Statement of Dr. Joseph C. Ross, Associate Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee Statement of Kenneth L. Mossman, President, Health Physics Society The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:49 a.m. in room SD-106, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Glenn, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. Present: Senators Glenn, Levin, Sasser, Lieberman, Dorgan, Stevens, Cohen, Cochran, McCain, and Bennett. OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN GLENN Chairman GLENN. The hearing will be in order. Good morning. Today, the Governmental Affairs Committee holds the first in what will likely be a number of hearings into the Government's secret radiation experiments. The Committee will examine the guidelines and laws that are in place governing the use of human subjects in any type of experiment, not just those with radiation, although that is the subject of our hearing this morning. Now, to allay fears and restore shaken confidence, I think there are three areas that we must investigate. First, what actually happened during the human radiation experiments conducted in the past? Apparently, these experiments were often conducted without the knowledge or permission of the persons involved. Secretary O'Leary has already taken major steps to find and release records that will let us know what happened and what can and should be done about it now. It is one thing to know about it; it is another thing to know what to do about it at this late date. In addition, the President has formed an interagency working group and advisory committee to make the same determination across Government, and I commend them for their efforts. Second, what human radiation experiments are going on now? We have been concerned about the past, but what is going on now, and what are the protections for the people involved? Are current laws adequate? Are they being scrupulously followed? How do we know? What kind of monitoring systems are in place? Do we need new laws to fill any existing weaknesses or loopholes? Third, what kinds of other human experiments in areas that have nothing to do with radiation are being conducted, and do these experiments have the proper consent of the people involved? A large number of Federal agencies are or were involved in such (1) research; for example, FDA, NIH, CDC, VA, DOD, DOE, CIA and NASA, to name a few, as well as questions about chemical warfare and biological warfare experiments conducted under DOD's guid ance. The same questions we ask about human radiation experiments, past and present, can and should be asked about other research on our own people. As a result of this hearing and others to follow, if necessary, I hope to be able to assure people in my home State of Ohio and those around the country that their Government is no longer conducting experiments unknown to the individual and that may not abide by strict ethical, scientific and legal guidelines. Over the past 2 months, we have seen a virtual avalanche of revelations describing secret radiation experiments conducted by the U.S. Government on humans, some unknowing, unwitting. People had no idea that the experiments were being conducted on them. Some of these reports, to make a gross understatement, are very disturbing. It is quite upsetting to learn that your own country, your own Nation, could carry out such experiments on its citizens without their knowledge. All the revelations of the past few months, which included a GAO report that we released at a hearing of this Committee in mid-December, documented 12 previously unknown, deliberate releases of radiation. This has created a great deal of confusion and we hope to be able to clear up some of this confusion today. The crucial issue is how to get the information on these tests out to the public. The people who were used in these experiments should be found and informed of exactly what went on and, if necessary, provided with medical treatment. That is the important first step toward making amends. However, I would caution against an immediate rush to naming and identifying these people. We must also have an appropriate plan in place to assist them. It is also of concern when we hear reports that due to attention on this issue there are cases of citizens apparently now refusing to accept therapeutic and diagnostic radiation treatments for fear that they are being used as guinea pigs by the Government once again. We have reports of that. Tens of millions of proven, beneficial and safe applications of radiation are given in the U.S. every year, and these treatments have been developed by the medical profession and approved by the Government. If someone has a question about a particular procedure or treatment, that person should consult his or her own doctor. Again, I want to commend both the White House and the Department of Energy for their efforts so far in this area. The administration is starting the task of uncovering the truth, even at the expense of so-called Government secrets. In particular, Secretary O'Leary deserves the thanks and support of Congress and the American public for tackling such an explosive issue with compassion and forthrightness. Having made repeated requests over the past two administrations over this issue, requests routinely ignored, to me personally it is quite refreshing to see the administration being open and putting the truth first. Nevertheless, getting at the truth is going to be difficult. One problem is whether documentation still exists on many of these tests. The Department of Energy's own hotline, set up to receive calls from people who may have been involved in radiation testing, has logged thousands and thousands of cases. These thousands of cases must be checked with literally millions of Government records, and it is truly a monumental task. Just in my office alone, we have received a large volume of letters and phone calls from people who believe they may have been the subjects of radiation experiments. I have received letters from various atomic veterans with information about specific tests or questions regarding their individual cases. We, of course, will pass these letters along to the appropriate agencies and ask that they investigate the allegations. There are also privacy concerns for the records of those people involved in the tests. It would set a very poor precedent for the U.S. Government to release privileged medical information on any citizens without their prior consent. The issue of secret radiation testing also should initiate a review of our current testing guidelines. Obviously, many people in Government thought the standards that permitted many of these radiation tests were adequate. 20/20 hindsight gives us a different perspective. Will our current guidelines stand up to that same 20/20 hindsight in the future? For example, since 1991, all Federal agencies have adopted strict guidelines concerning informed consent and the use of institutional review boards, the IRBS, in any experiments involving human subjects. However, the Department of Health and Human Services has also promulgated guidelines concerning certain segments of our population who should have additional protections. These include pregnant mothers and their fetuses, children, prisoners. While the HHS has adopted these guidelines, most other agencies have not, and today we have to ask why not. In addition, as I understand it, a rule regarding the use of human subjects who are institutionalized and mentally impaired has not yet made it out of HHS. Now, again, we will have to ask why this is the case. I guess when we get to that consideration, too, as to why we need special protections in those areas for the institutionalized, we have to ask in past decades why were the Fernald, Massachusetts, experiments not also run at Exeter down the road. Or if experiments were run in Washington, DC, here, why were they not also run at Georgetown Day or Sidwell Friends or volunteers out of the families of White House staff, if these were so innocuous and unimportant as some have claimed in the papers? So we want to look into some of these things. I have covered a broad set of questions for the Committee to review, so let me just repeat the three areas I outlined at the beginning of this statement. With respect to the radiation experiments, one, what happened in the past, what is being done to address this? No. 2, what types of radiation experiments are going on now, and are they being conducted properly? And, three, what other types of human experimentation are being conducted by the Government now, and are these experiments being conducted appropriately in nonradiation areas? How do we know? I certainly want to welcome our witnesses this morning, and before we hear from Secretary O'Leary I recognize Senator Stevens for any remarks he may have. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR STEVENS Senator STEVENS. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do commend you for holding this timely hearing, and I want to join you in complimenting Secretary O'Leary for her sensitivity and for the direction she is giving this investigation in the administration. The issue has concerned us for a long time. I am sure people at the Department of Energy know that. Alaska and its citizens have been targets of radiation experiments over the years. The Air Force Arctic Aeromedical Laboratory came to Alaska in 1957 to conduct a series of medical experiments using Alaska Natives from the Arctic villages of Point Hope, Fort Yukon, Anaktuvuk Pass, Point Lay, and Wainwright. They used radioactive isotope, iodine 131. It was administered to about 100 Eskimos and Athabascan Indians. They also administered dosages to nonnative airmen who were serving then at Ladd Air Force Base near Fairbanks. The experiments were intended to study thyroid activity in people exposed to cold weather, we were told, and to try to understand why Native people in Alaska performed so well in cold weather. The idea was to find a way to better prepare and train military people for cold weather. Incidentally, that came to light really for most of us when a researcher found copies of the archival material deposited at the University of Alaska about 3 years ago. Initial investigation of the records show that the Air Force Arctic Aeromedical Lab did not obtain informed consent from the participants, and there are questions as to the number of doses of iodine 131. Apparently, there has not been a follow-study as to the effects of the experiment on the participants. We do have allocated to the Department through the Department of Defense bill last year some money to follow up on that incident and to report to the Congress on the experimentation. In another experiment in Alaska, the Atomic Energy Commission performed a study while considering the excavation of a harbor in northern Alaska using nuclear explosives. It was in 1958. A part of that study included burying 15,000 pounds of contaminated soil from Nevada in 4 feet of soil in a creek drainage. The experiment was called Project Chariot. It was part of the Plowshare Program of the Atomic Energy Commission to investigate and develop peaceful uses of nuclear explosives. The Eskimos of the village of Point Hope 26 miles from the test site are still concerned about whether the site was totally cleaned up. I think their concerns are understandable. The people of the area hunt and fish and lead a subsistence lifestyle, is what we call it, Mr. Chairman, and they really did not know that there were radioactive wastes in their area. The Department of Energy last summer did cleanup that site. We are waiting to see this spring if all the material was removed, but to show you some of the problems of this, those small native villages spent over $500,000 trying to monitor the clean-up to find out what might have been the impact on their communities and this is a cost that is not covered by any current Federal supplement to the program. Again, I commend you, Ms. O'Leary. I think that I have some questions about Amchitka, as I told you. That was an experiment that we all knew about, but we have never been told about the fol |