Forum: Bioavailability study needed for dioxin

Russ Harding , Midland Daily News

06/06/2004

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) is threatening to declare a sizable portion of the city of Midland as a contaminated site requiring major cleanup action. But absent scientific evidence that pollution levels pose a health risk, such a dramatic step is unwarranted. Moreover, unnecessarily disturbing contaminated soils could actually worsen environmental conditions.

At issue are levels of dioxin on nearly 9,000 residential properties in Midland, affecting half the city's population. Soil analyses indicate some dioxin levels in excess of state and federal limits.

Dioxin is a generic term referring to 210 chemical compounds with similar structures. Dioxin is a byproduct of industrial combustion, as well as from natural sources such as volcanoes and forest fires. Emission controls have virtually eliminated dioxin releases from industrial sources. The principal source in Midland's case is believed to be incineration at Dow Chemical Co. before pollution control technology was in place.

The mere existence of dioxin in soil does not determine human exposure or health risk. Because dioxin binds tightly to soil, it enters the human bloodstream 95 percent of the time only through ingestion - that is, by consumption of wildlife or agricultural and dairy products from highly contaminated areas. Therefore, proximity to an industrial facility is far less a risk factor than the source of food supply.

Few, if any, Midland residents subsist solely on locally grown meats and vegetables. Indeed, a study by the Midland County Health Department in 2002 found no evidence of increased cancer in the past two decades, nor any increase in birth defects since 1992. In fact, cancer rates in Midland are lower than both the state and national averages.

Officials of the MDEQ nonetheless are considering whether to order Dow Chemical Co. to undertake major remediation measures as a condition of the company's operating permit. But no rational decision can possibly be made until a study of actual exposure levels is undertaken. Otherwise, regulators would simply be guessing whether a public health risk even exists.

State regulators do have discretion in the type and extent of cleanup actions required where dioxin levels exceed the Michigan standard. The Michigan Legislature in 1995 enacted a risk-based cleanup standard that allows cleanup requirements to be tailored to specific site use rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. But such a determination for Midland cannot be made until actual exposure levels are known.

The most accurate gauge of actual exposure requires a "bioavailability" study, which measures dioxin levels in the blood of city residents. Only with such information can researchers determine to what extent dioxin in the soil poses a health risk. Once the actual level of risk is established, regulators can better determine appropriate cleanup standards. To simply base cleanup requirements on soil analyses would be a breach of sound science.

As it is, soil sampling in the area has turned up broad variations of dioxin levels, which argues for a site-specific approach to remediation rather than applying a broad regulatory brush. Of 22 samples taken by MDEQ, for example, half actually measured below the state's stringent safety standard of 90 parts per trillion, while 90 percent of the samples measured below the federal safety standard of 1,000 parts per trillion.

Area lawmakers on Thursday proposed using $800,000 from the Clean Michigan Initiative (CMI) to fund a "bioavailability" study in Midland. (Voters authorized the state in 1998 to borrow up to $675 million in general obligation bonds for CMI projects, including environmental cleanup and natural resource protection.)

Overly aggressive cleanup requirements in themselves pose a risk. To insist that dioxin-laced soil be removed, rather than capped or confined, could actually increase airborne contamination. Too, the stigma attached to unnecessarily declaring Midland a contaminated community would produce incalculable economic hardship.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm has repeatedly emphasized the importance of retaining manufacturing jobs in Michigan. It is of particular importance to industry that the DEQ abide by sound science in regulatory decision-making. While agency officials undoubtedly are well intentioned in seeking to address dioxin contamination in Midland, an issue of this importance demands guidance from the governor. The community of Midland and the state as a whole would benefit more were the DEQ first to assess actual levels of human exposure before issuing remediation order.

Russ Harding, former director of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, is senior environmental policy analyst with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Midland-based nonprofit research and educational institute.

©Midland Daily News 2004

Reader Opinion

Name: David Linhardt

Date: Jun, 06 2004

Mr. Harding's comments on a bioavailability study contains a great deal of misinformation that it is difficult to know where to begin making needed corrections.

Let me address just two points: (1) The number of locations sampled for dioxins is very, very few in in number. In total, only about 70 locations have been sampled -- plus no residential areas have yet to be sampled. The 1983 EPA sampling found TCDD in a range of 3 ppt to 270 ppt. The 1996 DEQ sampling found approximately the same levels of TCDD: 3 ppt to 288 ppt. The forecasted drop in dioxins levels that is the basis for the "wait long enough and all will be well" has yet to occur. There is a reason for why dioxin levels have not dropped as expected -- perhaps, Mr. Harding will enlighten up.

(2) Mr. Harding's support of "bioavailability" (determination of dioxin blood serum levels) has a slight problem -- there is very little data to indicate what levels of blood serum dioxins will result in health risk.

There are perhaps only 3 to 4 quality epidemiology studies that measured both cancer mortality along with dioxin blood serum levels. All were industrial studies and all found that blood serum levels greater than 200 ppt to 300 ppt were associated with statistically significant elevations of cancer mortality.

Suppose some Midland residents are found to have dioxin blood serum levels in the 100 ppt to 150 ppt range -- then what? This is no data that I am aware of that will indicate the health risk from this level of dioxin in the body. Without "sound science" of confirmed health risk, will we act or just wait longer.

One final point, it is well recognized that both young children and nursing infants ingest more dioxins per day that does the average US adult. In fact, the EPA has determined that a nursing infant, whose mother has been exposed to only background levels of dioxins (9.4 ppt-TEQ), will ingest approximately 156 times more dioxins on a daily basis (12 month average) than will the mother. The reason for the difference -- breastmilk is high in dioxins even with only background levels of exposure.

Are the risks to Midland's nursing infants higher because dioxin levels are higher -- who knows -- there is not enough data. We need to study this more -- perhaps, 20 to 30 years might be just right.

The proponents of delay and no remediation until "sound science" is absolutely, positively certain may be endangering the health and development of Midland's youngest citizens and that yet to be born.

 


For additional articles like this one, go to the Tittabawasse River Watch web site www.trwnews.net for complete coverage of the Tittabawassee River Dow Chemical dioxin contamination saga. . The Newspaper / Media page of our site contains an extensive archive of media articles dating back to January 2002. The source organization's web site link is listed to the right of the article, visit often for other news in our area. The Newspaper / Media page may be accessed by scrolling down to the bottom of the CONTENTS section and clicking on the Newspaper/Media link.