Muggah Creek Watershed
PUBLICATIONThe Halifax Chronicle-Herald
DATE Thursday May 27, 1999
PAGE A1
BYLINE Tera Camus
HEADLINE:
Birth defects higher in Sydney - study
Doctor won't link results to toxic sites
Sydney - More children are born with birth defects in Sydney than
in the rest of the province, says a new study commissioned by the
Joint Action Group.
The Birth Outcomes Report on live and stillbirths from 1988 to 1997
determined that for all major anomalies combined, the rates in
Sydney are about 27 per cent higher than in the rest of Nova Scotia.
"The increased rate in Sydney translates to about three
additional infants with a major congenital anomaly born in Sydney
_each year out of about 390 births per year," the report says.
Dr. Jeff Scott, Nova Scotia's chief medical officer, refuses to draw
a link to Sydney's toxic waste sites.
"Anytime there are any births with a major congenital abnormality,
that's concerning to the mother and family. I think you have to put
it in perspective (that) the majority of children born in Sydney
will not have any major congenital abnormality."
The study also found no statistical difference between low birth
weight and prematurity rates in Sydney than in the rest of the
province. But it showed more women miscarrying in Sydney and Cape
Breton County.
The report says of the 3,852 live and stillbirths in Sydney, there
were 41 perinatal deaths before the age of 28 days. Based on
provincial perinatal mortality rates, about 29 deaths would be
expected.
The report said neuro tube defects in Sydney were higher, as were
cardiovascular anomalies and ear, eye, nose and mouth abnormalities.
During the period of the report, 101,165 babies were born in Nova
Scotia, 2,724 with defects, including 132 in Sydney.
Dr. Scott advised pregnant women to consult with their health-care
provider and take vitamins, and he said they should probably avoid
taking a walk around the tar ponds.
"I've never recommended in terms of the coke ovens and the tar ponds
to be in contact with them. That's why there are fences around them.
I think all this study tells us is that there's increased rates and
all we can do is continue the work to encourage women for what's
necessary for a healthy pregnancy."
About two-thirds of all birth defects have no known cause.
But Dr. Linda Dodds says 20 per cent are linked to congenital makeup
and drug intake by the mother. Another five per cent stem from
chromosomal abnormalities while 10 per cent can be linked to the
fetus's environmental factors.
For example, women who must take insulin for diabetes have three
times the chance of delivering a baby with abnormalities.
** Dr. Scott said the Health Department is putting forward a proposal
** to research chemical exposure among pregnant women in Sydney.
** Several members of JAG pressed Dr. Scott to make the link between
** the troubles and the environment, but he refused.
** The report gives JAG "important information about the health status
of our community," said Michelle Gardiner, chair of JAG's health
studies group.
"It will be helpful in . . . identifying what effects, if any, the
has had on the health of people in Sydney."
Just last year, a mortality analysis conducted by JAG determined
Sydney-area residents were dying 16 per cent earlier than other
Canadians, or living 10 years less.
Cancer, heart diseases and 20 other killer diseases exceed national
norms, according to the Band-Camus study. Sydney has a 16 per cent
higher cancer rate per capita than anywhere else.
That study also found 13 per cent more children living outside
Sydney were dying before they reached age 15, while in Sydney the
number of childhood deaths was below the national rate.
JAG plans to initiate a study to determine what's killing people.
But many would argue that one need look no further than the toxic
waste sites that sit in the centre of the most heavily populated
area in Cape Breton.
** A 1985 study by Health and Welfare Canada warned that Sydney
** residents were in harm's way from pollution at the coke ovens site.
The coke ovens closed for good in 1988. In 1972, 2.84 tonnes of
toxic dust fell each day on Sydney, while in 1975, 18 tonnes of
sulfur dioxide emissions fell.
"The well-documented evidence of carcinogenicity of coke-oven
emissions, the largely uncontrolled and high level of emissions from
the Sysco plant . . . the close proximity of residential population .
. . support the contention that reopening the plant without emission
controls could be expected to result in an increase of morbidity and
mortality in Sydney residents and coke plant workers," the 1985
report concluded.
PUBLICATIONCape Breton Post
DATE Thu 27 May 1999
EDITION FINAL
SECTION/CATEGORY Letters
PAGE NUMBER5
BYLINEGermaine LeMoine
STORY LENGTH 673
HEADLINE:
Excluded three departed JAG without a fight
To the editor:
Over the past several weeks, our community has been showered with
letters to the editor and press releases relating to the
dissatisfaction of those affected by the recent Joint Action Group
roundtable decision to exclude employees of Sydney Environmental
Resources Ltd. and their immediate family members from the
decision-making working groups and committees of JAG.
The operant words here are ``excluded from the decision-making
process'' -- not from taking part in those JAG committees that
have nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with selecting the
methods of remediation that will lead to the cleanup of the Muggah
Creek watershed. There are in fact working groups or committees
which could benefit from the enthusiastic energy of the three SERL
employees who resigned from the JAG process.
Incidentally, these members and the others who have written
letters to the editor resigned from JAG prior to the roundtable
vote relating to the acceptance or rejection of the ethics
committee recommendation.
In reality, had these members stayed, along with some of the
others who seem to be intent on taking unwarranted shots at the
JAG process because of the roundtable decision, the ethics
recommendation would have been defeated.
In like manner, had any of the SERL employees cited in the ethics
review exercised their democratic right to appeal the ethics
recommendation, the majority vote required to reject the position
of the ethics recommendation would have made it a shoo-in for
those members of roundtable to overturn the ethics recommendation.
In view of these curious realities, it is difficult to understand
why the SERL members so affected resigned before the vote or
failed to exercise their right to appeal. It is a known fact that
many of the members of roundtable who clearly intended to vote
against the ethics committee recommendation made personal contact
with the SERL employees and those others who tendered their
resignation before the all-important vote at roundtable in an
effort to convince them to stay and vote before walking.
One must consider the difficulties associated with employees of
SERL being permitted to be members of the remedial options working
** group, the environmental data gathering working group, the
steering committee, and roundtable. These are the very groups that
will select and recommend to our government partners the type and
variety of remediation methods that will be used to clean up the
. If, for example, a decision were taken to
use incineration in any form, how would it be perceived by all of
the other companies that have put forward proposals relating to
the cleanup? How would the members of the community perceive the
selection of the SERL incinerator, if in fact it were ever
selected, given that SERL employees had a hand in the selection?
JAG prides itself on being an open and transparent organization,
one that polices itself, one that has developed reasonable and
workable policies that affect all who give so freely of their time
and energy to achieve the overall objectives relating to the
cleanup. The decision to exclude SERL employees from particular
working groups was taken only because some of those employees
failed to remain aloof when particular motions and voting took
place.
In effect, they placed themselves in a position of conflict of
interest and left the process no alternative except to take
corrective action to protect the integrity of the process, and
indeed of fellow community-minded volunteers who take exception to
those who fail to recognize they have an obligation to abstain
when in a conflict of interest.
The truth is that those who have left the JAG process by resigning
rather than ``fighting'' for their democratic rights through the
use of the most effective tool at hand -- their vote -- have no
one to blame but themselves. At this point, it is hoped that all
or some of them will reconsider and rejoin those committees and
working groups of the JAG process that do not place them in a
conflict of interest position.
Germaine LeMoine,
public information officer,
Joint Action Group
