#371: Chemicals And Health--Part 3

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #371 
---January 6, 1994---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library. Dioxinnz.com ========================Original Source========================

Several studies of industrial dumps and contaminated water supplies during the last decade have reported adverse health effects among exposed human populations. [1] The principal health findings include:

** Significantly reduced stature (height) for a given age among children who lived near Love Canal, the chemical waste dump in Niagara Falls, N.Y., compared to a control group of children living further from the dump. [2]

** A higher prevalence of birth defects and liver disease among persons living near a thorium waste disposal site in Wayne, New Jersey, compared to persons living further away from the site. [3] (Thorium is a naturally-occurring radioactive element processed on this site by a private firm under contract to the old Atomic Energy Commission, now called the Department of Energy.)

** Low birth weight and birth defects in California children born in census tracts having waste disposal sites. [4]

** Enlargement of the liver (hepatomegaly) and abnormal liver function tests reported in residents exposed to solvents from a toxic waste dump in Hardemann County, Tenn. [5]

** Dermatitis, respiratory irritation, neurologic symptoms and pancreatic cancer at 7 waste disposal sites. [6]

** Significantly elevated rates of illness, including chronic kidney disease, stroke, hypertension [high blood pressure], heart disease, anemia, and skin cancer in a population exposed to toxic metals (cadmium and lead) from mine wastes in Galena, Kansas. [7]

** Leukemia (cancer of the blood-forming cells) among a group of children drinking water contaminated with industrial solvents in Woburn, Mass. In addition, a study of 4936 pregnancies and 5018 residents of Woburn aged 18 or younger revealed significant positive associations between intake of contaminated water and birth defects of the central nervous system, eye, ear, and face (e.g., cleft palate), as well as abnormalities of the chromosomes. [8]

** In Lowell, Mass., a group of 1049 people living 1200 feet from a large chemical waste dump was higher in self-reported complaints of wheezing, shortness of breath, cough, and persistent colds; irregular heart beat; constant fatigue and bowel dysfunction, compared to people living 2 and 3 times as far from the dump. [9] This study examined the possibility of recall bias (people selectively remembering health problems, or chemical exposures) and concluded that recall bias did not explain the findings.

** In Hamilton, Ontario, a study of people who lived and/or worked near an industrial dump revealed significantly elevated rates of the following conditions: bronchitis; difficulty breathing; cough; skin rash; arthritis; heart problems (angina [chest pain], and heart attacks); muscle weakness in arms and legs; tremors, cramps, and spasms; headaches; dizziness; lethargy; balance problems; and mood symptoms (anxiety, depression, insomnia, irritability, and restlessness) compared to populations living further from the site. [10] Recall bias was examined and rejected as the source of these problems.

** A survey of 2039 persons in 606 households living near the Stringfellow Acid Pits in Riverside County, California revealed significantly elevated rates for the following conditions: ear infections; bronchitis; asthma; angina [chest pain]; skin rashes; blurred vision; pain in the ears; daily cough for more than a month; nausea; frequent diarrhea; unsteady gait; and frequent urination. [11] Recall bias was examined and rejected as the cause of these problems.

** In Tucson, Arizona, a study of 707 children born with heart defects revealed that 35% of them were born to parents living in a part of the city where the water supply was contaminated with industrial solvents (trichloroethylene [TCE], and dichloroethylene). The rate of birth defects of the heart was three times as high among people drinking the contaminated water, compared to people in Tucson not drinking contaminated water.[12]

** A study of 296 women experiencing a spontaneous abortion during the first 27 weeks of pregnancy, compared to 1391 women having live births, revealed an association between spontaneous abortion and drinking water contaminants (detectable levels of mercury, or high levels of arsenic, potassium and silica). [13]

** Residents of Bynum, North Carolina, drinking raw river water contaminated by industrial and agricultural chemicals, have developed cancers 2.4 to 2.6 times more often than expected. [14]

To summarize: Epidemiological studies cannot prove a cause and effect relationship. Nevertheless, available information indicates that hazardous waste dumps can harm, and have harmed, humans living nearby. Likewise, contaminated water supplies have harmed people.

The problem of waste dumps is continuing to grow. As the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences said in 1991, "A limited number of epidemiologic studies indicate that increased rates of birth defects, spontaneous abortion, neurologic impairment, and cancer have occurred in some residential populations exposed to hazardous wastes. We are concerned that other populations at risk might not have been adequately identified." And the Council said, "Millions of tons of hazardous materials are slowly migrating into groundwater in areas where they could pose problems in the future, even though current risks could be negligible." [15]

There is a move afoot now in Washington, and in the mass media, to divert attention away from the problem of toxic wastes. The goal seems to be to cut funding for the federal Superfund program of toxic waste cleanup. It seems clear that such a move, if successful, will result in increased health costs for the American people.

                                                                         
--Peter Montague, Ph.D.

===============

[1] For a review of several studies, see Arthur C. Upton, Theodore Kneip and Paolo Toniolo, "Public Health Aspects of Toxic Chemical Disposal Sites," ANNUAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 10 (1989), pgs. 1-25.

[2] Beverly Paigen, Lynn R. Goldman, Mary M. Magnant, Joseph H. Highland, and A.T. Steegman, Jr., "Growth of Children Living Near the Hazardous Waste Site, Love Canal," HUMAN BIOLOGY Vol. 59 (June 1987), pgs. 489-508. See also, Lynn R. Goldman and others, "Low Birth Weight, Prematurity and Birth Defects in Children Living Near the Hazardous Waste Site, Love Canal," HAZARDOUS WASTE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, Vol. 2 (1985), pgs. 209-223; see also Beverly Paigen and others, "Prevalence of Health Problems in Children Living Near Love Canal," HAZARDOUS WASTE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, Vol. 2 (1985), pgs. 23-43. And see: Nicholas J. Vianna and Adele K. Polan, "Incidence of Low Birth Weight Among Love Canal Residents," SCIENCE Vol. 226 No. 4679 (December 7, 1984), pgs. 1217-1219.

[3] G. Reza Najem and Lisa K. Voyce, "Health Effects of a Thorium Waste Disposal Site," AMERICAN 
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 80 (April 1990), pgs. 478-480.

[4] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CALIFORNIA: BIRTH DEFECTS STUDY (Atlanta, Ga.: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1990). See also: Gary M. Shaw and others, "Congenital Malformations and Birthweight in Areas with Potential Environmental Contamination," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 47 (March/April 1992), pgs. 147-154, which showed increased risk of malformations of the heart and circulatory system (though not a risk of low birthweight) among children born to California mothers residing in census tracts having waste disposal sites.

[5] Channing R. Meyer, "Liver Dysfunction in Residents Exposed to Leachate from a Toxic Waste Dump," ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES Vol. 48 (1983), pgs. 9-13.

[6] Barry L. Johnson, "Testimony by Barry L. Johnson, Ph.D., Assistant Surgeon General, Assistant Administrator, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry [ATSDR], Before the Subcommittee on Superfund, Recycling, and Solid Waste Management, United States Senate, May 6, 1993," pg. 10, citing various studies by ATSDR.

[7] John S. Neuberger and others, "Health Problems in Galena, Kansas: A Heavy Metal Mining Superfund Site," THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT Vol. 94 (1990), pgs. 261-272.

[8] J. Cutler and others, "Childhood Leukemia in Woburn, Massachusetts," PUBLIC HEALTH REPORTS Vol. 101 (1988), pgs. 201-205. See also V.S. Byers, "Association between clinical symptoms and lymphocyte abnormalities in a population with chronic domestic exposure to industrial solvent contaminated domestic water supply and a high incidence of leukaemia." CANCER IMMUNOLOGY AND IMMUNOTHERAPY, Vol. 27 (1988), pgs. 77-81; and: S. W. Lagakos and others, "An Analysis of Contaminated Well Water and Health Effects in Woburn, Massachusetts," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION Vol. 81 (1986), pgs. 583-196. Because none of the chemicals in Woburn water were previously known to cause leukemia, the leukemia association was questioned; see B. MacMahon, "Comment on the Article, 'An Analysis of Contaminated Well Water and Health Effects in Woburn, Massachusetts,'" JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION Vol. 81 (1986), pgs. 597-599.

[9] David Ozonoff and others, "Health Problems Reported by Residents of a Neighborhood Contaminated by a Hazardous Waste Facility," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE, Vol. 11 (1987), pgs. 581-597.

[10] Clyde Hertzman and others, "Upper Ottawa Street Landfill Site Health Study," ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES Vol. 75 (1987), pgs. 173-195.

[11] Dean B. Baker and others, "A Health Study of Two Communites [sic] Near the Stringfellow Waste Disposal Site," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 43 (Sept./Oct., 1988), pgs. 325-334.

[12] Stanley J. Goldberg and others, "An Association of Human Congenital Cardiac Malformations and Drinking Water Contaminants," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY Vol. 16, No. 1 (July, 1990), pgs. 155-164. See also: Cleo P. Loeber Mary J. C. Hendrix, Steven Diez De Pinos, and Stanley J. Goldberg, "Trichloroethylene: A Cardiac Teratogen in Developing Chick Embryos," PEDIATRIC RESEARCH Vol. 24 (1988): pgs 740-744. And: Brenda V. Dawson, Paula D. Johnson, Stanley J. Goldberg, and Judith B. Ulreich, "Cardiac Teratogenesis of Trichloroethylene and Dichloroethylene in a Mammalian Model," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY Vol. 16 (November 1, 1990), pgs. 1304-1309.

[13] Ann Aschengrau and others, "Quality of Community Drinking Water and the Occurrence of Spontaneous Abortion," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 44 (September/October 1989), pgs. 283-290.

[14] J. Scott Osborne III, Carl M. Shy, and Berton H. Kaplan, "Epidemiologic Analysis of a Reported Cancer Cluster in a Small Rural Population," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 132, No.[1] (July 1990), pgs. S87-S95.

[15] Anthony B. Miller and others, ENVIRONMENTAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, VOLUME 1: PUBLIC HEALTH AND HAZARDOUS WASTES (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1991), pgs. 10, 257.

Descriptor terms: hazardous waste disposal; landfilling; morbidity; mortality; studies; children; growth; love canal; niagara falls; ny; birth defects; liver disease; thorium; wayne; nj; aec; doe; low birth weight; ca; liver disease; hepatomegaly; solvents; hardemann county; tn; dermatitis; neurologic disease; pancreatic cancer; kidney disease; stroke; hypertension; high blood pressure; heart disease; circulatory disease; anemia; skin cancer; cadmium; lead; galena; ks; leukemia; woburn; ma; eye; ear; cns; central nervous system; cleft palate; chromosomes; lowell; respiratory disease; colds; fatigue; cough; bowel disorders; recall bias; hamilton; ontario; cn; bronchitis; skin rash; arthritis; angina; heart attack; tremors; cramps; spasms; headache; dizziness; lethargy; anxiety; depression; incomnia; irritability; restlessness; stringfellow acid pits; asthma; nausea; diarrhea; urination; tucson; az; heart defects; trichloroethylene; dichloroethylene; tce; spontaneous abortion; reproduction; mercury; arsenic; potassium; epidemiology; nrs; nas;

#373: Invisible Killers: Fine Particles

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #373 
---January 20, 1994---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library. Dioxinnz.com
=======================Original Source========================

Eight studies of air pollution in U.S. cities have now shown that fine particles (the invisible soot emitted by incinerators, automobiles, power plants and heating units) are presently killing about 60,000 Americans each year. [1] More than a dozen studies have, in one way or another, confirmed this relationship. Furthermore, there appears to be no threshold, no level below which effects disappear. This means that people are being killed by air pollution levels well within existing federal standards.

To summarize bluntly, any increase in fine particles in the atmosphere kills someone. The victims remain nameless, but they have been deprived of life all the same. Mere compliance with federal standards does not protect the public. Any increase in the number of small particles in the air elevates the death rate. This has obvious implications for certain technologies: incinerators and fossil-fuel-powered machines (automobiles and trucks, power plants and heating units). To protect public health, these technologies must be avoided, or fitted with expensive control equipment, or replaced by cleaner alternatives.

People have known for a long time that particles in the air can kill. In 1952, a dense smog killed 4000 people during one week in London, and since then no one has doubted the cause-and-effect relationship. The question, therefore, isn't whether airborne particles can harm humans, but rather, how much pollution causes how much damage, and, secondly, is there a threshold, an amount below which no effects are seen?

Throughout the '50s and '60s, complacent authorities assumed there was a threshold --some amount that was safe. However, after 1975, a revolution took place in scientific understanding of fine particles and health. In 1979, the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, [2] and the United Nations, [3] both published book-length studies of the dangers of small particles to humans. Here is the current view: humans evolved in an environment where dust was made up of large particles. Humans therefore evolved means for protecting themselves against large particles. Large particles are filtered out by hairs inside the nose, mucous membranes in the throat and airways, and other mechanisms. However, modern combustion machines produce small particles which pass right by these natural protections and then enter the deep lung. In the deep lung, air comes into contact with a person's blood stream; this is where oxygen passes into the body and carbon dioxide passes out with each breath we take. Putting tiny particles of pollution directly in contact with the surface of the deep lung is a recipe for trouble. Because of their origin in combustion processes, most fine particles are coated with toxic materials --metals like lead and mercury, or toxic organics like polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). So fine particles provide a uniquely efficient carrier, giving dangerous toxins direct entry into the blood stream.

Armed with new knowledge, in 1987, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established new, stricter standards for particles in the air. The 1987 standard, which governs today, is expressed in terms of small particles (also called particulate matter) that measure 10 micrometers or less in diameter. (A meter is 39 inches and a micrometer is a millionth of a meter.) These are called respirable or inhalable particles because, as we saw above, they are small enough to get into the deep lung where they cause various kinds of damage. The shorthand way to refer to these pollutants is PM10 (meaning Particulate Matter 10 micrometers or less in diameter). Current U.S. standards say that the ambient air (the general air we all breathe) may contain no more than 50 micrograms of PM10 particles per cubic meter of air as an annual average, and the one-day average should exceed 150 micrograms per cubic meter only one day each year. (A gram is 1/28th of an ounce and a microgram is a millionth of a gram.)

Since 1987, evidence has been accumulating, showing that the 1987 standards do not protect human health. The question about the existence of a PM10 threshold was addressed first by Joel Schwartz of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Schwartz reviewed data on air pollution and deaths from London, 1958-1972, and showed there was no threshold down to the lowest observed levels of air pollution. [4] A study published last month in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, of six U.S. cities, including several that are not heavily polluted, such as Portage, Wisconsin and Topeka, Kansas, shows death rates increasing with just 15 micrograms per cubic meter of PM10 pollutants. [5] In all, at least 8 studies have now shown that PM10 at any level kills people. It seems clear there is no threshold.

A study of people in Steubenville, Ohio, showed that each increase of 100 micrograms per cubic meter of total suspended particles (of which PM10 represents about half) is associated with a 4% increase in the death rate, with no threshold. [6] Interestingly, the Steubenville study showed that the death rate changes as fine particle levels change, but not as sulphur dioxide levels change.

In Philadelphia, a close relationship between PM10 pollutants and the death rate was observed. [7] Once again sulfur dioxide levels did not correlate with the death rate, but particle concentrations did. Here each increase of 100 micrograms per cubic meter of total suspended particles (of which PM10 makes up half) was associated with a 7% increase in the death rate. There was no threshold.

A study of people in Detroit showed that a 6% increase in the death rate was associated with each increase of 100 micrograms per cubic meter of total suspended particles (of which PM10 makes up half). [8] There was no evidence of a threshold. Sulfur dioxide levels were not significantly associated with increases in the death rate. Studies [9] of St. Louis, Missouri and Kingston, Tennessee, showed that the death rate increased 16% (St. Louis) and 17% (Kingston) with each addition of 100 micrograms per cubic meter of PM10 pollutants to the air. Associations with gaseous pollutants --sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and ozone --did not come close to achieving statistical significance.

In the Utah Valley, a study of the population of Provo revealed that the daily death rate was closely associated with levels of PM10 pollution. [10] The Utah Valley is unique because PM10 is the only pollution present there in significant quantities (contributed chiefly by a steel mill). For every increase of 100 micrograms per cubic meter of PM10 pollutants, there was a 16% increase in the death rate, and no threshold was observed.

In all cities, the increase in deaths was most notable among people older than 65 and in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or cardiovascular disease.

There is a remarkable consistency apparent in all these studies: a 100 micrograms per cubic meter increase in PM10 is always accompanied by an 8% to 17% increase in the death rate. Joel Schwartz, the only EPA employee ever given a "genius award" by the MacArthur Foundation, re-analyzed data from London's 1952 killer smog and showed that the death rate increased 6.4% for each increase of 100 micrograms per cubic meter total suspended particles, or about 13% for each 100 micrograms per cubic meter increase in PM10 pollutants--again, remarkably consistent with the other studies.

No epidemiological study can prove a cause and effect relationship because it is always possible that some key factor was not considered. Until last month, skeptics could say smoking might explain why death rates increase as PM10 concentrations increase. But the study published last month in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE looked at 8111 adults in six American cities and showed that smoking did not explain the increased death rate observable when PM10 concentrations rise. [5] Smoking has now been ruled out.

Joel Schwartz recently quoted the British researcher, Bradford Hill, saying, "All scientific work is incomplete... All scientific work is liable to be upset or modified by advancing knowledge. That does not confer upon us a freedom to ignore the knowledge we already have, or to postpone the action that it appears to demand at a given time." Then Schwartz added: "At this given time, the knowledge we already have seems to demand a reduction in population exposure to airborne particles." [1]

                                                                        
--Peter Montague, Ph.D.

===============

[1] Seven studies are reviewed by Joel Schwartz, "Particulate Air Pollution and Daily Mortality: A Synthesis," PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS 1991/1992 Vol. 19 (1992), pgs. 39-60. For the 8th, see footnote 5. The 60,000 figure is taken from "Air Pollution in Typical U.S. Cities Increases Death Risk," press release dated May 13, 1991, from the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass. describing findings later reported in Joel Schwartz and Douglas W. Dockery, "Increased Mortality in Philadelphia Associated With Daily Air Pollution Concentrations," AMERICAN REVIEW OF RESPIRATORY DISEASE Vol. 145 (1992), pgs. 600-604. Two million deaths occur in the U.S. each year; according to Schwartz and Dockery, fine particles account for 3%. See also, Michael Weisskopf, "Particles in the Air Help Kill 60,000 a Year, Study Says," WASHINGTON POST May 13, 1991, pg. A13.

[2] National Research Council, AIRBORNE PARTICLES (Baltimore: University Park Press, 1979).

[3] United Nations, FINE PARTICULATE POLLUTION (NY: Pergamon Press, 1979).

[4] Joel Schwartz and Allan Marcus, "Mortality and Air Pollution in London: A Time series Analysis," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 131 (1990), pgs. 185-194.

[5] Douglas Dockery and others, "An Association Between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six U.S. Cities," NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE Vol. 329 (1993), pgs. 1753-1759; see also pgs. 1807-1808.

[6] Joel Schwartz and Douglas Dockery, "Particulate Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in Steubenville, Ohio," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 135 (1992), pgs. 12-19; see also pgs. 20 and 23 for discussion of the Steubenville study.

[7] Philadelphia study cited in note 1, above.

[8] Joel Schwartz, "Particulate Pollution and Daily Mortality in Detroit," ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH Vol. 56 (1991), pgs. 204-213.

[9] Douglas W. Dockery and others, "Air Pollution and Daily Mortality: Associations with Particulates and Acid Aerosols," ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH Vol. 59 (1992), pgs. 362-373.

[10] C. Arden Pope III and others, "Daily Mortality and PM10 Pollution in Utah Valley," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 47 (1992), pgs. 211-217.

Descriptor terms: air pollution; morbidity statistics; mortality statistics; fine particles; particulates; particulate matter; fossil fuels; coal; oil; natural gas; automobiles; trucks; soot; smoke; exhaust; electric power; steubenville; oh; philadelphia; pa; detroit; mi; st. louis; mo; kingston; tn; provo; ut; utah valley; pm10; joel schwartz; douglas dockery; bradford hill; regulations; ambient air standards;