Driller, public health consultant debate correlation-versus-causation at fracking hearing | TribLIVE.com

Driller, public health consultant debate correlation-versus-causation at fracking hearing

Patrick Varine
Laura Dagley, a medical advocacy coordinator with Physicians for Social Responsibility’s Pennsylvania branch, is sworn in as Protect P-T attorney Anton Berkovich of Fair Shake Environmental Legal Services prepares for a public hearing on the Titan well pad at Murrysville council’s meeting.

Laura Dagley, a medical advocacy coordinator with Physicians for Social Responsibility’s Pennsylvania branch, could not say hydraulic fracturing operations directly cause negative health effects on nearby residents.

But she said it is difficult to ignore the strong correlation that many studies have shown between a fracking operation’s arrival and an increase in negative health effects among people living near a well.

“We know that things like volatile organic compounds and benzene are being emitted by fracking sites, and they cause the same types of symptoms we’re seeing increase near those well sites,” Dagley said.

She testified as an expert witness on public health assessment Wednesday night when the Protect P-T citizen group presented its case at Murrysville council’s public hearing on the Titan well pad, proposed by Monroeville driller Huntley & Huntley Energy Exploration for a property off Bollinger Road.

Dagley talked about something called “the precautionary principle” as it relates to health issues.

“When something is posing a health risk, we should pause that action while we wait for the research on the effects to catch up,” Dagley said.

Physicians for Social Responsibility maintains an online compendium of studies, news stories and materials related to fracking with more than 1,700 entries. More than 80% of those studies “found signs of harm or indication of potential harm” from fracking operations, according to the compendium summary, Dagley said.

Huntley attorney Kate Gafner asserted Dagley was not qualified to be an expert witness, but her argument was rejected by attorney Bill Sittig, who is consulting with the municipality on fracking-related matters. Sittig has been conducting the ongoing public hearing.

Gafner asked several questions prompting Dagley to repeat that she could not show direct causation between fracking and negative health effects.

“Causation is really hard to prove,” Dagley said. “I can’t tell you that someone developed asthma when a well pad came in. But correlation is the first red flag of public health. With any epidemic throughout history, when you’re starting to see a correlation, that’s leading to a problem.

“Once you see causation, that usually means the problem has been around for too long,” she said.

The hearing will be continued at council’s Sept. 4 meeting, set for 7 p.m. at the Murrysville municipal building at 4100 Sardis Road.

Patrick Varine is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Patrick at 724-850-2862, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.