an environmental

biologist, I often run across data

. that: has been part of someone

~else’s study, and I wonder if they

have asked the questions that in-
terest me.

So it is, with part of the recent

B. C. Cancer Survey conducted

-jointly by federal and provincial
governments. ,

My data are lists of cancer
statistics for B.C. which were
brown-bagged to me. I don’t

know the time period of the

data, or how it was collected, or
much else about it, or even if it is
very accurate. However, it was
collected by the Health Ministry,
so it is probably fairly accurate.
I decided to play games with
the data to see what truths lurk-
ed there.
' I asked the simple questions:
(1) Were the lung cancer deaths
-. significantly greater for men in
the areas leading the province in
this.cause of mortality, than the
_ lung cancer deaths in the trailing
areas, where air quality was
relatively cleaner? (2) Was this
true also for women? (3) How
many deaths due to lung cancers
in Prince George and Vancouver
_were, -attributable to air pollu-
tign’
. To answer this question, I
tabulated total deaths, cancer
deaths and lung cancer deaths
for my. subjectively determined
polluted schoo! districts of Van-
‘couver, Sooke, Prince George,
‘Ft. Nelson, Kimberly, Nanaimo,
‘Richmond and compared them
‘to the same kind of data from
.the relatively cleaner areas of
Sunshine Coast, Central Coast,
Vancouver Island West, Kettle
Valley, Lillooet, Grand Forks,
‘and Arrow Lakes, and applied
very simple statistical calcula-
tions on the data.

Figures for Men

From the data it is clear that
total deaths were. 96,641.
Cancers caused 18,495 (19.138
percent) among males in the
polluted sample, and lung
cancers formed 5,350 (5.5 per-
cent of the total-deaths.

In the unpolluted areas, for -

males, total deaths recorded
were 5,221 of which cancers

‘caused 839 (16.06 percent), of -
which lung cancers formed 187,

(3.58 percent).

For males, Sooke was the lung
cancer leader at 6.79 percent of
total deaths while the Central
Coast was the lowest at 1.41, per-
cent,

Is it possible that the dif-
ference was due to pollution?

- Pollution could well be a co-
factor, along with smoking and
other factors in promoting or in-
itiating cancers. I say this
because lung cancer is relatively
rare among Eskimo peoples,
even though many smoke.
- Smoking has the effect of
‘burn-damaging the alvaeolar
cilia which ‘normally carry
‘pellutants out in the sputum, so
this could facilitate the onset of
cancers.

Figures for Women
In the polluted areas for
females, total deaths were

66,748 while cancer deaths were |

13,950 (20.98 percent) of which

Commentary —

by Jorma Jytkkanen

lung caricers formed 1,322 (1,99
percent).
~ In the unpolluted areas, for
females, total deaths were 3,005,
of which cancers: contributed
592 (19.7 percent), of which lung
cancers caused 70 (2.33 percent).

Since this last figure is greater
than the level in the polluted
area, it appears that there isn’t
much influence of area on in-
cidence in females. -

The worst area for lung cancer
for females was at Prince
George at 2.83 percent of total

deaths, while the lowest area was

Vancouver Island West with
zero lung cancers reported.

Thus, the difference. could be
attributed to air pollution, that
is 2.83 percent, though the Van-
couver Island sample is small
which could bias the interpreta-
tion. But one would expect that
jung cancers would develop
there, given sufficient time into
the future.

-I arranged the data for com-
parative purposes and compared
the mortalities between the
polluted areas for both sexes, us-
ing a powerful statistical method
known as Analysis of Variance.

For males, the finding of a
statistical increase is highly
significant, with less than one
percent probability that the
observed difference was due to
chance.

Men probably have a much

higher incidence of cancer due to
occupational exposure to harm-
ful pollutants, such as welding
fumes, chromium, zinc,
Pesticides, carcinogenic
chemicals at both work and
home, mill effluents, etc;
For females, there appears to
be little provincial effect of loca-
tion on lung cancer incidence,
though of course there will be
areas with lesser and greater
amounts, and one must keep in
mind that I chose a small bit of
the data for study.

Probably, the working en-
vironment of females, like of-
fices, is about as clean as her
other working environment, the
home.

Extra Cancer Deaths

~ Due to Pollution
If in Vancouver males,
surplus lung cancer deaths com-

_ pared to the Central Coast were

due to pollution — and there are
many assumptions to make in
accepting this estimate — then
lung cancer mortalities in Van-
couver caused by pollution alone
could run as high as 3,148 males
extra. -

The estimated proportion due

‘to pollution takes on a stronger

dimension especially if‘one con-

_ siders all of Canada, wherever
people are exposed ‘to air pollu- —

tion.

In Prince George, where three
mills share the air shed, surplus
deaths among males would be
approximately 161 males extra.

’ These results indicate that
much lung cancer is due to
polluted air, -and this causes a.
large and significant. loss of.
human lives, particularly among

the male segment. of the popula-
tion.

Correlation -isn’t, however,
causality, but there is ample
scientific literature to  cor-
roborate a clear link between
pollutants and lung cancers, and

the interested -reader is referred

to biomedical abstracts for more
information.
Recommendations
_ Since this cause of mortality is

-largely preventable, by the in-

stitution of regulations requiring
downscaling of air pollution,

these deaths, if not ‘spurious.

statistical artifacts, are therefore
unnecessary.

The health costs and loss of
life attributed to this source of
mortality should be borne and
compensated by the producers
of air pollution, as should the
clean up, without passing the
cost on the the public, since the
polluters have enjoyed the pro-
fits resulting from the sizeable
amount of human suffering in-
dicated above.

They should share respon- F

sibility for these deaths with the
government officials who licens-
ed the pollution..

Perhaps a class action should
be considered.

One must also consider the
mortality due to air pollution as
it affects asthma sufferers, those
with TB, emphysema, bronchitis
and other pulmonary diseases,
for a more comprehensive pic-
ture of pollution’s impacts. I
don’t recommend .that people
trapse off to areas with less lung
cancer, unless they suffer lung
irritation, at least not without
checking to see if there are
other, perhaps worse pollutants
affecting other systems there.

3992-B Old
Lakelse Lake Rd.
| Terrace, B.C. ~
V8G 3V1

Thornhill

Josie is now working
at The Hair Hut.

YOUR HOMETOWN LOCALLY OWNED AND OPERA TED NEWSPAPER

EDITORIAL ESSAY AND ART

CONTEST |

Submissions are still being accepted for the Review’ s Editorial Art and.
| Essay Contest. Grade 11 and 12 students are eligible for *100 for the-
best Essay and *100 for the best Editorial Cartoon. ”

“Men’s & Ladies’ Unique |
Hairstyling

‘Terrace Review ~- Wednesday, September 21, 1988 7

Slean air as an election is issue, and
pollution as a by- -product of profit —

Vancouver is very , unhealthy

and I recommend that most peo-
ple leave that city if they wish a
Jong life, or become very active
in cleaning it up.

Based on this crude study, .I
recommend that provincial
legislators and the federal
government meet to establish in-
creasingly strict controls on air
pollution, and immediately en-
force all existing legislation to
implement the best technology
available for clean up, so that we
can stop this needless loss of
human life.

Initial efforts by the health
department should be focused

continued on page 10

. Phone 635-2993
9:00 a.m. -6:00 p.m.
Tuesday to Saturday

Two essays and two cartoons
will also be awarded honorable
mentions, receiving certificates
and one-year subscriptions to
the Review. All three top win-
ners in each category will have
their submissions featured in up-
coming issues of the Terrace

Review,
Submissions should be on a

current events topic (politics,
ecology, human rights, tourism,

- .trade, ete:) with a focus on its

Televance to Terrace. The
editorial essay should include a

For further information contact Char at 635-7840
DEADLINE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 8,5 P.M,

critical analysis of the problem

_ Or situation and suggest possible

solutions or options for action.
Essays must be a maximum
length ‘of 500 words; typed
(double-spaced) and free of er-
rors; contain accurate references
to research sources (interviews
and/or literature); and be the
Original work of the student.

‘The editorial art submissions °,

should be on white paper, witha - ~~
maximum size of six and a half -

by nine inches, and should be
the original work of the student.

B
“S

EDITORIAL

expected of the public education system.

subject.

No time left to lose on
these important issues

With school back in session and the first meeting of
the local board behind us, education has once again
become a focal point for the community’s attention.
The issues that will come under discussion are
familiar: what students should be offered, how it will
be paid for and by whom, the interrelationships of
students, parents, administrators, teachers and elected
officials, and in fact what should and should not be

These questions have all been given a departure
point by the release last month of the final report by
the Royal Commissioner on Education, Barry
Sullivan. The report, despite some shortcomings, is.
probably better than would have been expected con-
sidering the time limitations and the vastness of the

A major area of concentration in the report Is the
changing role of the schools: aside from the nuts and
bolts of education, schools are now, willingly or other-