DATE: Thursday, September 25, 1997          TAG: 9709250296

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B1   EDITION: NORTH CAROLINA 

SOURCE: ASSOCIATED PRESS 

DATELINE: RALEIGH                           LENGTH:   90 lines

HEALTH DIRECTOR DEFENDS STATE'S LEVEL OF RESPONSE TO PFIESTERIA

When Maryland acted quickly to close its waterways following reports of a toxic cell that was affecting human health, comparisons to North Carolina's response were inevitable.

Given the available facts, Health Director Ron Levine says he responded prudently to outbreaks of Pfiesteria piscicida, a fish-killing microbe that is plaguing coastal waters from North Carolina to Delaware.

In light of recent findings, Levine said, the state has set up a toll-free hot line and organized a panel of experts to review how North Carolina should respond to future fish kills.

``You could make a case that we didn't move as aggressively on this as we could have,'' Levine said recently. ``But I don't believe it.''

For more than a year, JoAnn Burkholder, the now famous co-discoverer of pfiesteria, has accused Levine of responding slowly to potential health risks and allowing some of his staff to belittle her expertise.

Levine, 62, faces a more direct attack from Neuse Riverkeeper Rick Dove. An ally of Burkholder, Dove wrote a letter to Levine last month urging him to resign.

``The real problem is that the guys who got us in this mess are still in charge,'' Dove said.

So far, the Hunt administration has stood by Levine, who has worked for six governors and has weathered numerous controversies since he came to North Carolina as a U.S. Public Health Service officer in 1963. However, no issue has had as high a profile as the one-celled fish-killer that prompted Maryland to close rivers and Congress to schedule hearings.

Levine, trained in epidemiology at the Centers for Disease Control, has long been aware that coastal waters are home to perilous microbes. But from the start, pfiesteria's true dangers were difficult to unravel.

``This was almost the reverse of the usual situation we're faced with when investigating a new medical phenomenon,'' Levine said. ``Usually we begin with people being sick. Then we make the search for the common exposure. With this we have the organism first. It's somewhat of a challenge.''

Initially, Burkholder had good relations with Levine. In early 1994, he helped secure nearly $575,000 in state funds to pay for new research into pfiesteria. His staff studied the medical records of lab workers made sick by the microbe and vowed they would seek out people who experienced similar symptoms - which included memory problems and respiratory problems - after fish kills.

Those relations quickly soured. In June 1994, Burkholder accused Levine of questioning her qualifications and backing off of support for pfiesteria studies. In October 1995, a New Bern public hearing degenerated into a nasty exchange between Burkholder and a member of Levine's staff, who suggested she was promoting ``pfiesteria hysteria.''

The record also shows that, despite their plans in 1994, state health officials waited three years to fully establish a team to investigate reports of pfiesteria-caused illness.

About 50 people were interviewed after 1995 kills in the Neuse and Pamlico, but many later said that state workers treated them rudely and dismissed their concerns.

Many of these criticisms reached a national audience last spring after New Mexico author Rod Barker published a scathing book about the state's response to pfiesteria.

Levine makes no apologies. He says it was the best he could do at a time when hog waste spills and other environmental hazards were demanding state attention.

After reviewing the written record on how North Carolina health officials responded to pfiesteria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention staff recently concluded that Levine and his staff responded well to pfiesteria.

``It appears to me that when they had the opportunity to reach people who had been exposed, they went out and aggressively tried to find out what they could,'' said Michael McGee, chief of the CDC's health studies branch.

Carl Shy, an epidemiologist who helped review research proposals for pfiesteria, said he thought Levine reacted properly to an unclear health threat.

``I think he's become a bit of a scapegoat,'' said Shy, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

The backlash against Levine and other state officials has provided some lessons for officials in Maryland, where sick fish, signs of pfiesteria and reported illnesses have generated headlines and health concerns all summer.

Dr. Martin Wasserman, Maryland's secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene, said members of his staff urged him to order up controlled research studies, similar to the North Carolina response. But he decided the studies would take too long and instead dispatched a team of doctors to examine people reporting illnesses.

In recent weeks, those doctors have concluded that pfiesteria is the most likely cause of lesions, memory loss and breathing problems suffered by people who had frequent contact with fish-kill water.

``I did what I thought was appropriate under a set of conditions we had,'' Wasserman said. ``I'm sure Dr. Levine did the same. He's an outstanding public health leader.'' KEYWORDS: WATER POLLUTION

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu