|
BALTIMORE (AP) — Scientists using federal grants spread fertilizer
made from human and industrial wastes on yards in poor, black
neighborhoods to test whether it might protect children from lead
poisoning in the soil. Families were assured the sludge was safe and
were never told about any harmful ingredients.
Nine low-income
families in Baltimore row houses agreed to let researchers till the
sewage sludge into their yards and plant new grass. In exchange, they
were given food coupons as well as the free lawns as part of a study
published in 2005 and funded by the Housing and Urban Development
Department.
The Associated Press reviewed grant documents
obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and interviewed
researchers. No one involved with the $446,231 grant for the two-year
study would identify the participants, citing privacy concerns. There
is no evidence there was ever any medical follow-up.
Comparable
research was conducted by the Agriculture Department and Environmental
Protection Agency in a similarly poor, black neighborhood in East St.
Louis, Ill.
The sludge, researchers said, put the children at
less risk of brain or nerve damage from lead. A highly toxic element
once widely used in gasoline and paint, lead has been shown to cause
brain damage among children who ate lead-based paint that had flaked
off their homes.
The researchers said the phosphate and iron in
the sludge can bind to lead and other hazardous metals in the soil,
allowing the combination to pass safely through a child's body if eaten.
The
idea that sludge — the leftover semisolid wastes filtered from water
pollution at 16,500 treatment plants — can be turned into something
harmless, even if swallowed, has been a tenet of federal policy for
three decades.
In a 1978 memo, the EPA said sludge "contains
nutrients and organic matter which have considerable benefit for land
and crops" despite the presence of "low levels of toxic substances."
But
in the late 1990s the government began underwriting studies such as
those in Baltimore and East St. Louis using poor neighborhoods as
laboratories to make a case that sludge may also directly benefit human
health.
Meanwhile, there has been a paucity of research into the
possible harmful effects of heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, other
chemicals and disease-causing microorganisms often found in sludge.
A
series of reports by the EPA's inspector general and the National
Academy of Sciences between 1996 and 2002 faulted the adequacy of the
science behind the EPA's 1993 regulations on sludge.
The chairman
of the 2002 academy panel, Thomas Burke, a professor at the Johns
Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, says epidemiological studies
have never been done to show whether spreading sludge on land is safe.
"There
are potential pathogens and chemicals that are not in the realm of
safe," Burke told the AP. "What's needed are more studies on what's
going on with the pathogens in sludge — are we actually removing them?
The commitment to connecting the dots hasn't been there."
That's not what the subjects of the Baltimore and East St. Louis research were told.
Rufus
Chaney, an Agriculture Department research agronomist who co-wrote the
Baltimore study, said the researchers provided the families with
brochures about lead hazards, tested the soil in their yards and gave
assurances that the Orgro fertilizer was store-bought and perfectly
safe.
"They were told that their lawn, as it stood, before it was
treated, was a lead danger to their children," said Chaney. "So that
even if they ate some of the soil, there would not be as much of a risk
as there was before. And that's what the science shows."
Chaney
said the Baltimore neighborhoods were chosen because they were within
an economically depressed area qualifying for tax incentives. He
acknowledged the families were not told there have been some safety
disputes and health complaints over sludge.
"They were told that
it was composted biosolids that are available for sale commercially in
the state of Maryland. I don't think there's any other further
disclosure required," Chaney said. "There was danger before. There
wasn't danger because of the biosolids compost. Composting, of course,
kills pathogens."
The Baltimore study concluded that phosphate
and iron in sludge can increase the ability of soil to trap more
harmful metals including lead, cadmium and zinc. If a child eats the
soil, this trapping can let all the material pass safely through a
child's system.
It called the fertilizer "a simple low-cost"
technology for parents and communities "to reduce risk to their
children" who are in danger of lead contamination. The results were
published in Science of the Total Environment, an international
research journal, in 2005.
Another study investigating whether
sludge might inhibit the "bioavailability" of lead — the rate it enters
the bloodstream and circulates to organs and tissues — was conducted on
a vacant lot in East St. Louis next to an elementary school, all of
whose 300 students were black and almost entirely from low-income
families.
In a newsletter, the EPA-funded Community Environmental Resource Program assured local residents it was all safe.
"Though
the lot will be closed off to the public, if people — particularly
children — get some of the lead contaminated dirt in their mouths, the
lead will just pass through their bodies and not be absorbed," the
newsletter said. "Without this iron-phosphorus mix, lead poisoning
would occur."
Soil chemist Murray McBride, director of the
Cornell Waste Management Institute, said he doesn't doubt that sludge
can bind lead in soil.
But when eaten, "it's not at all clear
that the sludge binding the lead will be preserved in the acidity of
the stomach," he said. "Actually thinking about a child ingesting this,
there's a very good chance that it's not safe."
McBride and
others also questioned the choice of neighborhoods for the studies and
why residents were not told about other, possibly harmful ingredients
in sludge.
"If you're not telling them what kinds of chemicals
could be in there, how could they even make an informed decision. If
you're telling them it's absolutely safe, then it's not ethical,"
McBride said. "In many relatively wealthy people's neighborhoods, I
would think that people would research this a little and see a problem
and raise a red flag."
The Baltimore study used a compost of
sludge mixed with sawdust and wood chips packaged as "biosolids," the
term for sludge preferred by government and the waste industry.
"What
we did was make the yards greener," said Pat Tracey, a Johns Hopkins
University community relations coordinator who recalled helping with
the lawn work. "They were bald, bad yards. It was considered sterile
fertilizer."
Baltimore environmental activist Glenn Ross says
choosing poor neighborhoods destined for demolition makes it hard to
track a study's participants. "If you wanted to do something very
questionable, you would do it in a neighborhood that's not going to be
there in a few years," he said.
HUD documents show the study's
lead author, Mark Farfel, has pursued several other studies of lead
contamination including the risks of exposure from urban housing
demolitions and the vacant lots left behind.
Farfel has since
moved to New York, where he directs the World Trade Center Health
Registry surveying tens of thousands of victims of the Sept. 11
attacks. He denied repeated requests for interviews and referred
questions to Baltimore's Kennedy Krieger Institute, the children's
research facility that was the recipient of HUD grants with Farfel as
project manager.
The institute referred questions to Joann
Rodgers, a spokeswoman for Johns Hopkins. She said a review board
within its medical school approved the study and the consent forms
provided to families that participated. "The study did not test
children or other family members living in the homes," she said.
Some of Farfel's previous research has been controversial.
In
2001, Maryland's highest court chastised him, Kennedy Krieger and Johns
Hopkins over a study bankrolled by EPA in which researchers testing
low-cost ways to control lead hazards exposed more than 75 poor
children to lead-based paint in partially renovated houses.
Families
of two children alleged to have suffered elevated blood-lead levels and
brain damage sued the institute and later settled for an undisclosed
amount.
The Maryland Court of Appeals likened the study to Nazi
medical research on concentration camp prisoners, the U.S. government's
40-year Tuskegee study that denied treatment for syphilis to black men
in order to study the illness and Japan's use of "plague bombs" in
World War II to infect and study entire villages.
"These programs
were somewhat alike in the vulnerability of the subjects: uneducated
African-American men, debilitated patients in a charity hospital,
prisoners of war, inmates of concentration camps and others falling
within the custody and control of the agencies conducting or approving
the experiments," the court said.
Discuss this article on the forums. (0 posts)
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gbpCMPX9_kRtYkL1Yv9-OzuVxFfQD901S4002
|