Letters

(page 1 of 4)

Dear Messenger,

Your report "Fury over Parkwood Health Survey" and the accompanying report by Andrew Green are seriously misleading. In publishing them with such prominence you do a disservice to the people of Burngreave.

While correctly reporting the increase in self reported symptoms, Louise Vennells only mentions in passing our finding of no significant increase in cancer or birth defects. Why didn’t you give more prominence to this important and reassuring result?

Andrew Green makes much of reporting bias. One can argue against reporting bias being the whole explanation for symptoms close to the site but there are good reasons to think it may contribute, as has happened elsewhere. Brian Wilson's comment that it is "a polite way of saying victims are lying" is simply wrong, though it is evidence of his considerable skills as a spin doctor. The fact is we cannot exclude reporting bias, the work we are doing now is intended to clarify how much it does contribute.

Andrew Green quotes a number of studies showing an association between landfill sites and the health of residents and suggests the review by the Chemical Incident Response Service is wrong to say literature is inconclusive. Of course it is possible to find studies which have shown a link - but there are many which have not. If you look at all the research on landfill sites (which CIRS did and clearly Andrew Green didn’t) then one cannot conclude there is a consistent link. In fact, the one aspect of ill health where the evidence is strongest is the relationship between landfill and birth defects. We have shown that this link doesn’t exist for the Parkwood site.

Andrew Green reports local residents say other factors such as wind and geography should have been taken into account. It was the local resident representatives on the study steering group who requested that we didn’t just look at possible health effects down wind as they did not want to assume that ill health was caused by something windborne.

Andrew refers to the PCT as "an agency of the state" and suggests that we are unable to believe what ordinary people say. Although this has a conspiratorial ring which makes entertaining journalism, it is again untrue. Our job as a PCT, and mine as Director of Public Health, is to investigate thoroughly suggestions the Landfill site may cause ill health. We do this for the local population, not the State or anyone else. The Messenger is supported by public funds, and is just as much an "Agency of the State" as is North Sheffield PCT!

Andrew is right we are only dealing in probabilities. However it is possible further work will strengthen evidence of a link between the Landfill and ill health (though of course it may not be). The simple fact is, at this moment, the evidence is not strong enough and any calls we made for the site to be closed would almost certainly be rejected. The best way to protect the health of the people of Burngreave is to complete our studies and to base any action on the results.

Yours faithfully
Jeremy Wight, Director of Public Health

Over the years the Messenger has heard numerous reports from Parkwood residents about times when their children can’t play outside because dust and smells choke them and irritate their airways. They feel ill. We reported their anger that the PCT, that Dr Wight says acts on their behalf, still refuses to join their calls for the site’s closure despite it’s own surveys results.

Although the news of no rise in cancers is welcomed, it is unclear how reassuring this really is when increases in other illnesses are said to be due to chance. The numbers are just too small to prove anything, as was always likely to be the case.

It wasn’t our intention to suggest a conspiracy, but the uncertainties of science are held as a superior form of knowledge over the judgements ordinary people make from their every day experiences. While this is the case, the landfill operators will continue to say that nothing is proved, and no precautions will be taken to protect the health of those living near it. -ed