PRESS RELEASE - According to an official, unpublished study

WASTE INCINERATORS PROVOKE THE BIRTH OF DEFORMED BABIES

Paris, January 21st, 2003. CNIID reveals today the existence of an official epidemiological study showing that waste incinerators provoke the birth of deformed babies. It was done in one of the biggest regions of the country and takes into account 70 incinerators. The authors conclude that "globally, significant risks for the exposed populations are observed for two types of deformities:  chromosomal anomalies and other major deformities" (1).

Furthermore, they found "high and significant risk (...) for facial clefts, renal dysplasia, and egacolon". These are, among other things, deformities of the face, kidney and sex. Waste incineration is thus responsible for the birth of an important number of deformed babies.

For Pierre-Emmanuel Neurohr, Director of the National Center for Independent Information on Waste (CNIID), "Starting from today, Roselyne Bachelot, environment minister, takes judicial responsibility for every incinerator that is built in France. Waste incineration will be the asbestos of the 21st century, and she has the choice: either to declare a moratorium on the building of new incinerators, effective immediately, or face in a few years' time a judgement for poisoning". This study adds to the case on the danger posed by waste incineration as such, including the higher levels of cancer around the Besancon incinerator.

Furthermore, CNIID has asked the minister to clarify her policies on freedom of information. How is it possible that her ministry has known for months that incinerators provoke the birth of deformed babies without informing at once the public?

An incinerator emits hundreds of toxic substances. According to the environment ministry, when it comes to dioxin, the dirtiest incinerators in France include St-Ouen (at the entrance of Paris) which emits 4,9 g per year, Strasbourg, which emits 8,7 g per year and Lyon, which emits 4,4 g per year. Dioxin's toxicity is counted in millionths of millionths of gram. CNIID is currently doing a
postcards campaign in favor of the reduction of waste at the source aimed. Such a policy is the only viable alternative to  incineration.

For more information, please contact Pierre-Emmanuel Neurohr at + 33 1 55 78 28 60.

(1) Risk of congenital anomalies in the vicinity of municipal solid waste incinerators, Inserm, Afssaps, Institut européen des génomutations, not published yet.
------------------------

Note: Although the study itself has not been published yet, the following abstract was presented during a conference of "French-speaking epidemiologists".

Background
Although it appears indisputable that municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) increases the overall environmental load of particulate matter containing dioxins and metals, the evidence of
health consequences to populations is very limited. We used the birth defects registry for southeast France to attempt to assess at the regional level the impact of these emissions on birth defect rates.

Methods
We studied communities surrounding the 70  incinerators having operated at least one year in the region during the study period (1988-1997). Each exposed municipality (N=196) was assigned an exposure index estimated from a Gaussian plume model. With Poisson models and a reference population of the 2683 unexposed communities in the region, relative risks for congenital malformations were adjusted for year of birth, maternal age, population density, average family income and local road traffic for exposed communities.

Results
Both chromosomal and other major anomalies (mainly facial clefts, renal dysplasia, and megacolon) were  more frequent in the exposed than the non-exposed communities. Within exposed communities, a dose-response trend of risk with increasing exposure was observed for obstructive uropathies.

Risks of cardiac anomalies, renal dysplasia, obstructive uropathies and skin anomalies increased linearly with road traffic density.

Conclusions
Although both incinerator emissions and road traffic are plausible candidates for explaining the excess risks found, we cannot exclude several alternative explanations, including exposure isclassification, ascertainment bias and residual confounding. It should be stressed also that parts of the effects observed, if real, might be attributed to old technology MSWI and the long lasting pollution around them.

The closest we have to this is probably the work on childhood cancer by Professor Knox published in June 2000 (Childhood cancers, birthplaces, incinerators and landfill sites.  Knox E Int J Epidemiol 2000 Jun;29(3):391-397).

Knox examined 70 municipal incinerators, 307 hospital incinerators and 460 toxic-waste landfill sites in Great Britain for evidence of emissions causing childhood cancers. Knox was aware that municipal incinerators had previously shown significant excesses of adult cancers within 7.5 and 3.0 km (Cancer incidence near municipal solid waste incinerators in Great Britain. Elliott P, Shaddick G, Kleinschmidt I, Jolley D, Walls P, Beresford J, Grundy C Small Area Health Statistics Unit, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK. Br J Cancer 1996 Mar;73(5):702-10) but that the relative risks for adults had been marginal and that an analysis of childhood cancers seemed to offer a more sensitive approach.

The child-cancer/leukaemia data showed no systematic migration-asymmetries around toxic-waste landfill sites; but showed highly significant excesses of migrations away from birthplaces close to municipal incinerators. Relative risks within 5.0 km of these sites were about 2:1. Hospital incinerators gave analogous results. The ratios greatly exceed findings around 'non-combustion' urban sites.

Knox concluded that because of their locations, the specific effects of the municipal incinerators could not be separated clearly from those of adjacent industrial sources of combustion-effluents. Both were probably carcinogenic. Landfill waste sites showed no such effect.

This study follows on from earlier work by Knox (Migration patterns of children with cancer in Britain.  Knox EG, Gilman EA Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, Medical School, University of Birmingham. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998 Nov;52(11):716-26)  in which he was not specifically studying incineration but he confirmed the main findings of that work, based upon a different and independent method.  Specifically that proximities to several types of industrial source, around the time of birth, were followed by a raised risk of childhood cancer. Combustion products and volatile organic compounds were especially implicated. Within the 16 year limit of the study, the increased risk did not decay with advancing age. Low atmospheric concentrations of many carcinogenic substances suggest that the mother acts as a cumulative filter and passes them to the fetus across the placenta or in breast milk.

Knox suggested that:
"As with previous studies of proximities of childhood cancers to industrial sites, and of exposures to pre-natal medical radiation, the excesses were similar for leukaemia and solid tumours of all types.  This is as we might expect for agents with systemic access to the DNA/RNA of all types of fetal cells."

The work by Staessen also touches upon this area but not so specifically (Renal function, cytogenetic measurements, and sexual development in adolescents in relation to environmental pollutants: a feasibility study of biomarkers Jan A Staessen, Tim Nawrot, Elly Den Hond, Lutgarde Thijs, Robert Fagard, Karel Hoppenbrouwers, Gudrun Koppen, Vera Nelen, Greet Schoeters, Dirk Vanderschueren, Etienne Van Hecke, Luc Verschaeve, Robert Vlietinck, Harry A Roels, for the Environment and Health Study Group* Lancet 2001; 357: ---

CNIID
Centre national d'information indépendante sur les déchets
51 rue du fbg St-Antoine
75011 Paris
Tél. 01 55 78 28 60
Fax: 01 55 78 28 61

Site internet : http://www.cniid.org