Flawed methodology, lack of emissions or exposure measurement raises doubt.

No linkage exists between natural gas development and adverse birth outcomes and nearly all cancers studied in a series of University of Pittsburgh-led reports released last night.

The Health and Environment Study, which was funded by former Governor Wolf’s administration with taxpayer dollars and has been in progress since 2021, aimed to explore potential correlations between unconventional natural gas development and cancer, asthma, and birth outcomes among children in southwestern Pennsylvania. The three-part study found no link between unconventional natural gas activity and childhood leukemia, brain or bone cancers – including Ewing’s Sarcoma. Researchers also concluded virtually no or limited effects on adverse birth outcomes, including preterm births, low birthweights and small for gestational age.

“There were no associations between unconventional natural gas development activities and childhood leukemia, brain and bone cancers, including Ewing’s family of tumors,” the study says.

These results are consistent with the existing body of research, particularly relating to the rare Ewing’s Sarcoma. Doctors, hospitals and medical professionals have all confirmed there’s no known environmental or lifestyle cause to the disease and Department of Health researchers found in 2019 that the cases in Washington County were not higher than those in the remainder of the state.

“Overall, there were no conclusive findings indicating that the incidence rates of Ewing’s family of tumors in Washington County and Canon-McMillan School District for female and male populations were consistently and statistically significantly higher than the rest of the state over the time periods reviewed,” the Pennsylvania Department of Health concluded.

While a statistical correlation to lymphoma and asthma exacerbations exists in the Pitt findings, flaws in the studies’ methodology as well as the researchers’ admitted limitations raise significant doubts about the conclusions.

“The asthma methodology is troubling, as it simply reproduces previously flawed studies and relies on faulty metrics rather than actual emissions and exposure data,” Marcellus Shale Coalition President David Callahan said in a statement Tuesday.

“All of the studies, in fact, failed to adequately consider other critical causational factors that may have affected the findings,” he continued.

A decade-plus of scientific research analyzing exposures and potential exposure pathways, including air emissions and water quality, confirms no threat of natural gas development to public health. In fact, researchers have criticized similar epidemiological studies regarding asthma for lacking rigor.

“Studies tying shale development to negative public health impacts used imprecise measures, failed to consider other possible factors, and, in some cases, were poorly designed,” according the Health Effects Institute.

***CLICK HERE TO VIEW A COMPENDIUM OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES****

“As an industry rooted in science and engineering, we take objective and transparent research seriously,” Callahan continued. “Our industry’s commitment to the health and safety of our workers and the communities where we’re privileged to operate is second to none, as our members continue to responsibly supply clean, reliable domestic natural gas essential to modern life.”

Here’s initial takeaways from University of Pittsburgh’s latest studies:

No connection between shale development and leukemia, brain and bone (Ewing’s) cancers.

Of the four malignant childhood cancers observed, there was “limited to moderate evidence” in support of an association between exposure to unconventional natural gas development or related activity (including nearby compressor stations, impoundment pools, or wastewater treatment facilities).

“In this study, no evidence was found to support an association between exposures to UNGD activities and other environmental factors and the risk of leukemia, [central nervous system] tumors, and malignant bone tumors, including [Ewing’s Family of Tumors],” which was the base-case for launching this study, Pitt researchers concluded.

These findings mirror those by the state Department of Health in 2019 that childhood cancer incidence rates in the Canon-McMillan school district actually decreased over the years studied. “Incidence rates…were not consistently and statistically significantly higher than expected in all three time periods analyzed,” DOH’s report concluded.

Rate of lymphoma correlation less than 0.1%, omits other possible causes.

Attention-grabbing headlines have latched onto “some links” found between development and lymphoma risks, but concerns over sample size, residency, and exposure proximity weaken the legitimacy of these conclusions – not to mention the rate of such risks is less than one tenth a percent.

“Our study estimates that rate would be 0.006% to 0.0084% for children living within 1 mile of a well,” the study cites.

Flawed methodology to account for proximity at the time of exposure was also used to reach these conclusions. Relying on birth certificate addresses within a 5-mile radius of activity and lacking the ability to track residence changes for these cancer cases, leaves a huge margin of error in attempts to connect the two. The researchers also make a point that the study was engineered to examine associations with diseases and not causes of diseases

“The researchers were unable to say whether the drilling caused the health problems, because the studies weren’t designed to do that,” the Associated Press reports.

The research also fails to account for other relevant factors – such as the uranium waste site located in Canonsburg or other pollutants – that could be associated with perceived higher risk rates. As the AP reports, “it can be difficult or impossible for researchers to determine exactly how much exposure people had to pollutants in air or water, and scientists often cannot rule out other contributing factors.”

Flawed methodology associates natural gas production phase – not drilling or completion phases – with exacerbated asthma outcomes.

The study’s use of a poorly-designed and discredited model to find a relationship to asthma attacks also raises doubts over the findings as a whole. Using a “well activity” metric as a proxy for measured exposures to pollutants is a “deeply flawed” approach, researchers published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, because it doesn’t use actual air measurements and assumes all wells in the state contributes to the exposure of all residents in the state, as opposed to those living near wells.

Production is also by far the least emissions-intense in the development phase, and actual air monitoring in Western Pennsylvania shows air quality is far below designated health-protective levels.

An independent ambient air monitoring program looked at all phases of development at a Washington County well pad in 2021, and determined the data “does not indicate that…well pad air emissions contributed to elevated increases in long-term average concentrations of potential health concern for either particulate matter (PM 2.5) or the measured volatile organic compound (VOC) species.”

Additional Resources: