HIgher Infant Death Rates (Reports) Derek Trigg MP, > concerns - TopicsExpress

HIgher Infant Death Rates (Reports) Derek Trigg MP, > concerns of higher infant death rates Existing pollution health impacts would MASK effects of Runcorn incinerator says Halton Council Derek Twigg MP being very concerned about reports of higher infant death rates associated with exposure to incinerator emissions asked the House of Commons Report: The following bullet points briefly set out some important relevant issues: No apparent effort has been made by any government body since Dr William Brend correctly deduced that air pollution was causing higher infant mortality rates and not poverty – as had previously been believed to be responsible. (Dr William Brend: ‘ The relative importance of pre-natal and post-natal conditions as causes of infant mortality”, Medical Research Committee, (Special Report Series), 10, HMSO 1917). Dr Brend had scrutinised the 1914 infant mortality rates for all parts of the British Isles, which ranged from 38 per 1,000 live births in County Roscommon to 184 per 1,000 in Ashton-under-Lyne, Lancashire. The Rt Hon John Burns MP was aware that poverty couldn’t be responsible for high infant death rates as Lancashire had the highest infant death rate and also the lowest rate of pauperism. (Manchester Evening News, 4 August 1913) Despite reports of the clear association between exposure to incinerator emissions and higher rates of infant mortality at electoral ward level (Enfield Advertiser, 25 April 2007; Sunday Express, 29 April 2007; Harrow Observer 3 May 2007; South London Press, 4 May 2007; Waltham Forest Guardian, 2 August 2007), there’s been no effort by the EA, or expert bodies whose advice might be sought by the EA, to determine whether or not there’s been an upward trend in infant mortality rates in any Borough exposed to emissions from an incinerator after the incinerator started –despite such a search being so obvious and simple. The permitting process for incinerators is flawed as the claim is often made that no permit will issued if health is likely to be affected. The past Chairman of the Environment Agency (Lord Smith of Finsbury) was quoted as follows in the South London Press article by Julia Lewis (4 May 2004): “But Chris Smith, of the Government’s Environmental Protection Directorate, said no permit would be issued to an incinerator operator if a health risk was likely.”. The article had started as follows: ““FAMILIES living downwind of incinerators are more at risk from infant death, heart disease, cancer and autism, health researchers claim. Michael Ryan and Dr Dick van Steenis believe babies are more likely to die if they are exposed to fumes from incinerators like the South East London Combined Heat and Power Plant (SELCHP) in Deptford. The researchers point to Office of National Statistics (ONS) figures showing infant mortality rates ward by ward. Areas downwind of the incinerator in Landmann Way have an infant mortality rate more than four times that of wards upwind of the plant. ONS figures show that, in wards north-east of SELCHP, infant deaths are 7.1 per 1,000 compared with 0.9 per 1,000 south of the plant.” The abstract of a report into infant deaths around 63 incinerators in Japan starts: “Our study shows a peak-decline in risk with distance from the municipal solid waste incinerators for infant deaths and infant deaths with all congenital malformations combined.” (J Epidemiol. 2004 May;14(3):83-93.) The release of infant death rates for all London Boroughs for years 1965 to 2010 by the Office for National Statistics showed that the wealthy Borough of Kensington and Chelsea had the highest 1965-67 infant mortality rate. These data also showed that the four Boroughs of Wandsworth, Lewisham, Tower Hamlets, and Newham had similar infant mortality rates that were following a similar downward trend until the SELCHP incinerator started in 1993. After the SELCHP incinerator started, the rates of infant mortality in the latter three Boroughs, which were most heavily exposed to emissions from SELCHP, suddenly rose whilst the rate in Wandsworth, which is rarely exposed to SELCHP emissions, continued to fall. Following articles by Mark Metcalf in Big Issue in the North about the link between exposure to incinerator emissions and higher rates of infant mortality, the Health Protection Agency promised a study into infant death rates around incinerators (“Are rubbish incinerators killing our children?”, Sunday Express, 1 May 2011). The initial findings of this study were due to be published in March 2014, but have been delayed. Derek Trigg MP, being very concerned about reports of higher infant death rates associated with exposure to incinerator emissions asked the House of Commons Library about my research and received a two-page reply from Edward White (12 January 2009, Ref: 2009/1/24-SES) with subject heading: “Incinerators and infant mortality”. The reply starts: “Derek, You asked me to have a look at evidence presented by a constituency group which shows that infant mortality is greater downwind of municipal waste incinerators.” Parliamentary Questions about the link between infant mortality and incinerators have been very poorly answered, e.g. Norman Baker (17 Sep 2007 : Column 2209W); Paul Holmes (30 November 2009: Column 539W); Andy Love (22 July 2011: Column 325W); Lyn Brown (18 January 2013: Column 945W and 22 January 2013: Column 651W) Areas with very poor air quality already have effectively been “written off” with respect to effects of additional pollution from incinerators as I discovered following a Freedom of Information request to Halton Council The Runcorn Weekly News article “Existing pollution health impacts would MASK effects of Runcorn incinerator says Halton Council manager” (24 June 2014) starts: “HEALTH impacts of the Runcorn incinerator may not be measurable because they would be disguised by existing pollution sources, a Freedom Of Information (FOI) request has revealed. The admission by Halton Borough Council that air quality is already affected in the area was contained in a response to a question from campaigner Michael Ryan.”