The American Lung Association Supports Fracking?
“Sobering Statistics Tell Story about Reality of Women’s Lung Cancer” headlined a recent post by Harold Wimmer, president/CEO of the American Lung Association (ALA), for the Huffington Post. Wimmer was touting ALA’s new initiative “to make lung cancer in women a public health priority.” Businesses and organizations nationwide are sponsoring events to support it.
These well-meaning groups, and the public, deserve to know the shameful truth about the ALA.
It purports to work to reduce lung diseases, yet partners with the worst contributor to respiratory and other illnesses—the fossil fuel industry.
ALA officers and board know full well that “natural”* gas is now obtained primarily by dangerous fracking, and that the cradle-to-grave production of fracked gas contributes as much pollution as—and possibly even more than—oil and coal exploitation. Yet the organization "supports the increased use of natural gas” as a “transitional fuel.”
To fracture shale and extract the gas (methane) within, frackers mix millions of gallons of fresh water with numerous chemicals—including cancer-causing and nerve damaging agents. They blast this toxic stew into the rock along with silica, which props open cracks so the gas can escape. Silica causes the lung disease silicosis. And drill cuttings contain high levels of naturally occurring radioactive materials including radon-222; only tobacco causes more lung cancer than radon.
Too Cozy, and Too Coy
The negative health effects of fracking are firmly established in the medical literature. Yet the industry, its partner politicians and corrupt organizations insist it’s “safe.”
The ALA once wrote to Congress urging stronger regulations on fracking, acknowledging it causes atrocious air pollution. But after receiving hefty donations from fracking company Chesapeake Energy to fund its “Fighting for Air” ad campaign, ALA switched to promoting gas.
“[E]veryone has a role to play [in] raising awareness of lung cancer,” Wimmer wrote in his announcement.
We agree. So we called Wimmer and other national ALA officers to challenge their hypocrisy in supporting fracking while knowing it causes catastrophic health problems. How could they countervail ALA’s mission “to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease”? We pointed out their pro-gas policy will actually increase the likelihood of women (and men and children) developing lung cancer, and that by prostituting itself to Big Oil/Big Gas, the ALA is making a mockery of its very reason for existing.
But, just as tobacco executives did for decades to physicians and others about smoking, Wimmer and his board arrogantly dismissed our evidence.
The corporate ties that bind are quite tight.
The hypocrisy of current ALA leadership taints the dedication of chapter ALA staff members and volunteers—who could otherwise be justly proud that their decades of hard work resulted in curtailment of advertising and accessibility of killer tobacco, cleanup of polluting industries and condemnation of oil and coal exploitation.
A respected health organization should not play politics or footsies with fossil-fuel corporations. The only remedy for ALA is come clean—by denouncing fracking as the lung-destroying corporate activity it is.
Ronald Saff, MD, is a Tallahassee, FL-based asthma and allergy physician, former award-winning ALA volunteer, and former ALA board member. Maura Stephens is an independent journalist and co-founder of the Coalition to Protect New York and other organizations.
* The only natural state for this methane gas embedded in shale rock is deep below us, where it has been for millennia.
A version of this article originally appeared in Truthout under a Creative Commons Copyright. It is republished here with permission of the authors.
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›