HYDRAULIC FRACTURING, FOSSIL FUELS AND HEALTH RISKS

POSITION OF THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICIANS FOR

THE ENVIRONMENT QUEBEC CHAPTER

DECEMBER 2018

The hydraulic fracturing industry for fossil fuel exploration and exploitation has been developing
for several decades around the world, and has experienced a major boom in America over the
past decade or so. Unfortunately, before this industry was established, no study of the health
status of populations living near drilling sites was carried out. As a result, it is now very difficult
to measure the precise impact on the overall health of riverside populations. However, over the
past half-dozen years, several major public health studies have been conducted. These show a
clear deleterious impact on the health of populations at several levels, the extent of which
remains to be determined in ongoing studies. Of the thousand fracture chemicals used, 90% are
toxic to humans (1).

There are several worrying associations: a significant increase in the rate of low birth weight
babies has been reported in several studies (2, 3, 4), an increased risk of premature births (5),
and a higher risk of heart and neurological malformations in babies whose pregnant mothers
lived several kilometres from the drilling sites (6). An association has also been demonstrated
between this industry and an increased incidence of one type of leukemia in young people
(acute lymphoblastic leukemia) (7). Finally, several otorhinolaryngological, respiratory,
cardiological, neurological and dermatological problems have been reported in populations
exposed to drilling (8, 9, 10). There is, moreover, a clear association between the hospitalization
rate for many of these health problems and well density (11).
The environmental problems associated with the industry are of great concern: In addition to air
and water pollution, several cases of groundwater contamination have been described,
sometimes in major ways (1). Publications also report a significant increase in accidents
associated with intensive trucking around wells (1). In addition, in regions where drilling activity
is high, the risk of earthquakes is significantly increased (1). This has been confirmed by
geologists' associations on both the American and Canadian sides. The health status of workers
exposed to this industry is a major concern. They are exposed to often high levels of benzene,
hydrogen sulphide, silica, fine particles and several other pollutants. Unfortunately, this remains
poorly documented and monitored by the industry. The risk of accidents is also significantly
higher than in several other industrial activities (1, 12, 13).

It should also be noted that the impact of the arrival of this industry in a community is
significant both psychologically and socially. Several communities complain about the intense
stress induced by the presence of continuous industrial activity, the divisions that appear within
the population, and the sense of insecurity that is associated with it (14,15,16). Environmental
destruction also has a major impact on several groups: agricultural land subject to water and air
pollution, destruction of places significant to communities (17). And this can be particularly
harmful for some communities whose social fabric is already weakened. This is the case for First
Nations (1).

Finally, we must highlight the major negative impact on the climate: Methane emissions are
such that they totally cancel out the benefit so much touted by this industry. Several groups
believe that the deleterious effect on climate is worse with hydraulic fracturing, because of the
methane and ethane that are released into the environment, continuously or during major leaks
(1). Do we need to remember that global warming is humanity's most important public health
problem?

In conclusion, the health risks are of several kinds, biological as well as psychological and social,
and they seem to us to be major. Several American medical companies reiterated their great
concern about this industry a few years ago. Among the most important are: the American
Academy of Pediatrics, the American Lung Association and the New York State Medical Society
(1).

As a result, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment has made the following
recommendations:
1. The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment is calling for a complete ban
on all new hydraulic fracturing projects.

2. In addition, the Quebec Chapter of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the
Environment is calling for a halt to all fossil energy exploration and extraction projects in
Quebec.

Dr. Éric Notebaert MD MSc

Vice President, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE)

Coordinator, Quebec Chapter, ACME

MAIN REFERENCES :

1. Compendium of scientific, medical, and media findings demonstrating risks and harms of
fracking (unconventional gas and oil extraction). Fifth Edition March 2018. Concerned Health
Professionals of NY – Physicians for Social Responsibility

2. Shale Gas Development and Infant Health: Evidence from Pennsylvania. Hill Elaine L.
Cornell University. The Charles H Dyson School of Applied Economics and Development. Ithaca,
NY December 2013

3. Perinatal outcomes and unconventional natural gas operations in southwest

Pennsylvania. Stacey SL et al. PLOS One.DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0126425 June 03,2015

4. Hydraulic fracturing and infant health : New evidence from Pennsylvania. Currie J el al.
Science Advances 2017;3:e1603021 - 13.12.2017

5. Unconventional natural gas development and birth outcomes in Pennsylvania, USA.

Casey JA et al. Epidemiology 2016;27:163-172
6. Birth outcomes and maternal residential proximity to natural gas development in rural
Colorado. McKenzie LM et al. Environ Health Perspective 2014;122:412-417

7. Childhood hematologic cancer and residential proximity to oil and gas development.
McKenzie LM et al. Plos One. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170423 – Feb 15,2017

8. Gas Patch Roulette – How shale gas development risks public health in Pennsylvania.
Steinzor N. Earthworks’ Oil and Gas Accountability Project. October 2012

9. Associations between unconventional natural gas development and nasal and sinus,
migraine headache, and fatigue symptoms in Pennsylvania. Tustin AW et al. Environ Health
Perspective 2017;125(2):189-197

10. Association between unconventional natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale
and asthma exacerbation. Rasmussen SG et al. JAMA Internal Medicine 2016;176(9):1334-1343

11. Unconventional gas and oil drilling is associated with increased hospital utilization rates.
Jemielita T et al. Plos One DOI:10.1371.journal.pone.0131093 – July 15, 2015.

12. Endocrine disruptive chemicals and oil and natural gas operations: Potential
environmental contamination and recommendations to assess complex environmental
mixtures. Kassotis CD et al. Environ Health Perspectives 2016;124:256-264

13. Potential public health hazards, exposures and health effects from unconventional
natural gas development. Adgate JL et al. Environmental Science & Technology. 2014;48:8307-
8320

14. Psychosocial impact of fracking: A review of the literature on the mental health
consequences of hydraulic fracturing. Hirsh JK et al. International Journal of mental health and
addiction. July 2017. DOI:10.1007/s11469-017-9792-5
15. Psychosocial implications of unconventional gas development: Quality of life in Ohio’s
Guernsey and Noble Counties. Fisher MP et al. Journal of Environmental Psychology.
2018:55:90-98

16. Population size, growth, and environmental justice near oil and gas wells in Colorado.
McKenzie LM et al. Environmental Science & technology 2016;50:11471-11480

17. Salting the Earth – The environmental impact of oil and gas wastewater spills.
Environmental Health Perspectives 2016;124(12):a230-a235

18. Systematic review of the association between oil and natural gas extraction processes
and human reproduction Balise VD et al. Fertility and Sterility 2016;106(4):795-819