NOLA.com, Everything New Orleans
The Times-Picayune
April 8, 2008

Christopher De Rosa, a government toxicologist, said that he repeatedly raised concerns about the health risks posed by formaldehyde exposure in FEMA trailers -- to no avail.

Instead of listening to him, his superiors at the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ordered him to stop sending e-mails about his concerns, he told a House subcommittee last week.

Even after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention -- of which his agency is a part -- communicated his concerns to FEMA, nothing happened, Rep. Brad Miller, the subcommittee's chairman said. The CDC sent a letter to a FEMA lawyer who filed it away without sharing it with other officials.

In the meantime, FEMA officials, including Director David Paulison, continued to cite an earlier report that claimed formaldehyde concerns could be addressed by opening trailer windows and vents.

What really needs a thorough airing out, though, is how FEMA and the CDC treated this potential public health threat. Members of Congress are rightly pressing for answers and defending Mr. De Rosa, whom members describe as a whistle-blower.

Howard Frumkin, director of the agency that employs Mr. De Rosa, told Congress that the initial work on formaldehyde "did not meet our own expectations." He said that the agency should have been suspicious when the request for a report on formaldehyde levels came from FEMA's lawyers.

But that doesn't explain why the CDC remained silent when FEMA officials continued to tout a report that downplayed the health risks posed by formaldehyde in trailers. Nor does it explain why Mr. De Rosa was demoted from a position that he had held for 16 years.

Mr. Frumkin told the subcommittee that his agency now plans to do a five-year study on the long-term effects of formaldehyde exposure on Gulf Coast children. That ought to be done, since formaldehyde has reproductive, developmental and carcinogenic effects.

But if Mr. De Rosa's concerns had been heeded sooner, perhaps some of those children -- and their families -- would have received less exposure to a toxic subtance.