MEDICINE&SCIENCE
More at is a strong indication that the current, now sizable body of independent peer-reviewed scientific literature indicates there is harm and there are risks with this kind of oil and gas development.”
Industry representatives characterize the studies as inconclusive or directly contradicted by other studies, including some conducted by government analysts.
“Numerous studies that have actually measured emissions directly on well pads have shown that development is protective of public health,” said Seth Whitehead, researcher for an outreach campaign by the Independent Petroleum Association of America, which represents oil and gas producers. “It’s curious that studies funded, written or peer-reviewed by activists — as the Pennsylvania asthma study clearly was — never seem to include direct air measurements.”
Whitehead was referring to the Hopkins study’s senior author, Dr. Brian S. Schwartz, a Hopkins professor and unpaid, informal adviser to the Post Carbon Institute, a renewable energy think tank. The asthma study was independent of that work and was funded by the National Institutes of Health and several foundations, according to Hopkins.
Whitehead also pointed to Pennsylvania Health Department data showing that asthma hospitalization decreased statewide roughly at the same time the asthma study was conducted.
Rasmussen said better treatment or reduced energy demand likely pushed down statewide hospitalizations for asthma even as attacks remain higher near wells.
Nicole Deziel, a fracking researcher at the Yale School of Public Health, called the Hopkins study well designed and an “important advancement in how to capture exposure” to the drilling method because it accounted for the number of gas wells and how close they were to people’s homes and considered the types of activities from construction to production.
“This adds rigor to the approach and is an important step toward a better understanding of whether a certain aspect of the unconventional development process may be more hazardous,” said Deziel, an assistant professor in the department of environmental health sciences.
“This study provides evidence of an association between unconventional natural gas activity and asthma exacerbations,” she said. “More health studies like this are needed to see if similar results are observed in other settings.”
The data from various studies has been enough to raise concerns among health care professionals. The American Medical Association has called for disclosure of chemicals used during fracking and monitoring of human exposure.
A group of activist medical organizations called Concerned Health Professionals of Maryland formed to oppose fracking.
Asthma is a serious lung disease affecting 25 million Americans, said Katie Huffling, a nurse and director of programs for the Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, one of the member groups. Attacks can cause wheezing, coughing and shortness of breath, and can be fatal if untreated. She said the latest study combined with other research should push state lawmakers to extend the fracking moratorium or ban the practice.
She said fracking is still relatively new, having only taken off in the past 10 to 15 years, which is not enough time to see the full scope of health and environmental consequences. But she said the studies show an association.
“Researchers are going in and looking afterward to see if it’s impacting people living nearby, and unfortunately we are seeing potential,” she said. “The Hopkins study adds to a growing body of knowledge showing, yes, for people living around the hydraulic fracturing sites, there are negative health impacts.”