The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
As the process enters the home stretch, the last remaining debate surrounding the human-health risk assessment, borne out of smelter pollution, is a veritable no-brainer. The question is whether it is useful and appropriate to conduct biological testing Ð that is, analysis of residents' blood, urine and possibly hair and toenail clippings Ð to measure bodily metal levels. The answer is an unequivocal yes. Uncertainty over the possible health implications of living next to Canada's heaviest-polluting smelter has been allowed to percolate for far too long. The human-health risk assessment has thus far suggested that biological testing for three potentially harmful elements Ð lead, arsenic and inorganic mercury Ð would generate valuable additional data. In 2007, the last year for which statistics are available, HBMS emitted 104 tonnes of those substances, the weight equivalent of about 70 cars. Wishing to know whether those elements are accumulating in our bodies at unacceptable levels is hardly unreasonable. All that is left for voluntary biological testing to proceed is the go-ahead from an oversight committee and from a stringent ethical and peer review. There is no obvious reason for the process to end in a rejection. The only possible downside relates to the increased anxiety that test subjects might experience. As they await their results, worst-case scenarios could conceivably rush through their heads. On that front, the powers-that-be cannot ignore the apprehension that already exists. Numerous residents have legitimate questions about the air they breathe and the environment in which they live. That does not make them anti-HBMS, and that does not necessarily mean they yearn for the smelting operation to be shuttered, economic costs be damned. It simply means they know the research on these pollutants and are taking a keen interest in the health of themselves and their families. Already residents have learned much about the the impacts and non-impacts of the smelter. Many were pleasantly surprised, for instance, to find out that smelter-related metals are virtually non-existent in our drinking water supply, way below the accepted standards. Less unexpected was a 2007 provincial report highlighting the elevated metal levels in area soil, the very document that triggered the health risk assessment. It said the risks posed by the soil are most likely low, but the province is still cautiously rehabilitating the ground at most local playgrounds. Then last November, a statistical analysis found that between 1996 and 2005, incidence of cancer were no higher locally than in the NOR-MAN health region or Manitoba as a whole. And there were no specific types of cancer with "significantly greater" occurrences. Biological testing would invaluably augment the available body of knowledge. And since it would involve actual human test subjects, not just researchers poring over existing documents, the data would carry tremendous weight with the public. It is time this process began, not only for the sake of the volunteers to be tested, but for the community as a whole. If a problem is identified, then it can be dealt with. If no problem is identified, then we can all rest a little easier. Whenever health questions about the smelter emerge, it is common for long-time residents to say things like, "I've lived here for 70 years and I'm fine, so what's the problem?" While sprightly longevity in a populace is always encouraging, such statements are completely unscientific. It's time to get scientific with biological testing. Local Angle runs Fridays.
