An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Toxic waste sites contain a broad range of suspected or confirmed human carcinogens, and remain a source of concern to many people, particularly those living in the vicinity of a site. Despite years of study, a consensus has not emer...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2008-06-01
|
Series: | Environmental Health |
Online Access: | http://www.ehjournal.net/content/7/1/32 |
id |
doaj-c7be4aa9d211458587324e05d92e0dae |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-c7be4aa9d211458587324e05d92e0dae2020-11-24T20:44:15ZengBMCEnvironmental Health1476-069X2008-06-01713210.1186/1476-069X-7-32An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sitesCullen Mark RBorak Jonathan BRussi Mark B<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Toxic waste sites contain a broad range of suspected or confirmed human carcinogens, and remain a source of concern to many people, particularly those living in the vicinity of a site. Despite years of study, a consensus has not emerged regarding the cancer risk associated with such sites.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We examined the published, peer-reviewed literature addressing cancer incidence or mortality in the vicinity of toxic waste sites between 1980 and 2006, and catalogued the methods employed by such studies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Nineteen studies are described with respect to eight methodological criteria. Most were ecological, with minimal utilization of hydrogeological or air pathway modeling. Many did not catalogue whether a potable water supply was contaminated, and very few included contaminant measurements at waste sites or in subjects' homes. Most studies did not appear to be responses to a recognized cancer mortality cluster. Studies were highly variable with respect to handling of competing risk factors and multiple comparisons.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We conclude that studies to date have generated hypotheses, but have been of limited utility in determining whether populations living near toxic waste sites are at increased cancer risk.</p> http://www.ehjournal.net/content/7/1/32 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Cullen Mark R Borak Jonathan B Russi Mark B |
spellingShingle |
Cullen Mark R Borak Jonathan B Russi Mark B An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites Environmental Health |
author_facet |
Cullen Mark R Borak Jonathan B Russi Mark B |
author_sort |
Cullen Mark R |
title |
An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites |
title_short |
An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites |
title_full |
An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites |
title_fullStr |
An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites |
title_full_unstemmed |
An examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites |
title_sort |
examination of cancer epidemiology studies among populations living close to toxic waste sites |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Environmental Health |
issn |
1476-069X |
publishDate |
2008-06-01 |
description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Toxic waste sites contain a broad range of suspected or confirmed human carcinogens, and remain a source of concern to many people, particularly those living in the vicinity of a site. Despite years of study, a consensus has not emerged regarding the cancer risk associated with such sites.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We examined the published, peer-reviewed literature addressing cancer incidence or mortality in the vicinity of toxic waste sites between 1980 and 2006, and catalogued the methods employed by such studies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Nineteen studies are described with respect to eight methodological criteria. Most were ecological, with minimal utilization of hydrogeological or air pathway modeling. Many did not catalogue whether a potable water supply was contaminated, and very few included contaminant measurements at waste sites or in subjects' homes. Most studies did not appear to be responses to a recognized cancer mortality cluster. Studies were highly variable with respect to handling of competing risk factors and multiple comparisons.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We conclude that studies to date have generated hypotheses, but have been of limited utility in determining whether populations living near toxic waste sites are at increased cancer risk.</p> |
url |
http://www.ehjournal.net/content/7/1/32 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT cullenmarkr anexaminationofcancerepidemiologystudiesamongpopulationslivingclosetotoxicwastesites AT borakjonathanb anexaminationofcancerepidemiologystudiesamongpopulationslivingclosetotoxicwastesites AT russimarkb anexaminationofcancerepidemiologystudiesamongpopulationslivingclosetotoxicwastesites AT cullenmarkr examinationofcancerepidemiologystudiesamongpopulationslivingclosetotoxicwastesites AT borakjonathanb examinationofcancerepidemiologystudiesamongpopulationslivingclosetotoxicwastesites AT russimarkb examinationofcancerepidemiologystudiesamongpopulationslivingclosetotoxicwastesites |
_version_ |
1716817990502055936 |