, and also the pollution from the power plant. Moreover, how many of the communities surrounding Carlsbad were also built on farmland treated with the same chemicals. Then there is the question of whether land treated with agrichemicals years earlier is a factor in deadly cancers. Otherwise, how can you explain the fact that the San Joaquin County has some of the lowest rates of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in California.

Again, I feel bad for these people. But I hope that I’m right about this, and that the publicity surrounding this dies down soon. Otherwise, Carlsbad could be stuck with a Love Canal reputation for the next ten years, and property values will tank even more, and will stay there. In the meantime, HiggyBaby, I wouldn’t give up yet. I’d make some property-hunting expeditions, visit the schools, go to City Hall and the county health department, and talk to several realtors about this “cancer cluster” business. Like I said, I was surprised to see that there wasn’t more out there about it, and it may just be what I suspect: some grieving parents looking for an answer they can accept.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=sdduuuude]Seems like a doing a simple study in other areas similar to the counts done in Carlsbad would be a good, inexpensive start. WHat is the count in PB, CV, CLMT, the other CV, etc ? This will at tell you if it is a red herring or not. Looking at pet statisics may be interesting, too.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a simple epidemiological study – or a cheap one. It’s not because epidemiologists/public health scientists are full of themselves. It’s just that you cannot come up anything resembling a valid and viable conclusion unless you examine a huge number of factors and incidents that have taken place over several years. To draw conclusions from less information would invalidate any findings, and to release the findings to the media and public would be irresponsible and dangerous.

The numbers, as they stand, are well within normal limits. However, as some of you have mentioned, there may have been exposure to unusual types and levels of environmental hazards. The numbers may sound alarmingly high to the community, however, at any given time, do you know how many cases of cancer are in your town, your county, your state?

Don’t worry, because your state government does. Cancer reporting by physicians/health providers has been required in California since 1985. While some on this forum may feel that this is an invasion of their privacy, it is exactly this sort of data that can alert the state and federal governments to the possibility of a cancer cluster in Carlsbad. Data collection and analysis also aids in the development of strategies and policies for cancer prevention, treatment and control, and earlier detection – all things that save lives.

For those of you living and/or working in San Diego County, the most recent figures available for a five-year span show that the overall cancer rate for both sexes is 0.427%. Less than one-half of a percent. While this is cold comfort for current cancer victims and their families, it’s not a number that will cause people to run into the streets. And keep in mind that these are all cancers – individual diseases that are as different from each other as diabetes is from asthma.

As for Carlsbad, the expected number of newly-diagnosed cancers per year is 500, with 20 of these as pediatric cases. The parents of Chase Quartarone, who died last December at age 16, own and operate the website that HiggyBaby cited in his thread origination post. When I first read it a few days back, I was surprised that the website was so devoid of information, but I figured that there must be some significant evidence that would indicate the possibility of a cluster. However, after reading comments from other Piggs, who also expressed their cancer fears, I decided to check into the situation a little more closely. Among other things, I found that

— although Mr. Quartarone has been quoting increasingly larger numbers of cancer cases, there are only two patients listed on his website. One of them is his son. Why haven’t more people aligned themselves with the Quartarones?
–It appears that the only people really pushing this are the Quartarones. There have been other people at the meetings, but not what I’d expect from a city as large as Carlsbad. This doesn’t appear to be a large grass-roots movement populated by frightened and enraged parents and patients. I find it noteworthy that, except for the parents of the other child on the website, no other parents or patients have commented for the website, or the electronic or print media in the six months this has been going on.
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have made mention of benzene as a carcinogen on their website. Indeed, benzene is a whole lotta nasty, and, in extremely high doses typically seen only in exposures in the worst of occupational settings, can be an oncogenetic factor (but if you were getting that much benzene in your system, you’d probably die of something else before the cancer would develop to a diagnosable stage). Regardless, the Quartarones do not provide any details on why the information on benzene is on their site. So far as I can tell, it has not been linked to their son’s case. But is sure is good at scaring people!!
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have been on camera, and on the website, stating that friends and acquaintances have been “coming up to us, and telling us about all the people they know who have cancer”, and, based on this, they feel certain that the numbers are way beyond normal levels. Indeed, a former school principal weighed in, stating “that she noticed a spike in cancer cases more than 20 years ago. From 1986 to 2001, Herrera said an estimated 30 people she knew were diagnosed with different types of cancer. More than a dozen of them were students”. In actuality, the number of pediatric cases alone in Carlsbad should have been 300 during the period of time cited by Ms. Herrera.

Don’t get me wrong: I feel very sympathetic toward the Quartarones over the loss of their son. But they are putting Carlsbad and its citizens in a precarious position. It is not at all unusual to want answers when a loved one gets very sick, or dies, especially when that person is your child. And for many people, they find it easier to accept if they can find someone or something specific to blame. Hearing that the smoke coming from the powerplant stacks killed your son, for some, is more acceptable than hearing, “We have no idea why your son got cancer, or why he didn’t respond to the drugs, or why he had to suffer.” But, in all likelihood, that’s what it was.

So now you have a city that has a “cancer cluster” reputation hanging over it, even though its statistics are well within normal levels of cancer diagnoses. What will that do to already-depressed property values, and for how long? In addition, the Quartarones are campaigning to prevent construction of an updated power plant, near the site of the existing one. If they feel that the pollution generated by the existing plant was directly responsible for their son’s cancer, why would they object to a cleaner plant being built? And if the old plant is closed down, as they have also demanded, where the hell is Carlsbad going to get its natural gas power? Finally, they are reminding people that much of Carlsbad was built on former farmland, laden with agrichemicals, and that would certainly explain a “cluster”. However, they neglect to explain why significantly more Carlsbad citizens are not developing cancer from exposure to the farm chemicals, and also the pollution from the power plant. Moreover, how many of the communities surrounding Carlsbad were also built on farmland treated with the same chemicals. Then there is the question of whether land treated with agrichemicals years earlier is a factor in deadly cancers. Otherwise, how can you explain the fact that the San Joaquin County has some of the lowest rates of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in California.

Again, I feel bad for these people. But I hope that I’m right about this, and that the publicity surrounding this dies down soon. Otherwise, Carlsbad could be stuck with a Love Canal reputation for the next ten years, and property values will tank even more, and will stay there. In the meantime, HiggyBaby, I wouldn’t give up yet. I’d make some property-hunting expeditions, visit the schools, go to City Hall and the county health department, and talk to several realtors about this “cancer cluster” business. Like I said, I was surprised to see that there wasn’t more out there about it, and it may just be what I suspect: some grieving parents looking for an answer they can accept.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=sdduuuude]Seems like a doing a simple study in other areas similar to the counts done in Carlsbad would be a good, inexpensive start. WHat is the count in PB, CV, CLMT, the other CV, etc ? This will at tell you if it is a red herring or not. Looking at pet statisics may be interesting, too.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a simple epidemiological study – or a cheap one. It’s not because epidemiologists/public health scientists are full of themselves. It’s just that you cannot come up anything resembling a valid and viable conclusion unless you examine a huge number of factors and incidents that have taken place over several years. To draw conclusions from less information would invalidate any findings, and to release the findings to the media and public would be irresponsible and dangerous.

The numbers, as they stand, are well within normal limits. However, as some of you have mentioned, there may have been exposure to unusual types and levels of environmental hazards. The numbers may sound alarmingly high to the community, however, at any given time, do you know how many cases of cancer are in your town, your county, your state?

Don’t worry, because your state government does. Cancer reporting by physicians/health providers has been required in California since 1985. While some on this forum may feel that this is an invasion of their privacy, it is exactly this sort of data that can alert the state and federal governments to the possibility of a cancer cluster in Carlsbad. Data collection and analysis also aids in the development of strategies and policies for cancer prevention, treatment and control, and earlier detection – all things that save lives.

For those of you living and/or working in San Diego County, the most recent figures available for a five-year span show that the overall cancer rate for both sexes is 0.427%. Less than one-half of a percent. While this is cold comfort for current cancer victims and their families, it’s not a number that will cause people to run into the streets. And keep in mind that these are all cancers – individual diseases that are as different from each other as diabetes is from asthma.

As for Carlsbad, the expected number of newly-diagnosed cancers per year is 500, with 20 of these as pediatric cases. The parents of Chase Quartarone, who died last December at age 16, own and operate the website that HiggyBaby cited in his thread origination post. When I first read it a few days back, I was surprised that the website was so devoid of information, but I figured that there must be some significant evidence that would indicate the possibility of a cluster. However, after reading comments from other Piggs, who also expressed their cancer fears, I decided to check into the situation a little more closely. Among other things, I found that

— although Mr. Quartarone has been quoting increasingly larger numbers of cancer cases, there are only two patients listed on his website. One of them is his son. Why haven’t more people aligned themselves with the Quartarones?
–It appears that the only people really pushing this are the Quartarones. There have been other people at the meetings, but not what I’d expect from a city as large as Carlsbad. This doesn’t appear to be a large grass-roots movement populated by frightened and enraged parents and patients. I find it noteworthy that, except for the parents of the other child on the website, no other parents or patients have commented for the website, or the electronic or print media in the six months this has been going on.
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have made mention of benzene as a carcinogen on their website. Indeed, benzene is a whole lotta nasty, and, in extremely high doses typically seen only in exposures in the worst of occupational settings, can be an oncogenetic factor (but if you were getting that much benzene in your system, you’d probably die of something else before the cancer would develop to a diagnosable stage). Regardless, the Quartarones do not provide any details on why the information on benzene is on their site. So far as I can tell, it has not been linked to their son’s case. But is sure is good at scaring people!!
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have been on camera, and on the website, stating that friends and acquaintances have been “coming up to us, and telling us about all the people they know who have cancer”, and, based on this, they feel certain that the numbers are way beyond normal levels. Indeed, a former school principal weighed in, stating “that she noticed a spike in cancer cases more than 20 years ago. From 1986 to 2001, Herrera said an estimated 30 people she knew were diagnosed with different types of cancer. More than a dozen of them were students”. In actuality, the number of pediatric cases alone in Carlsbad should have been 300 during the period of time cited by Ms. Herrera.

Don’t get me wrong: I feel very sympathetic toward the Quartarones over the loss of their son. But they are putting Carlsbad and its citizens in a precarious position. It is not at all unusual to want answers when a loved one gets very sick, or dies, especially when that person is your child. And for many people, they find it easier to accept if they can find someone or something specific to blame. Hearing that the smoke coming from the powerplant stacks killed your son, for some, is more acceptable than hearing, “We have no idea why your son got cancer, or why he didn’t respond to the drugs, or why he had to suffer.” But, in all likelihood, that’s what it was.

So now you have a city that has a “cancer cluster” reputation hanging over it, even though its statistics are well within normal levels of cancer diagnoses. What will that do to already-depressed property values, and for how long? In addition, the Quartarones are campaigning to prevent construction of an updated power plant, near the site of the existing one. If they feel that the pollution generated by the existing plant was directly responsible for their son’s cancer, why would they object to a cleaner plant being built? And if the old plant is closed down, as they have also demanded, where the hell is Carlsbad going to get its natural gas power? Finally, they are reminding people that much of Carlsbad was built on former farmland, laden with agrichemicals, and that would certainly explain a “cluster”. However, they neglect to explain why significantly more Carlsbad citizens are not developing cancer from exposure to the farm chemicals, and also the pollution from the power plant. Moreover, how many of the communities surrounding Carlsbad were also built on farmland treated with the same chemicals. Then there is the question of whether land treated with agrichemicals years earlier is a factor in deadly cancers. Otherwise, how can you explain the fact that the San Joaquin County has some of the lowest rates of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in California.

Again, I feel bad for these people. But I hope that I’m right about this, and that the publicity surrounding this dies down soon. Otherwise, Carlsbad could be stuck with a Love Canal reputation for the next ten years, and property values will tank even more, and will stay there. In the meantime, HiggyBaby, I wouldn’t give up yet. I’d make some property-hunting expeditions, visit the schools, go to City Hall and the county health department, and talk to several realtors about this “cancer cluster” business. Like I said, I was surprised to see that there wasn’t more out there about it, and it may just be what I suspect: some grieving parents looking for an answer they can accept.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=sdduuuude]Seems like a doing a simple study in other areas similar to the counts done in Carlsbad would be a good, inexpensive start. WHat is the count in PB, CV, CLMT, the other CV, etc ? This will at tell you if it is a red herring or not. Looking at pet statisics may be interesting, too.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a simple epidemiological study – or a cheap one. It’s not because epidemiologists/public health scientists are full of themselves. It’s just that you cannot come up anything resembling a valid and viable conclusion unless you examine a huge number of factors and incidents that have taken place over several years. To draw conclusions from less information would invalidate any findings, and to release the findings to the media and public would be irresponsible and dangerous.

The numbers, as they stand, are well within normal limits. However, as some of you have mentioned, there may have been exposure to unusual types and levels of environmental hazards. The numbers may sound alarmingly high to the community, however, at any given time, do you know how many cases of cancer are in your town, your county, your state?

Don’t worry, because your state government does. Cancer reporting by physicians/health providers has been required in California since 1985. While some on this forum may feel that this is an invasion of their privacy, it is exactly this sort of data that can alert the state and federal governments to the possibility of a cancer cluster in Carlsbad. Data collection and analysis also aids in the development of strategies and policies for cancer prevention, treatment and control, and earlier detection – all things that save lives.

For those of you living and/or working in San Diego County, the most recent figures available for a five-year span show that the overall cancer rate for both sexes is 0.427%. Less than one-half of a percent. While this is cold comfort for current cancer victims and their families, it’s not a number that will cause people to run into the streets. And keep in mind that these are all cancers – individual diseases that are as different from each other as diabetes is from asthma.

As for Carlsbad, the expected number of newly-diagnosed cancers per year is 500, with 20 of these as pediatric cases. The parents of Chase Quartarone, who died last December at age 16, own and operate the website that HiggyBaby cited in his thread origination post. When I first read it a few days back, I was surprised that the website was so devoid of information, but I figured that there must be some significant evidence that would indicate the possibility of a cluster. However, after reading comments from other Piggs, who also expressed their cancer fears, I decided to check into the situation a little more closely. Among other things, I found that

— although Mr. Quartarone has been quoting increasingly larger numbers of cancer cases, there are only two patients listed on his website. One of them is his son. Why haven’t more people aligned themselves with the Quartarones?
–It appears that the only people really pushing this are the Quartarones. There have been other people at the meetings, but not what I’d expect from a city as large as Carlsbad. This doesn’t appear to be a large grass-roots movement populated by frightened and enraged parents and patients. I find it noteworthy that, except for the parents of the other child on the website, no other parents or patients have commented for the website, or the electronic or print media in the six months this has been going on.
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have made mention of benzene as a carcinogen on their website. Indeed, benzene is a whole lotta nasty, and, in extremely high doses typically seen only in exposures in the worst of occupational settings, can be an oncogenetic factor (but if you were getting that much benzene in your system, you’d probably die of something else before the cancer would develop to a diagnosable stage). Regardless, the Quartarones do not provide any details on why the information on benzene is on their site. So far as I can tell, it has not been linked to their son’s case. But is sure is good at scaring people!!
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have been on camera, and on the website, stating that friends and acquaintances have been “coming up to us, and telling us about all the people they know who have cancer”, and, based on this, they feel certain that the numbers are way beyond normal levels. Indeed, a former school principal weighed in, stating “that she noticed a spike in cancer cases more than 20 years ago. From 1986 to 2001, Herrera said an estimated 30 people she knew were diagnosed with different types of cancer. More than a dozen of them were students”. In actuality, the number of pediatric cases alone in Carlsbad should have been 300 during the period of time cited by Ms. Herrera.

Don’t get me wrong: I feel very sympathetic toward the Quartarones over the loss of their son. But they are putting Carlsbad and its citizens in a precarious position. It is not at all unusual to want answers when a loved one gets very sick, or dies, especially when that person is your child. And for many people, they find it easier to accept if they can find someone or something specific to blame. Hearing that the smoke coming from the powerplant stacks killed your son, for some, is more acceptable than hearing, “We have no idea why your son got cancer, or why he didn’t respond to the drugs, or why he had to suffer.” But, in all likelihood, that’s what it was.

So now you have a city that has a “cancer cluster” reputation hanging over it, even though its statistics are well within normal levels of cancer diagnoses. What will that do to already-depressed property values, and for how long? In addition, the Quartarones are campaigning to prevent construction of an updated power plant, near the site of the existing one. If they feel that the pollution generated by the existing plant was directly responsible for their son’s cancer, why would they object to a cleaner plant being built? And if the old plant is closed down, as they have also demanded, where the hell is Carlsbad going to get its natural gas power? Finally, they are reminding people that much of Carlsbad was built on former farmland, laden with agrichemicals, and that would certainly explain a “cluster”. However, they neglect to explain why significantly more Carlsbad citizens are not developing cancer from exposure to the farm chemicals, and also the pollution from the power plant. Moreover, how many of the communities surrounding Carlsbad were also built on farmland treated with the same chemicals. Then there is the question of whether land treated with agrichemicals years earlier is a factor in deadly cancers. Otherwise, how can you explain the fact that the San Joaquin County has some of the lowest rates of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in California.

Again, I feel bad for these people. But I hope that I’m right about this, and that the publicity surrounding this dies down soon. Otherwise, Carlsbad could be stuck with a Love Canal reputation for the next ten years, and property values will tank even more, and will stay there. In the meantime, HiggyBaby, I wouldn’t give up yet. I’d make some property-hunting expeditions, visit the schools, go to City Hall and the county health department, and talk to several realtors about this “cancer cluster” business. Like I said, I was surprised to see that there wasn’t more out there about it, and it may just be what I suspect: some grieving parents looking for an answer they can accept.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=sdduuuude]Seems like a doing a simple study in other areas similar to the counts done in Carlsbad would be a good, inexpensive start. WHat is the count in PB, CV, CLMT, the other CV, etc ? This will at tell you if it is a red herring or not. Looking at pet statisics may be interesting, too.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a simple epidemiological study – or a cheap one. It’s not because epidemiologists/public health scientists are full of themselves. It’s just that you cannot come up anything resembling a valid and viable conclusion unless you examine a huge number of factors and incidents that have taken place over several years. To draw conclusions from less information would invalidate any findings, and to release the findings to the media and public would be irresponsible and dangerous.

The numbers, as they stand, are well within normal limits. However, as some of you have mentioned, there may have been exposure to unusual types and levels of environmental hazards. The numbers may sound alarmingly high to the community, however, at any given time, do you know how many cases of cancer are in your town, your county, your state?

Don’t worry, because your state government does. Cancer reporting by physicians/health providers has been required in California since 1985. While some on this forum may feel that this is an invasion of their privacy, it is exactly this sort of data that can alert the state and federal governments to the possibility of a cancer cluster in Carlsbad. Data collection and analysis also aids in the development of strategies and policies for cancer prevention, treatment and control, and earlier detection – all things that save lives.

For those of you living and/or working in San Diego County, the most recent figures available for a five-year span show that the overall cancer rate for both sexes is 0.427%. Less than one-half of a percent. While this is cold comfort for current cancer victims and their families, it’s not a number that will cause people to run into the streets. And keep in mind that these are all cancers – individual diseases that are as different from each other as diabetes is from asthma.

As for Carlsbad, the expected number of newly-diagnosed cancers per year is 500, with 20 of these as pediatric cases. The parents of Chase Quartarone, who died last December at age 16, own and operate the website that HiggyBaby cited in his thread origination post. When I first read it a few days back, I was surprised that the website was so devoid of information, but I figured that there must be some significant evidence that would indicate the possibility of a cluster. However, after reading comments from other Piggs, who also expressed their cancer fears, I decided to check into the situation a little more closely. Among other things, I found that

— although Mr. Quartarone has been quoting increasingly larger numbers of cancer cases, there are only two patients listed on his website. One of them is his son. Why haven’t more people aligned themselves with the Quartarones?
–It appears that the only people really pushing this are the Quartarones. There have been other people at the meetings, but not what I’d expect from a city as large as Carlsbad. This doesn’t appear to be a large grass-roots movement populated by frightened and enraged parents and patients. I find it noteworthy that, except for the parents of the other child on the website, no other parents or patients have commented for the website, or the electronic or print media in the six months this has been going on.
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have made mention of benzene as a carcinogen on their website. Indeed, benzene is a whole lotta nasty, and, in extremely high doses typically seen only in exposures in the worst of occupational settings, can be an oncogenetic factor (but if you were getting that much benzene in your system, you’d probably die of something else before the cancer would develop to a diagnosable stage). Regardless, the Quartarones do not provide any details on why the information on benzene is on their site. So far as I can tell, it has not been linked to their son’s case. But is sure is good at scaring people!!
— Mr. and Mrs. Quartarone have been on camera, and on the website, stating that friends and acquaintances have been “coming up to us, and telling us about all the people they know who have cancer”, and, based on this, they feel certain that the numbers are way beyond normal levels. Indeed, a former school principal weighed in, stating “that she noticed a spike in cancer cases more than 20 years ago. From 1986 to 2001, Herrera said an estimated 30 people she knew were diagnosed with different types of cancer. More than a dozen of them were students”. In actuality, the number of pediatric cases alone in Carlsbad should have been 300 during the period of time cited by Ms. Herrera.

Don’t get me wrong: I feel very sympathetic toward the Quartarones over the loss of their son. But they are putting Carlsbad and its citizens in a precarious position. It is not at all unusual to want answers when a loved one gets very sick, or dies, especially when that person is your child. And for many people, they find it easier to accept if they can find someone or something specific to blame. Hearing that the smoke coming from the powerplant stacks killed your son, for some, is more acceptable than hearing, “We have no idea why your son got cancer, or why he didn’t respond to the drugs, or why he had to suffer.” But, in all likelihood, that’s what it was.

So now you have a city that has a “cancer cluster” reputation hanging over it, even though its statistics are well within normal levels of cancer diagnoses. What will that do to already-depressed property values, and for how long? In addition, the Quartarones are campaigning to prevent construction of an updated power plant, near the site of the existing one. If they feel that the pollution generated by the existing plant was directly responsible for their son’s cancer, why would they object to a cleaner plant being built? And if the old plant is closed down, as they have also demanded, where the hell is Carlsbad going to get its natural gas power? Finally, they are reminding people that much of Carlsbad was built on former farmland, laden with agrichemicals, and that would certainly explain a “cluster”. However, they neglect to explain why significantly more Carlsbad citizens are not developing cancer from exposure to the farm chemicals, and also the pollution from the power plant. Moreover, how many of the communities surrounding Carlsbad were also built on farmland treated with the same chemicals. Then there is the question of whether land treated with agrichemicals years earlier is a factor in deadly cancers. Otherwise, how can you explain the fact that the San Joaquin County has some of the lowest rates of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in California.

Again, I feel bad for these people. But I hope that I’m right about this, and that the publicity surrounding this dies down soon. Otherwise, Carlsbad could be stuck with a Love Canal reputation for the next ten years, and property values will tank even more, and will stay there. In the meantime, HiggyBaby, I wouldn’t give up yet. I’d make some property-hunting expeditions, visit the schools, go to City Hall and the county health department, and talk to several realtors about this “cancer cluster” business. Like I said, I was surprised to see that there wasn’t more out there about it, and it may just be what I suspect: some grieving parents looking for an answer they can accept.

[ocrenter]

went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.

[ocrenter]

went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.

[ocrenter]

went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.

[ocrenter]

went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.

[ocrenter]

went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=ocrenter]went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.[/quote]

My point exactly. Very little constructive information, but plenty of panic. Seeing all those pins is disturbing. But it’s essential to put it into context. First, take into consideration the total population in those map areas, and their demographics. Then look at disease and age, as you pointed out, and what year were they diagnosed and how long have they lived in the area (Cancer often takes years, and even decades to develop into a diagnosable condition. Perhaps a 16 year-old with non-Hodgkins lymphoma lived in Peoria, IL until age 12). Suddenly, the pins are starting to spread out a lot more, and it’s not quite as scary. And there are sooooo many more things that have to be examined when determining the epidemiology of an area’s cancer activity.

I’m not saying that the county shouldn’t engage in some testing of the air, soil, and water. I’m assuming that it’s done on a regular basis in Carlsbad, and why not take additional samples at the schools and athletic fields. But to insist on a full-blown epidemiological survey when (1) the numbers of cases are within normal limits, and (2) when prior assessments of risk in Carlsbad have been performed (2007 & 2008), with no evidence of unusual or markedly higher cancer activity, is unreasonable. These studies are unbelievably labor-intensive, and take many years to conduct and analyze the results. The associated monetary expense will be extremely high, a fact that has been completely overlooked in the press coverage. Then there’s the matter of other costs: the depressed property values that will almost certainly result, and the loss of Carlsbad’s employers and corporate tax base. After all, how is the local Chamber of Commerce supposed to handle the issue of a cancer cluster in their promotional materials.

As I said, I feel for the Quartarones, and hope that I am never in their position. But, in addition to concerns about them that I detailed in my earlier post, there is their response at the town meeting that was held recently. Dr. Thomas Mack, a highly respected epidemiologist from USC, has not only taken the time to analyze the Carlsbad data and information, but also to attend, and speak at, the meeting. The Quartarones, despite claiming that they want to “find out once and for all, if there is a problem in Carlsbad”, completely dismissed Dr. Mack and his data. From a local NBC affiliate report, 4/29 : “Others were also upset, especially with Dr. Thomas Mack, who the state has designated to investigate the possible cancer cluster. Mack told the audience that there was nothing unusual about Carlsbad. “He was just telling us research from 2000 to 2007, it was making me boil,”said Stacey Quartarone. She and her husband John lost their 16 year old son Chase last December to lymphoma. They have been pushing for an in depth investigation into what they believe is an unusually high number of cancer cases among adults and children in Carlsbad.”

The Quartarones claim that they want information, but reject data when it’s presented to them. It appears that what they are actually seeking is a (quick) confirmation of their own diagnosis of the problem.

Again, I am not saying that there is not a problem in Carlsbad. I’m saying that, based on the data, the numbers of cases of a wide variety of cancers in Carlsbad are within normal limits. I also endorse taking some additional air, water, and soil samples, both randomly and from suspect areas.

However, if the results of the sampling are also within normal limits, what then? The short- and long-term repercussions of their decisions should be carefully considered by the residents and the leaders of Carlsbad, with the aid of expert opinion.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=ocrenter]went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.[/quote]

My point exactly. Very little constructive information, but plenty of panic. Seeing all those pins is disturbing. But it’s essential to put it into context. First, take into consideration the total population in those map areas, and their demographics. Then look at disease and age, as you pointed out, and what year were they diagnosed and how long have they lived in the area (Cancer often takes years, and even decades to develop into a diagnosable condition. Perhaps a 16 year-old with non-Hodgkins lymphoma lived in Peoria, IL until age 12). Suddenly, the pins are starting to spread out a lot more, and it’s not quite as scary. And there are sooooo many more things that have to be examined when determining the epidemiology of an area’s cancer activity.

I’m not saying that the county shouldn’t engage in some testing of the air, soil, and water. I’m assuming that it’s done on a regular basis in Carlsbad, and why not take additional samples at the schools and athletic fields. But to insist on a full-blown epidemiological survey when (1) the numbers of cases are within normal limits, and (2) when prior assessments of risk in Carlsbad have been performed (2007 & 2008), with no evidence of unusual or markedly higher cancer activity, is unreasonable. These studies are unbelievably labor-intensive, and take many years to conduct and analyze the results. The associated monetary expense will be extremely high, a fact that has been completely overlooked in the press coverage. Then there’s the matter of other costs: the depressed property values that will almost certainly result, and the loss of Carlsbad’s employers and corporate tax base. After all, how is the local Chamber of Commerce supposed to handle the issue of a cancer cluster in their promotional materials.

As I said, I feel for the Quartarones, and hope that I am never in their position. But, in addition to concerns about them that I detailed in my earlier post, there is their response at the town meeting that was held recently. Dr. Thomas Mack, a highly respected epidemiologist from USC, has not only taken the time to analyze the Carlsbad data and information, but also to attend, and speak at, the meeting. The Quartarones, despite claiming that they want to “find out once and for all, if there is a problem in Carlsbad”, completely dismissed Dr. Mack and his data. From a local NBC affiliate report, 4/29 : “Others were also upset, especially with Dr. Thomas Mack, who the state has designated to investigate the possible cancer cluster. Mack told the audience that there was nothing unusual about Carlsbad. “He was just telling us research from 2000 to 2007, it was making me boil,”said Stacey Quartarone. She and her husband John lost their 16 year old son Chase last December to lymphoma. They have been pushing for an in depth investigation into what they believe is an unusually high number of cancer cases among adults and children in Carlsbad.”

The Quartarones claim that they want information, but reject data when it’s presented to them. It appears that what they are actually seeking is a (quick) confirmation of their own diagnosis of the problem.

Again, I am not saying that there is not a problem in Carlsbad. I’m saying that, based on the data, the numbers of cases of a wide variety of cancers in Carlsbad are within normal limits. I also endorse taking some additional air, water, and soil samples, both randomly and from suspect areas.

However, if the results of the sampling are also within normal limits, what then? The short- and long-term repercussions of their decisions should be carefully considered by the residents and the leaders of Carlsbad, with the aid of expert opinion.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=ocrenter]went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.[/quote]

My point exactly. Very little constructive information, but plenty of panic. Seeing all those pins is disturbing. But it’s essential to put it into context. First, take into consideration the total population in those map areas, and their demographics. Then look at disease and age, as you pointed out, and what year were they diagnosed and how long have they lived in the area (Cancer often takes years, and even decades to develop into a diagnosable condition. Perhaps a 16 year-old with non-Hodgkins lymphoma lived in Peoria, IL until age 12). Suddenly, the pins are starting to spread out a lot more, and it’s not quite as scary. And there are sooooo many more things that have to be examined when determining the epidemiology of an area’s cancer activity.

I’m not saying that the county shouldn’t engage in some testing of the air, soil, and water. I’m assuming that it’s done on a regular basis in Carlsbad, and why not take additional samples at the schools and athletic fields. But to insist on a full-blown epidemiological survey when (1) the numbers of cases are within normal limits, and (2) when prior assessments of risk in Carlsbad have been performed (2007 & 2008), with no evidence of unusual or markedly higher cancer activity, is unreasonable. These studies are unbelievably labor-intensive, and take many years to conduct and analyze the results. The associated monetary expense will be extremely high, a fact that has been completely overlooked in the press coverage. Then there’s the matter of other costs: the depressed property values that will almost certainly result, and the loss of Carlsbad’s employers and corporate tax base. After all, how is the local Chamber of Commerce supposed to handle the issue of a cancer cluster in their promotional materials.

As I said, I feel for the Quartarones, and hope that I am never in their position. But, in addition to concerns about them that I detailed in my earlier post, there is their response at the town meeting that was held recently. Dr. Thomas Mack, a highly respected epidemiologist from USC, has not only taken the time to analyze the Carlsbad data and information, but also to attend, and speak at, the meeting. The Quartarones, despite claiming that they want to “find out once and for all, if there is a problem in Carlsbad”, completely dismissed Dr. Mack and his data. From a local NBC affiliate report, 4/29 : “Others were also upset, especially with Dr. Thomas Mack, who the state has designated to investigate the possible cancer cluster. Mack told the audience that there was nothing unusual about Carlsbad. “He was just telling us research from 2000 to 2007, it was making me boil,”said Stacey Quartarone. She and her husband John lost their 16 year old son Chase last December to lymphoma. They have been pushing for an in depth investigation into what they believe is an unusually high number of cancer cases among adults and children in Carlsbad.”

The Quartarones claim that they want information, but reject data when it’s presented to them. It appears that what they are actually seeking is a (quick) confirmation of their own diagnosis of the problem.

Again, I am not saying that there is not a problem in Carlsbad. I’m saying that, based on the data, the numbers of cases of a wide variety of cancers in Carlsbad are within normal limits. I also endorse taking some additional air, water, and soil samples, both randomly and from suspect areas.

However, if the results of the sampling are also within normal limits, what then? The short- and long-term repercussions of their decisions should be carefully considered by the residents and the leaders of Carlsbad, with the aid of expert opinion.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=ocrenter]went to the website, very little constructive information.

the maps were really the same map but taken at different angles.

if you look at the map, it does look concerning. a bunch of blue pins all clustered Emerald Pointe Estates, and by the coast and bunch of yellow pins and also a bunch of red pins.

but there is NO captions to explain what the pins mean. each pin represent a death? a diagnosis? a leukemia diagnosis in a youth? or a lung cancer in a 50 year smoker?

I’m not making any judgement on this because there is NOTHING to judge.[/quote]

My point exactly. Very little constructive information, but plenty of panic. Seeing all those pins is disturbing. But it’s essential to put it into context. First, take into consideration the total population in those map areas, and their demographics. Then look at disease and age, as you pointed out, and what year were they diagnosed and how long have they lived in the area (Cancer often takes years, and even decades to develop into a diagnosable condition. Perhaps a 16 year-old with non-Hodgkins lymphoma lived in Peoria, IL until age 12). Suddenly, the pins are starting to spread out a lot more, and it’s not quite as scary. And there are sooooo many more things that have to be examined when determining the epidemiology of an area’s cancer activity.

I’m not saying that the county shouldn’t engage in some testing of the air, soil, and water. I’m assuming that it’s done on a regular basis in Carlsbad, and why not take additional samples at the schools and athletic fields. But to insist on a full-blown epidemiological survey when (1) the numbers of cases are within normal limits, and (2) when prior assessments of risk in Carlsbad have been performed (2007 & 2008), with no evidence of unusual or markedly higher cancer activity, is unreasonable. These studies are unbelievably labor-intensive, and take many years to conduct and analyze the results. The associated monetary expense will be extremely high, a fact that has been completely overlooked in the press coverage. Then there’s the matter of other costs: the depressed property values that will almost certainly result, and the loss of Carlsbad’s employers and corporate tax base. After all, how is the local Chamber of Commerce supposed to handle the issue of a cancer cluster in their promotional materials.

As I said, I feel for the Quartarones, and hope that I am never in their position. But, in addition to concerns about them that I detailed in my earlier post, there is their response at the town meeting that was held recently. Dr. Thomas Mack, a highly respected epidemiologist from USC, has not only taken the time to analyze the Carlsbad data and information, but also to attend, and speak at, the meeting. The Quartarones, despite claiming that they want to “find out once and for all, if there is a problem in Carlsbad”, completely dismissed Dr. Mack and his data. From a local NBC affiliate report, 4/29 : “Others were also upset, especially with Dr. Thomas Mack, who the state has designated to investigate the possible cancer cluster. Mack told the audience that there was nothing unusual about Carlsbad. “He was just telling us research from 2000 to 2007, it was making me boil,”said Stacey Quartarone. She and her husband John lost their 16 year old son Chase last December to lymphoma. They have been pushing for an in depth investigation into what they believe is an unusually high number of cancer cases among adults and children in Carlsbad.”

The Quartarones claim that they want information, but reject data when it’s presented to them. It appears that what they are actually seeking is a (quick) confirmation of their own diagnosis of the problem.

Again, I am not saying that there is not a problem in Carlsbad. I’m saying that, based on the data, the numbers of cases of a wide variety of cancers in Carlsbad are within normal limits. I also endorse taking some additional air, water, and soil samples, both randomly and from suspect areas.

However, if the results of the sampling are also within normal limits, what then? The short- and long-term repercussions of their decisions should be carefully considered by the residents and the leaders of Carlsbad, with the aid of expert opinion.

[Author]

Posts