Challenges Associated with Monitoring Long-Term Health Effects After a Major Accident: Lessons from a Large Chemical...

Major incidents, such as large fires and floods, often trigger a complex series of environmental and health risk assessments involving multiple institutions and authorities. They can also lead to long-lasting concerns from members of the local communities about the possible impact on their health and environment. Here, we use the example of a large fire that occurred in 2000 at a chemical storage site in Sandhurst, Gloucestershire, England, to contrast evidence from official reports and scientific studies with the expectations of members of the local community. We reflect on how the handling of such an incident has evolved over the last two decades and how public involvement can be further improved in the future. Firstly, we present the results of a 20-year follow-up (2001-2020) retrospective small-area ecological epidemiological study with rates of overall cancer incidence, all-cause mortality and hospital admissions for respiratory disease in the exposed area compared with rates in the South West region of England. We also studied the ten years preceding the fire (1991-2000). Secondly, we discuss the limitations of these findings to alleviate the concerns of the local community. Finally, we use this case study to make recommendations about how to better manage this balance between scientific evidence and public concerns for future incidents. In line with earlier reports, the 20-year follow-up study did not identify any major increase in relative risks for cancer or mortality. Although an increase in admissions for respiratory disease was identified, this was also observed before the fire, suggesting that this may be due to other local factors. Despite these findings, members of the local community still believe that some local cases of cancer were caused by the fire. As rigorous as a long-term epidemiological study can be, it cannot determine causality between an incident and individual cases for a given health outcome, nor can it make up for the absence of data not-or only partly-collected after the incident (e.g., individual-level health register). This case study further highlights that engaging with local communities and managing their expectations and planning potential long-term follow-up studies immediately after a major incident should be carefully considered.