Hundreds of people crowded a meeting with Vermont state health and environmental officials after conflicting results of a recent study of asbestos disease in the area in January 2009.
The state Health Department study found an elevated incidence of deaths and hospitalization for asbestosis, a lung disease, among residents within a 10 mile radius of the now-closed Vermont Asbestos Group mine in Eden and Lowell.
The actual number of cases between 1994 and 2006 was three deaths and 14 hospitalizations, a small number but statistically significant for a small area, and the study did not attempt to determine how the patients had been exposed to asbestos. Um, the mine maybe?
The Health Department originally reported that it also found a higher incidence of lung cancer, then announced that finding was a mistake because one extra town was erroneously included in the study results.
“Now you are making all these statements about the ‘flawed survey.’ The fact that it was flawed did not get out,” said Betty Jones of Eden, who said her husband worked 50 years in the mine. “I have 200 acres that abuts the mine, and this makes my land worthless. What are you going to do about that?”
Dr. Wendy Davis, state health commissioner, apologized for the error about lung cancer, and asked for residents’ help in better understanding asbestos exposure in the area. She acknowledged that the report was preliminary and left many questions unanswered. She said its findings were significant enough that the Health Department did not delay alerting the public to its findings. At the very least, she said, it should make clear to residents that they should stay away from the closed mine.
For some residents, the report created new fears that their children’s health might be at risk. Many others, like Jones, were upset and angry that the 13 towns involved had been stigmatized and property values would drop.
“If you were going to ignite this kind of fear, why didn’t you get in your car and drive up here and take some case histories?” demanded Mary Walz of Hyde Park. Releasing the report without understanding the cause of the asbestos illness was irresponsible, she said, to applause from the audience.
Walz and others were outraged that the hospitalization data used did not contain patients’ names, so the 14 hospital discharges might have represented many fewer patients.
Others denounced the state’s suggestion that the mine itself might be declared a Superfund site, a designation that triggers a federal cleanup program, saying it would further stigmatize the area.
Asbestos was mined for nearly 100 years on Belvidere Mountain in Eden and Lowell.
The Health Department study did not conclude that living in one of the 13 towns creates a risk for contracting asbestosis.
A statistical analysis of historical data from years soon after the mine closed in 1993, the study found that asbestos diseases were more common in the 13 towns than in the rest of the state, but it did not determine why.
In most cases, the state does not know the identity of the people who contracted asbestosis or how they might have been exposed to airborne fiber. Living near an asbestos mine perhaps?
The most curious thing about the situation in Vermont is why it isn’t being taken more seriously with regard to health hazards. Like Libby, Montana.
For your information regaring the article above. The type of asbestos mined in Vermont is NOT the same type of fiber as in Libby, Montana. The fiber in Vermont is chrysotile. The Health Department cites 3 cases of asbestosis as a large part of their data which makes the study “statistically significant”. Fact: one of those cases was a man, born in Ohio who was a shipbuilder and welder. As shipbuilding is well documented for high rates of occupational exposure and this gentleman only moved to the area one year prior to his death at age 77, he DID NOT get his exposure from the vermont mine. Case #2 was a man who worked at the mine for a year and was a dairy farmer. His surviving family said that he died of farmers lung and he was a heavy smoker. There was no autopsy. This information identifies the case as having occupational exposure as well. This leaves one case remaining which no longer makes the rate of asbestosis any higher than the rest of the state. Please correct you article or contact me more more data so that your web site accurately reflects THE FACTS.