Document MJ95nOQ0agEYZ2j33bGB8X0Na

T: Marmor Page 21 1 Q. At Harvard College, did you study 2 the subject of asbestos exposure?. ' . 3 A. Not particularly. There was one 4 course on-eConomic development which-had an 5 occupational health side to it, but not in the 6 college.' ' 7 Q. So when you say one course,.is 8 that a semester.course? , 9 A. Yes.'1-' 10 Q. * What year of college did you take 11 that? Do you recall? 12 A. Ini my senior year; 13 Q. ls:a semester'at Harvard College 14 fall, then a spring semester? 15 A. i-Yes.: " ' i' 16 Q. Sohalfofa year? 17 A. Right. 18 Q. How itmrch of that course dealt 19 with asbestos? 20 A. A very sntalfamount. 21 Q. One lecture? 22 A. Perhaps part Of two or three: 23 lectures in connection:with occupational 24 health. vi - 25 Q. What year was that? Page 23 1 A. The subject of the year was 2 social science explanation, so the philosophy 3 of social science and-how it bears on 4 explaining disputed matters of causation. And 5 one area -- just one of many -- were the 6 disputes about how to explain differential 7 rates of population subjected to disease. 8 Q. What portion of that year dealt 9 with asbestos? 10 A. Again, I'm coming at it a 11 different way.' That is, I did not organize my 12 thinking. I am a political scientist and a 13 policy analyst, and I organize my thinking 14 about topics which touched on^asbestos. This 15 was not a preoccupation of mine at that time. 16 Q. Is it a preoccupation of yours. - 17 now? 18 A. Well, it certainly has been for 19 the last couple of years. 20 Q. Tell me what other issues 21 regarding disputed areas of causation came up 22 at Oxford; in other words, what other toxins? 23 You explain it to me. 24 A. It`included health disputes as . 25 one of themybutT moved from health-disputes Page 22. 1 A. 1959. 2 Q;. Whatdid you learn? ' 3. A. That asbestos was a controversial 4 area in thepublichealth wortd,;and that 5 secondly;'there had been'a considerable 6 increase and attention to it in connection with 7 cancer. 8 Q. How about at Berkeley; did you , 9 study asbestos?' 10 11 ; QHowabout at Oxford; did you 12 study-atsbidstos?'?' '' 13 A. . 'Ididh't'study'asbestosi'but l 14 studied andth'ef subjebt relevant to that which 15 was disputed about how you establish scientific 16 causatibnv'an d: asbestos was sim ply -part of a j 17 whole set Of-disputes concerning explanation of 18 cancer rates: That was-one'of the'subjectsi* 19 Q. ThatwasasemeStercourSe? 20 A. : They don't have courses in the 21 same way. These are tutorials, one-on-one 22 meetings with professors;. I had a fellowship 23 which allowed me to study whatT wanted to 24 study, so that's what I did. 25 Q. Tell me again. Page 24 I to medical care disputes explaining, for 2 example, differences in' the rate'of expenditure 3 for medical care cross countries, disputes 4 about the timing"in which'countries Came to 5 take on social insurance programs like Worker's 6 Compensation, for instance: The dispute being 7 there, what explains the difference between two 8 countries that have similar'rates of trouble. 9 but very different timing of the one that take 10 on that question. 11 A third had to do with arguments 12 concerning the relative role of economic 13 circumstances and .different ideology or ideas 14 in explaining why an issue comes up for 15 attention and another one doesn't. 16 So, for example, what would 17 explain the prominence given to medical care 18 matters in the immediate post war period in the 19 United States, and explain' the attention given 20 to universal health insurance;.which had been 21 given little attention in the decade before 22 even though conditions were so low. That's the 23 sort of thing. Explanation in social science 24 was the topic. 25 Q. Out of those subtopics, in which 6 (Pages 21 to 24) POHLMAN REPORTING COMPANY (314)421-0099