Tsuda T, Mino Y, Yamamoto E, Matsuoka H, Babazono A, Shigemi J, Miyai M
Department of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, Okayama University Medical School, Japan.
Nihon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 1997 Jul;52(2):511-26. doi: 10.1265/jjh.52.511.
Kondo's "Incidence of Minamata Disease in Communities along the Agano River, Niigata, Japan (Jap. J. Hyg. 51:599-611;1996)" is critically reviewed. The data of the article were obtained from most of the residents living in the Agano river villages where Minamata disease was discovered in June, 1965. However, sampling proportions were much different between in the population base and in the cases. The method of identification of cases from the data and the reason for the difference were not clearly demonstrated. The citations of reference articles are insufficient despite the fact that other epidemiologic studies on methyl-mercury poisoning have been reported not only in Japan, but also around the world. His "analysis of the recognized patients" is erroneous. Both the sampling scheme of information of hair mercury and the modeling of the analysis are based on Kondo's arbitrary interpretation, not on epidemiologic theory. His "analysis of the rejected applicants" is also erroneous. His calculations of the attributable proportion are incorrect and self-induced in both the assignments of data and analysis of data. Kondo has failed to study the epidemiologic theories in light of changes in the field. Therefore, his article is lacking in epidemiologic theory, a logical base and scientific inference. In Japan, epidemiologic methodology has rarely been used in studies on Minamata Disease in either Kumamoto and Niigata. The government has used neurologically specific diagnosis based on combinations of symptoms to judge the causality between each of symptoms and methyl-mercury poisoning. Epidemiologic data obtained in Minamata, Kumamoto in 1971 indicate that the criteria set by the government in 1977 have produced much more false-negative patients than false-positive patients. As a result, a huge number of symptomatic patients, including those with peripheral neuropathy or with constriction of the visual field, did not receive any help or compensation until 1995. The authors emphasize that the causal relationship between each symptom and methyl-mercury exposure should be reevaluated epidemiologically in Japan.
对近藤的《日本新潟阿贺野川沿岸社区的水俣病发病率(《日本卫生学杂志》51:599 - 611;1996年)》进行了批判性综述。该文章的数据来自1965年6月发现水俣病的阿贺野川沿岸村庄的大多数居民。然而,人口基数和病例中的抽样比例差异很大。从数据中识别病例的方法以及差异的原因并未得到清晰阐述。尽管关于甲基汞中毒的其他流行病学研究不仅在日本,而且在世界各地都有报道,但参考文献的引用并不充分。他对“已确诊患者的分析”是错误的。头发汞含量信息的抽样方案和分析模型均基于近藤的任意解读,而非流行病学理论。他对“被拒申请者的分析”同样错误。他在数据分配和数据分析中对归因比例的计算都是错误的且是自导自演的。近藤未能根据该领域的变化研究流行病学理论。因此,他的文章缺乏流行病学理论、逻辑基础和科学推断。在日本,熊本和新潟在水俣病研究中很少使用流行病学方法。政府采用基于症状组合的神经学特异性诊断来判断每种症状与甲基汞中毒之间的因果关系。1971年在熊本水俣获得的流行病学数据表明,政府1977年设定的标准产生的假阴性患者比假阳性患者多得多。结果,大量有症状的患者,包括患有周围神经病变或视野缩窄的患者,直到1995年都没有得到任何帮助或补偿。作者强调,在日本应从流行病学角度重新评估每种症状与甲基汞暴露之间的因果关系。