The call for an investigation into drinking water experiments in Wiarton, Ontario has fizzled, after a federal judge ruled in favour of the research-granting council NSERC. Former U of T grad student Christopher Radziminski, backed by CFS, had called on NSERC to launch an inquiry into the Wiarton study.
Radziminski is a former U of T grad student who received a research scholarship from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council. His Master’s thesis found that the chemical “chlorine dioxide could be used to effectively treat water only if used in quantities that violate the American EPA’s safety standards.”
But U of T prof Robert Andrews, Radziminski’s supervisor, used his research to publish claims that the chemical was safe in two scientific journals. Under contract with ERCO Worldwide (previously Sterling Pulp Chemicals Ltd.), Andrews tested a newly patented chlorine dioxide generator on the water supply of Wiarton, Ontario—without the town’s knowledge or consent—in the summer of 2000.
Residents’ complaints of strange odours in drinking water and spots on their laundry were logged with the Ontario Clean Water Agency and in several daily newspapers, yet Andrews and Georges Ranger, a patent-holder for the chemical being tested, called the experiment a success. “No customer taste and odor complaints were reported during the study period,” reads an article on the Wiarton study published in the Journal of Environmental Engineering and Science.
After U of T refused to investigate, Radziminski called on NSERC, the research-granting council, to launch an inquiry into the Wiarton case. When appeals to the NSERC failed, the Canadian Federation of Students backed Radziminski and filed an application with the federal court, contesting NSERC’s decision.
In April, Justice O’Keefe ruled that NSERC did not act improperly: while the council provides funding to universities for research and can order investigations into experiments which it has financially supported, it did not directly fund the Wiarton study and thus did not have authority to order an investigation.
