=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL’S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #370
—December 30, 1993—
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
==========
The Back issues and Index are
available here.
The official RACHEL archive is here.
It’s updated constantly.
To subscribe, send E-mail to rachel-
weekly-request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It’s
free.
===Previous
Issue==========================================Next
Issue===
CHEMICALS AND HEALTH–PART 2
The Assistant Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service,
Barry L. Johnson, told Congress in May 1993 that living near a
hazardous waste site “seems [to be] associated with a small to
moderate increased risk of some kinds of birth defects and…
some specific cancers.” [1]Since 1986 Johnson has been Assistant
Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry [ATSDR], the unit of the Public Health Service that
Congress created to deal with hazardous waste health issues.
Johnson told Congress that “health investigations of communities
around some… hazardous waste sites have found increases in the
risk of birth defects, neurotoxic disorders, leukemia,
cardiovascular [heart and circulatory system] abnormalities,
respiratory and sensory irritation, and dermatitis [skin
disorders].”
Johnson told Congress there were 1331 dump sites on the official
Superfund list, as of last May. He said industrial solvents are
present at 87% of the sites; inorganic compounds (such as lead)
at 87%, and pesticides at 50% of the sites. He said 41 million
Americans live within 4 miles of 1134 Superfund sites that were
studied. On average, 3325 people live within one mile of each
site; since there are 1331 listed sites, this means a total of
4.6 million Americans live within a mile of an official Superfund
site today.
Johnson said a typical site contains more than 100 different
chemicals; “such mixtures may be much more toxic than any of the
individual chemicals,” he told Congress. [The situation is
actually somewhat worse than Johnson described. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analyzed leachate at 13
representative hazardous waste sites from across the country.
Only 4% of the organic chemicals in the leachate were identified
by gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy [GC/MS], but this 4%
included 200 individual chemical compounds, including 13 metals.
“The unidentified 96%” of the organic chemicals is “of unknown
toxicity,” the National Research Council said when it reported
EPA’s findings in 1991. [2]
To illustrate the point that even a single chemical can cause
real problems, Johnson discussed the industrial solvent
trichloroethylene (the second-most common chemical found at
Superfund sites, after lead). He said, “An increasing body of
scientific evidence indicates past exposures to hazardous
substances can cause latent [delayed] adverse health effects.
Recent findings from the ATSDR exposure registry of approximately
5000 persons exposed in the past to trichloroethylene (TCE) in
drinking water showed registrants reporting elevated rates of
diabetes, stroke, elevated blood pressure, and neurologic
problems.”
Johnson then described two large cancer studies that compared the
health of people in counties with hazardous waste sites to the
health of people in counties without hazardous waste sites. Both
studies found an increased frequency of cancers in counties with
hazardous waste sites. A 1983 study reported that age-adjusted
gastrointestinal (GI) cancer death rates were higher than
national averages in 20 of New Jersey’s 21 counties (for the
period 1968-1977). The environmental variables that correlated
most closely with elevated death rates were population density,
urbanization, and presence of toxic waste disposal sites. [3] A
1989 study looked at 593 hazardous waste sites in 339 U.S.
counties (in 49 states) where contaminated ground water was the
sole source for drinking, during the period 1970-1979. [4] (SEE
RHWN #127.) Excess cancer deaths were found in counties with
hazardous waste sites compared to counties without hazardous
waste sites for the following kinds of cancers: lung, bladder,
esophagus, stomach, large intestine, and rectum for white males;
and cancers of the lung, breast, bladder, stomach, large
intestine, and rectum for white females. Non-whites were not
studied.
Johnson described a study by the New Jersey Department of Health
of reproductive effects associated with contaminated drinking
water. [5]Public drinking water systems were evaluated in 75
towns in northern New Jersey. The study looked at all live
births and stillbirths (excluding chromosomal defects and plural
births) during the period 1985-1988 in the 75 towns. The 75
towns were not known to have excessive health problems. Although
some water systems had levels of certain contaminants above
federal standards at the time of the study, contamination levels
in the 75 towns are thought to be typical of U.S. water supplies,
Johnson told Congress.
In the 75 towns, statistically significant associations were
found for the following: total trihalomethanes [the chemicals
formed in drinking water supplies when chlorine is added to kill
germs] were associated with low term birth weight, intrauterine
growth retardation, central nervous system defects, and major
heart defects. Trichloroethylene (TCE) was associated with
neural tube defects [defects of the spinal cord and brain] and
oral cleft defects [for example, cleft palate]. Carbon
tetrachloride was associated with low term birth weight,
intrauterine growth retardation, central nervous system defects,
and oral cleft defects. Dichloroethane was associated with major
heart defects, and dichloroethylenes were associated with central
nervous system defects.
Johnson then described a large study of birth defects among
children whose mothers lived near waste dumps in New York state.
“A particularly important study [6]examined the association
between congenital malformations in children and maternal
proximity to hazardous waste sites in the state of New York,”
Johnson told Congress. Researchers at the Yale University School
of Medicine and the New York State Department of Health (NYDOH)
studied 27,115 births and concluded that, overall, women living
within a mile of an inactive dump have a 12% greater chance of
bearing a child with a major birth defect, compared to women
living further than a mile from a dump. (See RHWN #313.)
The researchers looked at 590 inactive dump sites in 20 northern
New York Counties. Among the 590 sites studied, 90 were ranked
as “high risk” sites because there was documented evidence that
chemicals had migrated off the sites. The study found that women
living within a mile of any of these 90 sites had a 63% greater
chance of bearing a child with a major birth defect, compared to
women living further than a mile from all of the 90 sites.
In sum, Johnson’s testimony forces the conclusion that toxic
waste dumps are hazardous to human health.
[To be continued.]
                 
                 
                 
                 
Descriptor terms: usphs; phs; public health service; barry l.
johnson; atsdr; agency for toxic substances and disease
registry; hazardous waste; health effects; morbidity; mortality;
birth defects; neurological disorders; neurotoxins; leukemia;
cardiovascular disease; dermatitis; superfund; leachate; epa;
environmental protection agency; trichloroethylene; tce;
gastrointestinal cancer; lung cancer; bladder cancer; esophagus
cancer; stomach cancer; colon cancer; rectal cancer; rectum;
trihalomethanes; thms; chlorination; drinking water; low birth
weight; heart defects; neural tube defects; cleft palate;
central nervous system; lawsuits; monsanto; william r. gaffey;
epidemiology; science; peter montague; dioxin; occupational
safety and health; slapps; strategic lawsuit against public
participation; agent orange; vietnam veterans; cate jenkins;
kemner;