Surprise as Grenfell tower land study finds ‘no risk to health’

JULIA GREGORY
Local Democracy Reporter
yann@slpmedia.co.uk

A detailed study of scientific tests made at the site of Grenfell tower following the tragic fire of two years ago has found “no increased risk to health” from potentially contaminated land.

Tests were conducted to see whether dangerous chemicals existed in the soil, but a report published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said the levels of chemicals scientists found at test sights around the tower were “typical” of the amounts generally found in London.

Many residents living near Grenfell remain unconvinced by the findings and are demanding blood tests to determine whether health has been impacted in a lasting way by the fallout from the smoke and debris.

Scientists who carried this first investigation to help plan the focus of the second more detailed investigations recommend that the next set of tests look at community gardens and schools.

Kensington MP Emma Dent Coad, who is also a councillor for a ward near the tower, said she found the results “scarcely believable”.

She added: “They would have you believe that the ‘screening levels’ of the various contaminants they have tested for are way below the level we should be concerned about. So what happened to our toxins? Did angels take it all away?”

She added: “This report is frankly insulting. I have yet to meet anyone who finds it reassuring.”

Abbas Dadou, the chairman of the Lancaster West Residents’ Association, which included Grenfell tower, is one of those saying the tests findings are far from convincing.

“I am not really reassured. For me it does not change anything,” he said. “It’s too little, too late
anyway. They should do blood tests of people in the area.”

Environmental scientists took 93 samples from 21 sites within a 1km radius in and around Grenfell tower in April and May.

They found some of the lowest levels of soil contamination within the Grenfell tower cordon. Experts think it could be because of the clean-up or the water used by firefighters tackling the blaze.

While this area was significantly affected by debris as a result of the fire, the results suggests that the effect of either the clean-up of the debris and/or the firefighting water used during the fire is that there is very little detectable soil contamination.

They presented their preliminary findings to the community in July and delayed publication of the full results until this month because of the large number of readings they needed to assess.

Scientists said the levels they found were not at high enough concentrations to cause “an unacceptable risk” under the Environmental Protection Act.

The scientific advisory group which is overseeing the tests said it “did not think” there was an elevated risk to anyone’s health from potential land contamination because of the fire.

It also stressed that most of the chemicals found were at low levels so “long-term exposure to these chemicals would represent a low (minimal or without appreciable) risk to health”.

They discovered chemicals they would expect to find at fires, including brominated flame retardants, in very few samples and in low concentrations.

The next stage of investigation will do further tests for lead and other potentially cancer-causing substances. Scientists will also do more tests for asbestos and dioxins.

The report said: “There are no obvious patterns in the spread or levels of the substances found – if substances were present in the soil because of the fire, we would expect to see much higher levels closer to the tower and spreading outwards, but the checks did not find this.”

The Government’s chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, who chairs the scientific advisory group overseeing the tests, said his team “has confidence in the results from stage one” of the tests. This will be used to draw up plans for the second stage in the investigation.

He said he was satisfied that “the approach taken was scientifically rigorous and met the agreed specification”.

Earlier this summer fire toxicology expert Professor Anna Stec resigned from the scientific advisory group over her concerns about tests.

She did her own research within months of the fire and said there was “significant risk of contamination” and called for more research.

Her team from the University of Central Lancashire concluded there was a potential increased risk of a number of health problems, from asthma to cancer.

The second stage of the latest tests will include samples up to 1km radius from the tower, and will focus, as a priority, on schools, nurseries and community gardens which grow food.

However residents said they were concerned that tests were not done soon after the fatal fire in June 2017.

The Government advised that people who are concerned about their health should contact their GP, who can refer them for enhanced health checks.

They are also available at various clinics in North Kensington via community provider, Enhance, who can be reached on 020 3434 2500.