Research: Sufferers with PA coronary heart failure close to fracking had been extra more likely to be hospitalized

12,000 patients were analyzed over a period of 8 years

• Reid Frazier

  Reid R. Frazier is an energy reporter for The Allegheny Front, a Pittsburgh-based public media company dealing with the environment in Pennsylvania. His work has been broadcast on NPR and Marketplace.

December 21, 2020 | 5:13 am

Heart failure patients who live near fracking operations were more likely to be hospitalized than patients who live further away, according to a new study.

Drexel and Johns Hopkins researchers examined medical records of 12,000 heart patients in Pennsylvania between 2008 and 2015.

The authors reported that patients with heart failure were significantly more likely to be hospitalized compared to increased fracking activity in the area. Heart failure includes any condition, such as heart attacks, that causes the heart to be unable to pump enough blood to meet the body’s needs.

Elderly patients and those with more severe heart failure “appear to be particularly susceptible to adverse health effects,” the authors say.

The study appeared in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. The study was funded by grants from the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), which is part of the National Health Institutes.

The study’s lead author, Tara McAlexander, a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at Drexel University’s Dornsife School of Public Health, said increased noise, air pollution and traffic from fracking could explain the higher levels of hospitalizations for cardiac patients in her Study found.

“We thought about all of these potential exposures and how they could affect heart failure. And pretty much all of them really suggested that if you were exposed to (fracking) and found yourself in this vulnerable state of heart failure, they would get worse. “

The authors reported that they had no data on the diet or lifestyle of the study subjects, but doubted that the higher hospitalization rates they observed in cardiac patients who lived near fracked gas sources could be attributed to these factors.

Joan Casey, Assistant Professor of Environmental Health Sciences at Columbia Universitysaid in an email that the study “is contributing to increasing evidence that fracking is linked to adverse health outcomes.”

Casey, who worked with some of the co-authors of the paper as a PhD student at Johns Hopkins University but was not involved in the study, said she suffered from the same limitations “from essentially all epidemiological studies of fracking to date: us me do not know which component of fracking is responsible. Is it air pollution? Water pollution? Noise pollution? Psychosocial Stress? Something else?”

Casey also noted that the study ends in 2015 “and therefore may not reflect current Pennsylvania fracking exposures”.

Zach Rhinehart, assistant professor of cardiology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical School, said there has been a demand for “high quality evidence” of fracking and health effects for years.

He said the study’s statistical model was strong enough to essentially rule out causes other than fracking for the increased hospital stays noted by the authors.

Fracking “seems really to be associated with hospitalization for heart failure ”. said Rhinehart, who was not involved in the study. “And it doesn’t seem like other (factors) explain it away.”

Rhinehart said that since fracking is a huge part of the state’s economic and energy portfolio, “it would be really important to know what is causing the problem.”

“You can’t deny the fact that natural gas development is an important economic engine and very important to the livelihood of many people,” said Rhinehart. “So it’s really important to find out why this club is there.”

McAlexander said the study fits into a growing list showing increased health problems for people living near fracking. These problems include an increased incidence of asthma, heart problems, and Mental health Problems as well as health problems related to pregnancy, to like birth defect, Premature birth and low birth weight.

“These activities – particularly unconventional natural gas development and fracking – have a negative impact on the health of the local population.”

For this reason, she says that fracking should be banned.

“We know enough to know that we shouldn’t be doing this and that it is having a negative impact on the population,” said McAlexander.

Another co-author, Brian Schwartz, Professor in the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Healthhas public come out against fracking.

McAlexander acknowledged that burning natural gas instead of coal is widespread Air quality gains in the US, but said “The way the natural gas industry in this country produces natural gas shifts many of these health pressures to nearby populations. “

Nate Wardle, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, said the agency is reviewing the study. The agency is funding two studies to examine the link between fracking and health outcomes such as cancer, asthma and poor birth outcomes.

“It is the department’s goal through these studies to better understand both long-term and short-term acute effects,” Wardle said in an email.

A spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, asked to comment on the study, said the agency would “review the (Department of Health) study,” which is expected to be completed in December 2022, and that the agency will “I will consider the study and others who may like it when they revise their oil and gas regulations in the future.

A Pennsylvania Grand Jury in June 2020 report Both the DEP and the health department were beaten up for failing to protect the public from the health effects of fracking.

Fracking industry groups say They develop the state’s natural gas resources “safely and responsibly” while also meeting state requirements for industry.

“Our industry is based on advanced scientific research and protecting the health and safety of the communities in which we live and work is a top priority, ”said Dave Spigelmyer, president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, in a statement.

Rhinehart, of the University of Pittsburgh, said any negative health effects from fracking should be weighed against any positive factors the industry brings to those who benefit it – such as workers or landowners who have leased properties for gas drilling.

“Maybe now they can get their blood pressure medication or their cholesterol medication or smoking cessation tools, ”Rhinehart said. “It could be that the economic benefits of this allow more people to live better lives and be happier and healthier despite the negative effects of pollution. “

Editor favorites