CLICK to return to story index

 

'No radiation link' claims Rio Tinto

GREG DROPKIN

RIO Tinto has played perhaps its strongest card yet against former Rossing worker Eddie Connelly. Michael Spencer QC told the High Court on Tuesday there is no scientific evidence linking throat cancer to radiation exposure, so Connelly could not conceivably prove his case.

During last week's "strike-out" hearing, Judge Michael Wright cut Spencer short when he began a technical medical debate. But now Rio Tinto's counsel argued the Judge should not exercise discretion to permit Connelly to exceed a three year time limit on bringing a claim on such weak evidence.

Without a proven link between throat cancer and radiation or a proper epidemiological study of Rossing, it would be unfair to force Rio Tinto to expend considerable sums defending an unwinnable claim funded by Legal Aid.

The company presented affidavits from Sir Richard Doll, a world authority on the statistics of cancer and its possible causes, and Rhys Evans, a consultant surgeon specialising in head and neck cancers. Evans said "Neither I nor Sir Richard Doll could find any statistically significant association linking radiation exposure and carcinoma of the larynx..."

Doll said smoking was the obvious explanation of Connelly's throat cancer.

Connelly's surgeon G. Picozzi disagreed, particularly as the former Rossing worker was just 36 when throat cancer was detected. The surgeon has only encountered two such patients under 40 years of age during fourteen years of clinical practice.

As a specialist, Rhys Evans sees throat cancer patients more frequently, Spencer explained.

Prof. Jonny Myers, Head of the Dept. of Community Health at the University of Cape Town has found five scientific papers showing significant links between radiation and laryngeal cancer. Radiation exposure is known to cause many cancers, and a lack of comprehensive evidence on throat cancer does not rule out a link, Myers adds.

Spencer criticised the papers and quoted Prof. Doll: "Any risk resulting from (Connelly's) occupation can only have been unmeasurably small".

Connelly's counsel Brian Leveson QC accepted Rio Tinto had made careful points. But Prof. Doll relied on dose estimates from the International Atomic Energy Agency report on their 1992 Rossing mission. Dr. J.A. Dennis, an expert in dose measurement, does not regard the report "as having much relevance to the doses that Mr. Connelly may have received" since conditions in 1977 were vastly different.

Connelly's cancer risk could not be discounted before assessing his dose, using full access to the documents available to Rio Tinto and a proper trial of the issue. "Before you decide to dispose of the case you must have all the evidence," Leveson declared.

Spencer also argued Connelly could have formulated his current claim while recovering from surgery in the 1980s.

Leveson cited a February 1987 phone call from Agnes Connelly describing her husband as "done in". He had to attend the Ear Nose and Throat clinic along with speech therapy, treatment for his leg and back, and a persistent virus.

Connelly did attempt to pursue a claim as advised by his former solicitor, who had acted reasonably, and then sought Workmen's Compensation in Namibia.

He could not be accused of sitting on his hands, Leveson said.

The case concludes today. Rio Tinto's argument that Peter Carlson's widow Anne must bring her claim in Windhoek despite the House of Lords ruling allowing Connelly to proceed in London, will be heard tomorrow (Friday).

 

November 26, 1998