http://markwrite.co.uk/Incinerator.htm

The map referred to in above article is at:

http://ukhr.org/incineration/kirkleesarea.pdf

This is more recent article which mentions suicide increase in Bridgend after Crymlyn Burrows incinerator started.

http://www.runcornandwidnesweeklynews.co.uk/runcorn-widnes-news/runcorn-widnes-local-news/2010/07/08/runcorn-facing-suicide-and-infant-mortality-increases-claims-incinerator-researcher-55368-26804926/

Here’s relevant question by Darren Johnson. Southwark’s 2008 infant mortality rate was 7.0 per 1,000 live births. Kingston upon Thames was London Borough with lowest rate in 2008 at 0.9 per 1,000. The 2002-2008 aggregated data at ward level shows that incinerator emissions are obviously linked to high infant death rates.

http://legacy.london.gov.uk/assembly/assemmtgs/2010/mqtjan27/minutes/written-answers.pdf

Incinerators
Question No: 41 / 2010
Darren Johnson
A constituent asks, is there any evidence to suggest that the SELCHP and Kings College Hospital incinerators which flank Southwark contributed to the Borough having the highest infant mortality rate in London in 2008?
Answer from the Mayor:
My health team are making enquiries to get hold of the necessary data to furnish you with a full reply and I will send this to you as soon as possible.
In the meantime you might suggest to your constituent that they write to their local Director of Public Health with their request. The address is:
NHS Southwark
PO BOX 64529
London
SE1P 5LX
Tel: 020 7525 0400
*
Infant morality rates
Question No: 42 / 2010
Darren Johnson
Will you publish electoral ward-level data and a map showing the 2002-2008 infant mortality
rates in London?
Answer from the Mayor:
In some boroughs there are only five infant deaths a year, so rates at ward level for single years would be extremely unreliable.
While DMAG could combine several years worth of data to calculate a ward rate, one of the stipulations of their licence is that they do not publish the data online. If you wish to discuss the data in more detail can I suggest you contact Andrew Collinge, Assistant Director of Intelligence,
on extension 4652.

Thank you for your letter dated 8th December. You have written to me about incinerators on a number of occasions and I do not think that I can add much to my earlier replies. As you know, our recent statement on Municipal Waste Incinerators deals with the subject in some detail and we will be discussing the possibility of a national study of infant mortality with Professor Elliott.

I am surprised by your criticism of Professor Elliott’s work. He is a most distinguished epidemiologist with a long series of important publications to his name. If you have points to make about his published work it might have been more appropriate to have written to the editors of the journals in which it was published or to Professor Elliott himself. I am copying your letter and this, to him.

Yours sincerely

Justin McCracken

Chief Executive

From: Michael Ryan
Sent: 08 December 2009 15:52
To: Justin McCracken
Cc: Cllr Alan Buchan; maliks@parliament.uk; Daniel Kawczynski; Jon Simcock; Dave Morris
Subject: Will the HPA offer any evidence that the proposed Peterhead incinerator will have “no negative effects on residents” (Sky News, 8 December 2009)?

Dear Mr McCracken,

You should tell Paul Elliott, upon whose incinerator/cancer “study” you’ve relied, how to construct a study. Professor Elliott didn’t bother about wind direction or the use of a “control”, ie an area with no pollution source to use as a comparison. The Elliott study compared cancer rates in two concentric circles around incinerators, ie “like with like” and found no significant difference.

I’ve not sought to prove that incinerators cause infants to die – but what I have proved beyond any reasonable doubt is that according to Office for National Statistics data, the infant death rates in electoral wards which are subject to PM2.5 emissions from incinerators and other industrial sources (eg power stations, oil refineries etc) are always high. The ONS data also reveals electoral wards where there have been zero infant deaths for many consecutive years and these “zero infant death wards” are always in locations that are free from PM2.5 emissions from incinerators & other industrial sources.

Cllr Buchan represents Peterhead residents and he’ll have read in Buchan Observer of 17 November 2009 that I’ve examined infant death rates in electoral wards around incinerators.

Here’s a ward map of Kirklees Borough in Yorkshire which has ten wards where the 2004-2008 infant death rate greater than or equal to 7.5 per 1,000 live births:

http://ukhr.org/incineration/kirklees.pdf

Note that the ten high infant death wards are all linked and if you look at the same set of data for the wards in Bradford, you’ll find another ten high infant death (ie 7.5 per 1,000 & above) forming a continuous “chain” around the Ciba incinerator which is in “Wyke” ward in southern part of Bradford. These ten “high infant death wards” in Bradford that are part of the 20-ward “chain” are: Tong, Little Horton, Great Horton, City, Toller, Heaton, Thornton, Wrose, Eccleshill, and Bradford Moor. There’s also a group of six Bradford wards with 2004-2008 infant death rates ranging frpom 5.0 to 7.4 per 1,000 live births contained within the ten high infant death wards: Wyke, Royds, Wibsey, Clayton & Fairweather, Manningham, and Bowling & Barkerend…continues

http://ukhr.org/incineration/kirklees.pdf

http://www.ukhr.org/incineration/justinmccracken8june2009.pdf

http://www.mlive.com/living/saginaw/index.ssf/2009/04/saginaw_county_infant_mortalit.html

http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/wfnews/1592749.Concerns_over_infant_death_rates_in_Chingford_Green/

http://www.hounslowchronicle.co.uk/west-london-news/local-hounslow-news/2008/08/21/baby-death-rates-soar-109642-21573869/

Kind regards,

Michael Ryan,
Shrewsbury