A GROUP of scientists who will recommend how the government supports Islanders who have high levels of a man-made chemical in their bodies will meet again this week to further discuss the merits of blood removal.
The PFAS Scientific Advisory Panel was formed in June to advise public health director Professor Peter Bradley on possible action after a blood-sampling programme last year found that those tested had higher than normal levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in their bodies.
PFAS is an umbrella term for a family of thousands of chemicals that were engineered for their indestructible and non-stick properties.
They are used in a huge range of consumer products, including waterproof clothing, furniture, cookware, electronics, food packaging and firefighting foams and are employed in a wide array of industrial processes.
Firefighting foam containing one of the substances, called PFOS, was sprayed at the Airport up until the early 90s. It flowed into streams and boreholes that were used for drinking and washing.
The 70 or so Islanders who volunteered to be tested last year all lived in water catchment areas flowing from the Airport.
The advisory panel, chaired by Dr Steve Hajioff, a former director of public health in London, is preparing five reports, with the first focusing on the efficacy of ‘therapeutic phlebotomy’ – the concept that removing blood and letting it naturally replenish lowers PFAS levels.
Dr Hajioff is joined by epidemiologist Dr Tony Fletcher, who is an expert on the health implications of PFAS, Professor Ian Cousins, who specialises on its environmental impact, and Grace Norman, the Island’s deputy director of public health, who is a standing observer at panel meetings.
Published studies into therapeutic phlebotomy include one where six people in Canada saw their levels of PFAS fall significantly over the course of a year. The average fall was 29% over the 12 months, including an estimated 12% drop which would have happened naturally anyway.
Another study which focused on a group in Italy also suggests that phlebotomy has a positive impact, although it has not been fully reported.
Part of the panel’s job is to advise if a clinical study in Jersey is warranted and, if it is, what should be its criteria.
