By By David Silverberg Oct 31, 2006 in Health Richard Clapp of Boston University published a study in Environmental Health that shows the risk of death is greater in both male and female workers at IBM factories compared to the general U.S. population. He studied the causes of death among all IBM factory workers who had worked for the company for at least five years between 1969 and 2001. It is the largest published study of cancer rates linked to computer manufacturers. Clapp found that IBM factory workers were more likely to have died of cancer, including brain, kidney or breast cancer and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, than the rest of the population. But he was quick to point out that the study “cannot link these deaths to any specific chemicals or other toxic exposures.” The study came about after two former IBM employees filed a lawsuit against the company, although the study was never submitted as evidence, and IBM ended up winning the case. IBM quickly responded to the study’s results by saying the analysis is based on “flawed methodology and woefully incomplete data,” according to New Scientists. An IBM spokesman also added: “Dr. Clapp prepared his study as a paid expert witness in support of unsuccessful litigation against IBM.” It’s too early to determine if Clapp or IBM is speaking the truth, but the impact of this study should not be understated. In fact, whenever any workplace safety report is published, it deserves attention from all corners of the world. On-the-job mortality rates are serious business, and it’s commendable that this report has been published to prove, at the very least, that this kind of data can be obtained. What we would like to see, though, is IBM giving the public solid evidence that runs counter to Clapp’s evidence. That would give IBM employees, and the many workers in other tech factories, a peace of mind they deserve. Digital Journal — It’s every company’s worst nightmare: a bold accusation that its workplace makes employees sick. Now IBM is shifting into damage control in light of a controversial paper claiming the company’s factory workers have a high risk of developing cancer.Richard Clapp of Boston University published a study in Environmental Health that shows the risk of death is greater in both male and female workers at IBM factories compared to the general U.S. population. He studied the causes of death among all IBM factory workers who had worked for the company for at least five years between 1969 and 2001. It is the largest published study of cancer rates linked to computer manufacturers.Clapp found that IBM factory workers were more likely to have died of cancer, including brain, kidney or breast cancer and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, than the rest of the population. But he was quick to point out that the study “cannot link these deaths to any specific chemicals or other toxic exposures.”The study came about after two former IBM employees filed a lawsuit against the company, although the study was never submitted as evidence, and IBM ended up winning the case.IBM quickly responded to the study’s results by saying the analysis is based on “flawed methodology and woefully incomplete data,” according to New Scientists. An IBM spokesman also added: “Dr. Clapp prepared his study as a paid expert witness in support of unsuccessful litigation against IBM.”It’s too early to determine if Clapp or IBM is speaking the truth, but the impact of this study should not be understated. In fact, whenever any workplace safety report is published, it deserves attention from all corners of the world. On-the-job mortality rates are serious business, and it’s commendable that this report has been published to prove, at the very least, that this kind of data can be obtained.What we would like to see, though, is IBM giving the public solid evidence that runs counter to Clapp’s evidence. That would give IBM employees, and the many workers in other tech factories, a peace of mind they deserve. More about Ibm, Cancer, Factory, Science, Study ibm cancer factory science study