Dr. O'Conner: Alberta Oils Sands and rare cancers and sickness:

[Toma]

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/07/qa-canada-oil-sands-linked-health-woes-2014718111922892889.html


Fort Chipewyan, Canada - Dr. John O'Connor is the first physician to speak out about a possible adverse link between the oil sands and human health. While working in Fort Chipewyan, he became increasingly concerned about the growing number of rare cancers he saw among his patients in Fort Chipewyan.

Fort Chip, as it is more commonly known, is the oldest settlement in Alberta province. Located on the north shore of Lake Athabasca, it's a community of fewer than 1,000 mostly First Nation and Metis people, also resides directly downstream from Fort McMurray's renowned oil sands.

When in early 2006, Dr. O'Connor suggested that cancer could be caused by the oil industry's polluted runoff from the oil sands, "all hell broke loose", as he put it.

He was accused of misconduct by Health Canada, and spent the following 2 years and eight months trying to clear his name and reputation. In the end, he was cleared of all charges. He has not changed his opinion and remains determined to find out what is making his patients sick.


A battle between economy and environment
This month, the Mikisew Cree First Nation and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation in conjunction with the University of Manitoba, publicly released a report that shows an association between environmental contaminants from the oil sands and the declining health and well-being of people living in Fort Chip. Specifically, it shows the extent of heavy metals and other contaminants in country foods harvested by indigenous people in the region.

We spoke with him at the clinic in Fort McKay.

Al Jazeera: What is your latest reaction to this report?

John O'Connor: This is yet another scientific report, this time paid for by the community itself, that confirms again that the tar sands mining industry is having a severe adverse impact on Fort Chip, on traditional foods in this instance and with the cancers. The numbers have increased since the last tally was done. And it begs immediate action.

AJ: What came to your attention at first and why?

O'Connor: I started medical care in Fort Chipewyan in 2000. [Over time] I got to know the community, the stories I heard especially from the elders, about the changes in their environment over the past 15 years, were quite striking.

Then I got to know what their health was like, and from very well kept charts from the nursing station in Fort Chip, it was obvious that there was a sort of burden of illness in the community that I didn't expect.

I began to accumulate test results that were of concern. Issues related to auto-immune diseases for instance, quite a bit of lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, which I didn't expect, but also cancers in numbers and of types that I really couldn't explain.

I talked to my colleagues in Fort McMurray, some of the specialists about this issue and if in their experience, they'd seen what I was seeing.

What I got back from the specialists who I deal with on a regular basis was that yes, there is a burden of illness in the community, you're right, and I brought it to the attention of the authorities, as is my duty.

[kdwebber]

I studied this when I was in university. Pretty hard to ignore the evidence, unless of course...

[FraserB]

^ So you must have the cancer rates and types going back to the start of oil sands development right? Can you post it?

He fails to point out:

- The results that fell within the expected range or below it
- The fact that many residents have also been employed in uranium mining, which is linked to the development of gall bladder and extrahepatic bile duct cancers
- A 1972 study of 1000 subjects in South America under similar conditions that returned 10 cases of cancer where 8 were expected
- The cases were it was found he misdiagnosed cancer types, the presence of cancer at all or the fact he inserted a few non-Ft. Chip residents into his numbers. 3/12 cases of colon cancer diagnosis and 2/6 cholangiocarcinoma cases is not an enviable confirmation rate
- The rate of cholangiocarcinoma can vary hugely depending on geographic location (0.1-96 per 100k) and that there is no incidence rate info for Canada (2009 report)

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by FraserB
^ So you must have the cancer rates and types going back to the start of oil sands development right? Can you post it?

He fails to point out:

- The results that fell within the expected range or below it
- The fact that many residents have also been employed in uranium mining, which is linked to the development of gall bladder and extrahepatic bile duct cancers
- A 1972 study of 1000 subjects in South America under similar conditions that returned 10 cases of cancer where 8 were expected
- The cases were it was found he misdiagnosed cancer types, the presence of cancer at all or the fact he inserted a few non-Ft. Chip residents into his numbers. 3/12 cases of colon cancer diagnosis and 2/6 cholangiocarcinoma cases is not an enviable confirmation rate
- The rate of cholangiocarcinoma can vary hugely depending on geographic location (0.1-96 per 100k) and that there is no incidence rate info for Canada (2009 report)

That's all well and good, but Oil Sands=Bad so I'll chose to disregard everything you said :thumbsup:

[Nitro5]

I thought there was an issue with substance abuse and gas huffing on that reserve as well

[killramos]

Not to mention it's a none fact that, for the same reason the oil sands are mineable, there has always been bitumen that flows into the Athabasca. It literally seaps out of the hills. The formation is present at surface.

I'm sure there is plenty of natural gas that is off gassing around the entire area...

Now this stuff is 100% natural and has absolutely 0 to do with development. I imagine your genius doctor accounted for that (ie a baseline prior to development).

No? That's to bad.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Nitro5
I thought there was an issue with substance abuse and gas huffing on that reserve as well

When I first heard this story on CHQR a few days ago, that's exactly what I thought.

Well that, diet, and general lifestyle.

[ekguy]

Despite all the deniers and head in the sand'ers....whether this is truth or not we can't deny the fact that the oil sands produce immense amounts of pollution. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

[Toma]

Remember when they used to say fracking can't cause earthquakes too?

Or that the chemicals can't enter the water supply...

Will this make it 3 for 3 industry lies proven false?

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by ekguy
Despite all the deniers and head in the sand'ers....whether this is truth or not we can't deny the fact that the oil sands produce immense amounts of pollution. It would be ridiculous to think otherwise.

So does life in general, and let's not forget that we need that pesky oil for heat, food, and products.

Most people are not in any denial about pollution in general. But c'mon, let's be realistic in how to address the issue.

[Arash Boodagh]

When a new war on terror starts in the future, the same argument can be made... we need oil and human life is but a small sacrifice for the greater good of a new world order, a one world government.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Arash Boodagh]

I really like how that doctor was charged for what came out to be pretty evident.
"Specifically, it shows the extent of heavy metals and other contaminants in country foods harvested by indigenous people in the region."
This should teach other doctors a lesson that if in the future more health problems do arise in Alberta... the government and its media will be the only ones making announcements.

[frizzlefry]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Wait, I thought people on the reserves live a wholesome and healthy life? Are you saying that a terrible lifestyle of drugs, fried & junk food and alcohol might be linked to a high cancer rate? Golly gee... imagine if that was true!

And, you know, the uranium mine. Uranium has been found in water samples up there. Other chemicals too, true. I think we can all agree that chemicals in the water bad. But 20% of the worlds uranium in produced up there. And people ion the community worked/work there. While obviously chemicals bad I would think the worst chemical and most likely cause of the cancers was uranium. Some chemicals may increase the risk but uranium is well known to cause cancer. And the population is also ageing, increasing the risk of cancer for the area.

But then again, the cancer rates there are not actually abnormal. As I recall there were 9 more cases annually of various cancers than the average for communities that don't feed off that river.

Link (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Data+shows+overall+cancer+rates+elevated+Fort+Chipewyan+video/9654721/story.html)


“The perception in Fort Chipewyan is that there is more cancer and to some extent it’s true,” Talbot said. “But this is a discussion we are having everywhere in the province. We have more people, so we have more cancers being diagnosed. It’s not unique to this community.”

If the government does not care about the thousands of smoking related cancers every year I doubt they will bat an eye at 9 people in a community with a huffing problem and ageing population.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Toma
Remember when they used to say fracking can't cause earthquakes too?

Or that the chemicals can't enter the water supply...

Will this make it 3 for 3 industry lies proven false?

Fracking doesn't cause earthquakes, or really any issues. Idiot.

But you'd know about it after studying it extensively on the interwebs, right? :nut:

[dirtsniffer]

Fracking can and does cause earth quakes
Usually up to about a 3 on the Richter scale.

Can't really feel them but they are recorded.

[lasimmon]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Fracking doesn't cause earthquakes, or really any issues. Idiot.

But you'd know about it after studying it extensively on the interwebs, right? :nut:

Yes they do. CNRL had a frac shut down recently due to an earthquake they caused.

[AndyL]

I vote we relocate the reserve to somewhere outside the oilsands region.

It's obvious their choice of nation land was foolhardy - choosing to live on a natural oilspill and all... So lets relocate them somewhere away from the oil where they can recover - (oh and royalties/leases/etc stop getting paid once relocated).

Seem fair?

I've been to that reserve - I'm 100% sure it's more remote reserve lifestyle vs environmental effects from the sands.

[Sugarphreak]

..

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by lasimmon


Yes they do. CNRL had a frac shut down recently due to an earthquake they caused.

Bullshit. Show me the prooves :rolleyes:

Any link between fracking and earthquakes is tenuous at best, and even then, most of them are micro-tremors that humans can't even feel.

Fuck, beyond is getting seriously full of conspiracy theory anti-anything types. I used to come here for news and thoughtful/funny debate, this shit is getting old.

[lasimmon]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Bullshit. Show me the prooves :rolleyes:

Any link between fracking and earthquakes is tenuous at best, and even then, most of them are micro-tremors that humans can't even feel.

Fuck, beyond is getting seriously full of conspiracy theory anti-anything types. I used to come here for news and thoughtful/funny debate, this shit is getting old.

I actually work in industry and that comes from the Completion Engineer who was running the project.

But I am sure you know more than he does :rolleyes:

[codetrap]

Originally posted by lasimmon
I actually work in industry and that comes from the Completion Engineer who was running the project.

But I am sure you know more than he does :rolleyes:

So, you're relaying what a friend of a friend said. Get your completion engineer to write a letter putting his professional designation on the line stating that, then we'll believe you. Until the, 'pics or didn't happen...'

I can't say that I know much about fracking, as I don't touch in that industry. What I do know is what I read on the internets, and it seems interesting to me that fracking has been happening since 1947, with over a million wells having been fracked. Yet this is only an issue now in some small areas? Just sayin...

[16hypen3sp]

Originally posted by AndyL
I vote we relocate the reserve to somewhere outside the oilsands region.

It's obvious their choice of nation land was foolhardy - choosing to live on a natural oilspill and all... So lets relocate them somewhere away from the oil where they can recover - (oh and royalties/leases/etc stop getting paid once relocated).

Seem fair?

I've been to that reserve - I'm 100% sure it's more remote reserve lifestyle vs environmental effects from the sands.

It is lifestyle... plain and simple. They want more money... and the way I see it, what they are doing is attempted extortion. No industry should have to pay them off... why should they? They make poor lifestyle choices and get paid handsomely for it???... Thats crazy.

They are the vocal minority. There are lots of aboriginal owned companies and individuals who work hard in the oil sands. They are paid well, do an excellent job and from what I hear, don't pay income tax. I respect these individuals and work along side them. I just wish they were more vocal in support of the industry instead of falling into the silent majority.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by codetrap


So, you're relaying what a friend of a friend said. Get your completion engineer to write a letter putting his professional designation on the line stating that, then we'll believe you. Until the, 'pics or didn't happen...'

I can't say that I know much about fracking, as I don't touch in that industry. What I do know is what I read on the internets, and it seems interesting to me that fracking has been happening since 1947, with over a million wells having been fracked. Yet this is only an issue now in some small areas? Just sayin...

Thank you. Better put than I could say it.

Note that I am NOT saying that fracking can NOT cause earthquakes. I just dont think there is definitive proof that it does. And for the record, just because someone has a degree, does not preclude them from being a moron.

[dirtsniffer]

I was at a presentation by a senior vp of crescent point and he openly talked about how hydraulic fracturing causes micro quakes, and on occasion ones you can feel.

This does not really have a known environmental impact but one theory is that all the micro quakes could cause stored energy in larger nearby faults to release.

[lasimmon]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Thank you. Better put than I could say it.

Note that I am NOT saying that fracking can NOT cause earthquakes. I just dont think there is definitive proof that it does. And for the record, just because someone has a degree, does not preclude them from being a moron.

I am not going to get into a argument because I won't divulge the source, but it was not a "friend of a friend" it was him telling me his project was delayed until an investigation was complete.

Take it as you will. Were not talking massive quakes, but micro quakes you can sometimes feel as Dirtsniffer mentioned.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by lasimmon


I am not going to get into a argument because I won't divulge the source, but it was not a "friend of a friend" it was him telling me his project was delayed until an investigation was complete.

Take it as you will. Were not talking massive quakes, but micro quakes you can sometimes feel as Dirtsniffer mentioned.

Ok, so basically much ado about nothing.... I have to admit, after reading up on this stuff, I'm more concerned about geothermal/wastewater disposal than the actual fracking. That seems to be where the issue is.


Microearthquake
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A microearthquake (or microquake) is a very low intensity earthquake which is 2.0 or less in magnitude.[1] They are very rarely felt beyond 8 km (5 mi) from their epicenter.[1] In addition to having natural tectontic causes, they may also be seen as a result of underground nuclear testing or even large detonations of conventional explosives for producing excavations. They normally cause no damage to life or property, and are very rarely felt by people.[1]

Microquakes occur often near volcanoes as they approach an eruption, and frequently in certain regions exploited for geothermal energy[citation needed], such as near Geyserville in Northern California. These occur so continuously that the current USGS event map for that location usually shows a substantial number of small earthquakes at that location.e

[Seth1968]

I couldn't care less if fracking brought upon the occasional earthquake (either minor or major), as such few deaths wouldn't compare to the tens of millions of millions that would horribly die without oil extraction.

Sacrifice the one to allow thousands to live, as there is no viable alternative energy source. Otherwise, drastically reduce human population to compensate.

BTW- It seems to me that Canadian oil companies are bending head over heals to be as environmentally "friendly" as possible, and Canada is a world leader in such regard.

In other words, shut the fuck up, and see how far your, "I'm going to take my pocket knife and live in the woods" opinion takes you. You'll be be running back home after that berry poisened you, or a bear bent you over.

[ExtraSlow]

The technology to measure tiny eathquakes is now pretty advanced and easy to obtain. I have firsthand knowledge of a company monitoring a frac treatment under some critical infrastructure here in alberta to see if it made any earthquakes.
In this instance, no local earthquakes were detected, but they did detect a few medium sized ones in China that were happening at the same time.

[16hypen3sp]

Originally posted by Seth1968
BTW- It seems to me that Canadian oil companies are bending head over heals to be as environmentally "friendly" as possible, and Canada is a world leader in such regard.

Not all of them are. But 99% do go above and beyond regulations. Major oil sands producers have capital available to purchase and install major pieces of equipment that can clean up contaminated by-products... most of which is resold to customers.

They do a good job... too bad they are constantly attacked over a shovel going into the ground. That's all I ever see the media covering... the mine. Not the equipment cleaning the whole process up, or reclaimed land... just the mine.

[killramos]

You know I bet using dynamite in a mine had potential to cause earthquakes / be felt at surface.

But no one actually cares about that...

Considering if you put a seismometer on the ground and jump near it it will measure a response you can honestly make the data look like whatever you want it to.

[dirtsniffer]

Originally posted by codetrap


Ok, so basically much ado about nothing.... I have to admit, after reading up on this stuff, I'm more concerned about geothermal/wastewater disposal than the actual fracking. That seems to be where the issue is.



frac water disposal has nothing on SAGD. also what the fuck is geothermal disposal?

your only concern should be how much freshwater is consumed by settling ponds or injection systems.


Originally posted by Seth1968

BTW- It seems to me that Canadian oil companies are bending head over heals to be as environmentally "friendly" as possible, and Canada is a world leader in such regard.


Canada isn't a world leader in energy regulations, but Alberta does lead Canada. The AER does keep awesome records and does make producers responsible. The OGC isn't too far behind, but Sask and MB are pretty unregulated.

Don't get me started on the states...
:nut:

[codetrap]

Originally posted by dirtsniffer
frac water disposal has nothing on SAGD. also what the fuck is geothermal disposal?

your only concern should be how much freshwater is consumed by settling ponds or injection systems.
What I was discussing wasn't specific to the Oilsands.. it seems all the issues aren't with the fracking itself, but with the wastewater disposal. From what I understand, that leftover fluid is simply pumped waaaay down and left there when everything is all done.

Wastewater..
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/earthquakes-triggered-by-fracking-wastewater-in-oklahoma-1.2695536

Geothermal..
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/geothermal-drilling-earthquakes/

I did some more reading on it last night, and apparently the geophysicists are working on safer methods of geothermal energy extraction.


All of this totally off the original topic though, but it makes for some interesting reading after the kids have gone to bed, or on a coffee break. :D

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by killramos
You know I bet using dynamite in a mine had potential to cause earthquakes / be felt at surface.

But no one actually cares about that...

Considering if you put a seismometer on the ground and jump near it it will measure a response you can honestly make the data look like whatever you want it to.

THAT is the basis of flaw.

But no one actually cares about that.