Traffic on 595Alert.org increases daily. One of the benefits of having an open site such as this, on which reader comment is solicited and encouraged, is that from time to time, someone who has something new and different to add to the discussion will surface. Such is the case with Dr. Marc Fishman, a physician who practices in our local area and who, as a concerned resident, was moved to write to us as follows:

“There is abundant evidence that living near a major highway is bad for health, especially the health of children. The incidence of asthma is increased, and total lung capacity is diminished in children. This may be lifelong, and could significantly impact peak athletic performance. The incidence of leukemia is also much higher, as well as other cancers. Heart disease is also increased. 

      It seems logical that elevating the highway will significantly increase the exposure of nearby residents to a wide variety of toxins. Perhaps the EPA should evaluate the proposed elevation of the highway.”

Internet Seminar Held To Discuss Health Effects

Recognizing that this represented yet another facet of this I-595 issue— one that had not yet been broached—Mitchell Chester hosted and moderated a meeting on the evening of July 5^th to which were invited a number of public officials, representatives of homeowners’ associations in the affected area, and other interested citizens.

This was a unique kind of meeting because none of those attending had to leave their homes or offices. It was conducted virtually, on-line, and permitted all attendees to assemble audibly via telephone conference call, observe the material that was presented on their computer screens, and ask any questions of Dr. Fishman that arose as he spoke.

Dr. Fishman addressed the group without any prepared text, saying that his interest in the planned highway expansion started when he saw it featured on one of the local news channels. He had been shocked to hear that the State of Florida, “in its wisdom,” had seen fit to decide that an elevated highway was the most favored plan for solving the traffic problem on I-595.

He was deeply concerned, he said, about the health issues that would arise despite the possible benefit of such construction. “Lots of research shows that people living in polluted areas, transportation corridors, etc. suffer from that exposure.” And, said Fishman, “There is lots of variation in the exposure to various toxins.”

Cancer Risks and Elevated Pollutants

These include carcinogenic, as well as other significant irritants and toxins. “An elevated highway is going to spread this stuff over a wider area. It seems logical…that elevated pollutants will travel a lot farther.”

According to Dr. Fishman, much research shows that the first cases actually develop in utero; and that over time, those cases have developed into a propensity for leukemia. Exceptional athletes’ performance can be reduced; and they will experience shortness of breath. “Perhaps the victim won’t even be aware of the difference between his best performance and that of which he would have been capable under other circumstances…. Certainly the maximum lung capacity deteriorates with age; but it deteriorates faster when living in polluted areas.” He went on to say, “You simply notice, as you age, that you can’t do things you should be able to do because of diminished lung capacity and pulmonary insufficiency.

“There is a parallel line between your normal performance and reduced performance as you grow older and your capacity diminishes.” This means that your capacity to do things, were you living in an unpolluted environment, would of course decrease with age. But, if you live in a polluted area, the starting point for that decrease would be considerably lower. And, your ability would decrease at the same rate perhaps; but the difference between what you should be able to do at the more advanced age, and what you can do, will remain just as wide.

In response to a question about the kinds of effects pollution can have on those living within polluted areas, Dr. Fishman replied that they included a wide variety of negative effects, including such things as bladder cancer, breast cancer, leukemia, and lung cancer. Encouraging more traffic, at an elevation, just seems a bad thing to do.

Citing information that his son related to him from an interesting course he had taken, Dr. Fishman made the point that new roadways don’t reduce the traffic. They just seem to encourage more people to live there and use the roads. “Evidence suggests that, over the years, it just increases the number of cars that use the roadways.”

We Are All Susceptible

At this point, the moderator posed the question as to whether the preponderance of research reported in such publications as the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, the British Medical Bulletin, etc. focus more on children or on adults.

Dr. Fishman replied that it deals with both adults and children. He noted that, except for the U.S. News and World Report review which was very readable, the studies he had provided were all well-researched and refereed articles and not the typical magazine kind of stuff. However, he said, children are, obviously, more susceptible because they’re growing.

While there is plenty of evidence that, over the long haul, women exposed in childhood would be more likely to have breast cancer in the fourth, fifth, and sixth decade, the best argument to stress is the effect on children because people are more sensitive to taking care of our children. There was a study, for example, that suggested that all the leukemias in England seemed to occur within a kilometer, or a half a kilometer of major roadways. The argument to make here is that we wouldn’t want to expose our children to an increased risk of getting leukemia because we live in a nice house in a nice city that lies next to a roadway that they decided to elevate.

According to Dr. Fishman, there are many, many studies available. Another study, for example, examined the exposure of a mother, delivering a child to a school bus, and studied the difference between the mother’s exposure, and that of the children who sat in front of the bus and in the back of the bus, with the windows open and closed. (The mother had the least exposure, next was the child in the front, and the greatest exposure was the case of the child in the rear of the bus, windows open, closest to the exhaust.)

The moderator posed the question, “How much research has there been done on elevated roadways?

Dr. Fishman’s reply: “I’m not familiar with evidence from elevated highways, but it would seem logical that pollutants would spread further.”

FDOT's Air Quality Analysis

Mr. Chester then called to the group’s attention the Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) Air Quality Report dated June 13^th and noted that it was prepared by Reynolds, Smith, and Hills, Inc., who seems to be the private contractor behind the design and implementation of this project, at least from the planning standpoint. He called into question the “level of uncertainty” concerning the thoroughness and accuracy of that study. Citing the Wikipedia definition of Roadway Pollution Dispersion Modeling, Chester questioned whether or not FDOT had employed such a technique in the course of their study. [Ed: That study makes reference only to CO (carbon monoxide) and none at all to other toxins or the particulate pollutants that would cause cancer.]

Another question posed to Dr. Fishman was whether the elevation of the highway, while making for a wider dispersal of the particulate matter, would not diffuse it more and make it less dense.

Dr. Fishman’s response was that, at ground level, a certain portion of the exhaust would stay close to the ground and settle there; but, with the same car on an elevated roadway, a smaller amount will probably settle close by while a greater amount will float further away. And, with an increasing number of cars, you will increase the overall level of pollution. “No, you won’t end up with more people exposed to less pollution,” he said.

Another questioner who apparently had asked a similar question on another occasion added, “Raised highway, more cars, more turbulence…the pollutants kicked in the air spread laterally.” Said she, “It is not intuitive at all. More cars, more pollution... FDOT is extremely vague on the subject. The quality of air is simply glossed over. “

Mr. Chester replied, “You can’t find real analysis in the FDOT study. It’s not a scientific study at all. By elevating the highway, you’ll have more cars, more dispersion….more effect on humans because it will float farther and affect more people.”

Environmental Lawsuit

He added, “’Googling’ the topic,” he had come across an article in USA Today which was relevant. According to that article, US-95, in the vicinity of Las Vegas, is a congested road in a fast-growing area. Its 6-lanes now serve some 300,000 cars traveling on it each day, “morphing twice daily into a rush-hour parking lot.” From the governor on down, policymakers support a plan to add an additional four lanes to ease the problem.

The Sierra Club sued to stop the project, saying the federal government “failed to consider health consequences and alternatives to highway construction as required by law.” While this is not the first lawsuit ever filed on environmental issues, it was a landmark case because it was the first ever to have been “based on scientific research into traffic-generated pollution,” and it could have had far-reaching consequences.

According to Chester, this suit was dismissed at the local level but the court, but an appellate court ordered a stay on the construction of the road and they ultimately settled with the local people.

Dr. Fishman’s brief letter, according to Chester, “could well pave the way for FDOT to pursue this in a more responsible way.”

According to an article in the New York Times (January 2007), a new study suggests that children growing up within a third of a mile of the roadway had an inordinate number of physical problems.

The Need For An Authoritative, Independent Analysis

All of this makes it imperative that we ask for, and demand, an authoritative analysis of what the implications are for our community, health-wise. “It’s not just property values, it’s affecting lives!”

Another issue—one that is high on the list of Davie Councilperson Susan Starkey’s concerns—also affects the health and welfare of those involved. This is the matter of rescue capability when an accident or mishap occurs on the elevated roadway. A rescue crew must first travel to one end or the other of that seven or eight-mile span to gain access—and then thread its way through the traffic that’s at a standstill all the way back to the site. Those precious minutes can condemn the victim or victims to death!

A final admonition from Dr. Fishman: Beware of government guidelines for safe levels of toxins. History has shown that, when the government issues guidelines for what should be considered acceptable, they never seem to find that they have been too strict. On the contrary, experience usually shows that they should be reduced still further. Says Dr. Fishman, “In an urban society, you have to be exposed to a lot of things that are not healthy. Don’t take the government’s word that you’re safe at the levels they recommend.” He adds, “From my experience—everything I’ve looked at—less is better.”

He went on to describe the long-term hazards of particulate matter as small as 2.5 microns that get deep in the lungs and are not only impossible to get rid of but whose effect is cumulative as time goes on. “They,” says he, “are the particles that will cause lung cancer.”

This issue is but one of many; and, as one attendee observed, we must be careful not to rely upon this as the strongest issue. The argument can always be made that the highway was there first, and those who live near it followed. “But,” observed another speaker, “if the circumstances are such that the highway is no longer adequate to support the traffic, then we are certainly justified in claiming that the change we object to has also followed us here!”

The meeting was concluded with a request that all attendees continue to watch www.595Alert.org and do as much as they can to get involved in the issue and make their feelings known in quarters where it will do the most good.