Mike Thompson: “let's listen to the scientists on the Science Advisory Board to which the Senator referred. Dr. Dennis Passionback: I…”

“let's listen to the scientists on the Science Advisory Board to which the Senator referred. Dr. Dennis Passionback: I think John's point [meaning John Graham] is what you thought his point was, Mort, and that is in several studies and hypotheses over the years that there are some hormonic beneficial effects associated with dioxin and related chemicals for certain disease influences. Of course that is at very low dose of course. These are scientists. It is easy for the rhetoric to get out of hand here, and I want to try to do my part to not engage in escalating, but I find some of the statements attributed to this man amazing. I think our colleagues know better. I think the letters of endorsement and the public endorsements belie this. I think the reflection on Harvard University is unfair. It is not uncommon for centers doing work similar to Harvard's center to receive 40 to 60 percent of their funding from the private sector. I think what we have here is just a back and forth with regard to a man whose opponents are desperately trying to undermine this nomination. I think we have here a question concerning public service and whether or not we are going to get decent people to come into these thankless jobs to do them if we are going to see the confluence of scientific work on the one hand and the political process on the other produce such an ugly result. I think we need to ask ourselves that question.”