2019: The Human Toll Part 1, Risk and exposure in the gaslands
Physicians For Social Responsibility PA’s Dr. Ned Ketyer Shares Summary Of Studies Of Shale Gas Development Impacts On Human Health by David Hess, Sept 26, 2024, PA Environment Digest Blog
On September 17, Dr. Ned Ketyer, a pediatrician with 26 years in practice in Southwest Pennsylvania, shared a summary of recent research into the health impacts of shale gas development during a briefing hosted by the Physicians for Social Responsibility Pennsylvania, Environmental Health Project, FracTracker Alliance and the Center for Coalfield Justice.
Here are his remarks–
In late 2019, Governor Tom Wolf ordered the Pennsylvania Department of Health to conduct research looking at the relationship between fracking and health impacts in residents living in Southwestern PA.
The Department of Health commissioned the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health to conduct the studies in 2020. And the studies were completed in early 2023 and the results were released more than a year ago in August of 2023.
And a well-attended public meeting held at Penn West California University and streamed online. And media from across the country and around the world took notice of the results.
Though interestingly, not so much the media in Southwestern PA.
Several panelists on this webinar today, myself included, were asked to serve on the external Advisory board as a sounding board for the researchers as they gathered their data.
I want to start today by explaining the reasons why these studies were done in the first place, because if it wasn’t for some really good investigative journalism and also the voices of residents impacted by fracking, the studies wouldn’t have been done at all.
The Human Toll
From 2008 to 2018 in four heavily fracked counties in southwestern Pennsylvania, David Templeton and Don Hopey, two reporters of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette uncovered 27 cases of Ewing sarcoma, which is a very rare and frequently fatal bone cancer in childhood.
And 40 cases of other rare cancers for a total of 67 rare cancers in children, teenagers, and young adults.
Only about 200 cases of Ewing sarcoma are diagnosed in the United States each year.
In Washington County, Pennsylvania’s most heavily fracked county where I live, six cases of Ewing sarcoma and 30 other rare childhood cancers were counted.
And these numbers are far more than would be expected to occur in a similarly populated, mostly rural area over a 10-year period.
And new cases keep popping up in this region. And that’s getting parents and physicians very concerned that pollution and toxic waste from fracking operations may be to blame for this outbreak of rare childhood cancers.
And six months after Templeton and Hopey published the human toll, I had the chance to go to the [Pennsylvania] House along with dozens of other concerned community members.
And we spoke with Governor Wolf and other lawmakers and demanded a thorough and transparent investigation into the causes of these rare pediatric cancers and other health impacts that residents were experiencing.
And lo and behold, four days later the governor announced the creation of three studies.
One study examining the impacts of fracking on asthma, which is a common chronic lung disease. Another study focusing on birth outcomes when pregnant moms live near fracking. And a third study examining the plausible link between fracking and those rare childhood cancers.
20 Years Of Fracking Studies
Fracking has been going on in Pennsylvania for the last 20 years.
And that’s given researchers from around Pennsylvania and across the country and physicians like myself, enough time to observe the damage that fracking causes to the environment and to people.
All the evidence showing the risks and harms of fracking is contained in the ninth edition of the Fracking Science Compendium, which is a fully referenced compilation of more than 2,300 peer-reviewed medical and scientific papers, as well as media investigations and government reports.
Compendium is the work of public health experts and medical providers, including pediatricians at Concerned Health Professionals of New York and Physicians for Social Responsibility.
I’ve been a peer reader for the last several editions, and this is the go-to reference regarding health impacts from fracking.
Now, as I mentioned, the researchers from Pitt explored the link between fracking and asthma, cancers in childhood and birth outcomes in people living in an eight-county area in southwestern Pennsylvania where fracking is occurring.
Those counties are Allegheny and the surrounding counties.
Again, there’s already an abundance of evidence showing harm from fracking in Pennsylvania.
Birth outcomes are easiest to study because of the relatively short duration of pregnancy.
Many studies already link fracking with complications of pregnancy, including pregnancy induced hypertension, low birth weight, small for gestational age newborns and prematurity.
Other studies show an association of fracking in cancer in children, including a study from Yale University in 2022 showing that young children living within two kilometers, that’s a little bit over a mile of a fracking well in Pennsylvania had two to three times the odds of developing acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Fracking has also been associated with severe asthma and increased hospitalization rates for asthma in adults.
Something About Fracking
What we’ve learned from the Pitt studies and other studies examining the health impacts of fracking is that there’s something about fracking, we don’t know exactly what it is.
Maybe it’s the dangerous chemicals that are used or maybe the toxic and radioactive pollution and waste that results, or even the stress of living near fracking activities, or maybe it’s a combination of all of these factors.
But there’s something about fracking that increases the risk of getting sick. And no one should be surprised when these studies also show that the closer you are to fracking, the higher the risk.
When you look at these studies, remember that public health research is designed to find correlations and associations and not establish causation.
The good news is doctors don’t wait for absolute proof in order to help their patients prevent or treat disease.
And there’s plenty of precedents for governments to pass laws to protect the public even without having absolute proof of harm, and that’s something that the industry forgets when they insist on absolute proof.
University of Pittsburgh Studies
Let’s talk about the studies for a second.
For the asthma study, the researchers used electronic medical records from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center or UPMC.
They discovered that people living within 10 miles of one or more unconventional gas wells, had four to five times the risk for having a severe asthma attack or being seen in the emergency department for asthma or needing hospitalization because of their asthma, compared to people living more than 10 miles away.
The biggest association was seen not during the well’s construction phase, which may take several weeks.
And it wasn’t seen during the drilling and fracking phases, which takes several weeks or even a few months.
The biggest risk was later during the production phase when gas is blowing out of the well and being collected on the surface.
The production phase lasts for many years, even decades after the drilling and the hydraulic fracturing of the shell is completed.
So even if fracking were to stop tomorrow, the risk to residents who have asthma will persist for a very, very long time.
For the cancer study, the researchers examined the Pennsylvania Department of Health Cancer Registry between 2010 and 2020.
They looked at only four types of cancer in children– leukemia, lymphoma, brain and central nervous system tumors and bone tumors like Ewing’s sarcoma.
And they found 498 cases in that eight county area of southwestern Pennsylvania during those 10 years.
The study found that the children living within one mile from one or more frack gas wells, had five to seven times the risk of developing lymphoma compared to kids living more than five miles away.
No link was found to leukemia to brain or CNS tumors and to bone cancers. But lymphoma is a very, very serious cancer and the risk was significantly elevated.
The birth outcome study used the Pennsylvania Department of Health birth registry data of more than 185,000 births in the eight county area of southwestern Pennsylvania.
They found associations between living up to 10 miles from fracked wells and low birth weight, and newborns.
They also found the well-known association of prematurity as a result of exposure to fine particulate matter or PM 2.5 from any source, not just fracking in southwestern Pennsylvania.
What this tells me as a pediatrician that there’s something about fracking.
Again, maybe it’s a chemical exposure, maybe it’s a pollutant or even stress felt by the pregnant mom, but there’s something about fracking that is interfering with the growth and development of the baby in the womb.
Washington County
In Washington County hardly anybody lives more than 10 miles away from a fracked well pad.
In fact, most residents live much, much closer to wells, but also to pipelines and compressors, processing facilities, landfills where the toxic and radioactive fracking waste is dumped, and all the diesel emissions resulting from fracking activities.
So every asthmatic and every mother who is pregnant has a higher risk of having their health and the health of their babies harmed by fracking.
Growing Mountain Of Evidence
All three studies add to the growing mountain of evidence showing that fracking is linked to health harms, especially in children.
And when you think about it, why would anybody be surprised by the results of these and so many other studies?
Severe asthma, cancer and poor birth outcomes have been strongly linked to fossil fuel pollution for many decades.
Fracking isn’t any different. Gas might burn a little cleaner than coal, but that’s like putting a filter on a cigarette.
It may seem cleaner, but no doctor is going to tell you that it’s safe to smoke it.
Enough Evidence To Act
So there’s already enough evidence where actions are needed to protect people and the planet from harm.
We don’t need any new studies for Governor Shapiro and the DEP and state legislators to adopt health protective policies.
Beginning with the eight recommendations handed to Governor Shapiro by a grand jury in 2020 when he was Attorney General.
First expand setbacks, look, 500 feet is way too close [the minimum now]. I think anybody understands that.
The grand jury recommended 2,500 feet from homes and 5,000 feet from schools, hospitals, and other buildings where vulnerable people congregate.
Disclose all the chemicals used during drilling and fracking. And that’s all the chemicals, all of them. Doctors need to know they can better evaluate their patients and treat them, they need to know this information.
Patients have a right to know what they’re being exposed to. And so do first responders who may have to respond to well pad fires, explosions, or spills.
When permitting fracking infrastructure, the DEP should take into account all other sites around a proposed new site because they all add up and result in cumulative impacts.
Doctors also need to understand that patients may live near a gas well, but also a pipeline or a compressor station or a processing facility where emissions also occur.
And living near fracking operations also means living near constant heavy diesel truck traffic.
Fracking is a massive waste problem. Both solid fracking waste and wastewater are highly toxic and radioactive.
Deadly waste that also causes damaging earthquakes when injected to get rid of it. Do the companies that cause the harms pay to repair the health costs and damages to public infrastructure? Rarely, if ever. We, the people pay, and pay, and pay, and pay.
Fracking waste needs to be defined, regulated, and monitored.
At the end of the day though, we just have to stop making more of it.
In 2020, the grand jury called out the DEP and the Department of Health for being unresponsive and neglecting the complaints of residents living near fracking.
And I’m happy to report that this is one area where I have seen improvement recently.
The Pennsylvania government, the Senate, the House, and every governor since Governor Rendell has been complicit in allowing fracking to rapidly expand in the state without holding the oil and gas industry accountable.
And that behavior has to stop.
Education is also a part of the solution, and the Department of Health has committed themselves to educate schools on air quality, educate health providers, hospitals, and health systems around the threats posed by fracking.
Health impact assessments can help communities understand what a proposed project will mean for their community’s health and safety before agreeing to allow that project to move forward.
Nonprofits like ours will continue to educate lawmakers and health providers and the public about the harms of fracking, and the health and climate consequences that we and our children face with every new fracking site that’s permitted.
Our groups host frackland tours throughout the year.
Over the years, we’ve taken politicians and journalists and health professionals, faith groups and others on tours in fracking sites so they can see and smell and taste and hear for themselves how badly fracking has touched residents.
Department of Health staff members, by the way, have taken these frackland tours in Washington County three times, I think, by my count.
And our groups continue to meet with them every quarter.
And finally, we need to keep up the pressure.
There is no denying that fracking is unsafe, it’s making Pennsylvanians sick.
Fracking is dangerous and it’s irresponsible.
We need everyone to acknowledge those facts beginning with Governor Shapiro.
Refer also to:
Frac’ers (eg Encana/Ovintiv) poisoning residents, workers, and livestock/wildlife of NEBC:
2005: Andrew Nikiforuk: Life Inside a Science Project (in Canada)
