May 14, 2001

To: Dorry Lane

From: Leslie Tucker and Jud Richland

Subject: ACPM Environmental Health Committee

This memo is a follow-up to our discussion last week about possibly establishing an ACPM Environmental Health Committee. We think that, for several reasons, the time may be right to consider establishing an entity within the College to make the College a more active participant in the field of environmental health.

First, the policy debates over the impact of environmental exposures, especially exposures affecting children, are gaining momentum on Capitol Hill. Yet debates over important environmental health issues are often notable for their lack of mainstream, science-based voices. They are often marked by emotional and passionate, but not necessarily science-based, exchanges between environmental and industry groups.

Second, the increasing attention being given to environmental health issues opens up potential avenues of new funding for the College. It is worth noting that CDC has already indicated interest in supporting an initial meeting of an ACPM Environmental Health Committee.

And third, through ACPM’s relationship with the Mt. Sinai-based Center for Children’s Health and the Environment, the Center has generously offered to assist in staffing an ACPM Environmental Health Committee.

Such a committee could have a number of important objectives. It could:

1. Become a recognized authoritative, impartial voice on hotly contested environmental health issues: e.g., endocrine disruptors, non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in agriculture, environmental exposure surveillance, and consumer product labeling;
2. Advocate for a well-funded, multi-disciplinary, results-driven environmental health research agenda;
3. Work with CDC and others to identify manpower and training needs for the next generation of environmental health physicians and scientists, including epidemiologists, toxicologists, laboratorians; etc.;
4. Develop clinical guidelines for environmental health history taking, exposure assessment, and management (e.g., hair analysis and chelation);
5. Reach out to engage/inform other primary care societies and leverage representatives in the AMA House of Delegates to move policy items; and
6. Connect public health and the practicing clinician at "ground level," e.g., by putting health department officials on stage before state medical society meetings to discuss local environmental conditions and what practitioners can look for in their practice.

As we discussed last week, the College’s committees have not been topic-specific, so establishing a new Environmental Health Committee would represent a departure from how we have traditionally done business. While a new entity could be a committee, it could also be a new kind of body, such as an APHA-like section. Regardless of its structure, the new entity would likely need to work closely at times with existing ACPM committees, but there would also need to be a clear delineation of responsibilities vis-à-vis, e.g., the Policy, Education, or Prevention Practice Committees.

We know that you plan to raise this issue during your President’s Report during the Board conference call, and we look forward to that discussion.