The Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) in Ventura County, California, stands out as one of the state’s most contaminated areas. Over its nearly six decades of operation, this nuclear reactor and rocket testing facility experienced several incidents, including a partial nuclear meltdown in 1959, which led to significant pollution of the soil and groundwater with radioactive and chemical waste.
Declared a superfund site in 1989, efforts have been ongoing to assess the risks it poses to public health. Previous studies primarily focused on cancer rates among people living within a 5-mile (8-kilometer) radius of the site. However, a new study published in the journal Risk Analysis expands the scope, examining health outcomes among individuals living as far as 15 miles (24 km) away and exploring a range of chronic illnesses linked to exposure to contaminants.
The research indicates that residents closest to this superfund site might encounter higher rates of autoimmune, endocrine, and metabolic disorders.
A unique superfund site
Ventura County, known for its affluence, is an atypical location for a superfund site, which is typically found in lower-income and minority areas. This difference makes SSFL a noteworthy case for research. A team led by Jenna Blyler from the University of California’s Wrigley Institute for Environment and Sustainability conducted surveys among those living near SSFL to address some lingering questions.
They sought to determine if health risks extended beyond what previous studies had found and if these risks increased with proximity to the site. Additionally, they looked into how people perceive environmental health risks and whether their actions align with theoretical predictions about risk behavior and protective measures.
The researchers surveyed 475 residents within a 15-mile (24 km) radius of SSFL, with 56% of participants earning $100,000 or more per year. More than a third reported at least one health diagnosis since moving to their current homes. This aligns with national averages, but chronic illnesses are typically less frequent in wealthier communities.
The study found that 18% of those living within 5 miles (8 km) of SSFL had autoimmune diagnoses, in contrast to just 4% among those residing 11 to 15 miles (18 to 24 km) away. This pattern was also evident for metabolic and endocrine issues, with 15% of nearby residents reporting such diagnoses compared to only 2% of those farther away.
While these findings might suggest that certain health problems are more prevalent closer to the SSFL, Blyler noted in an email to Gizmodo that further research is needed to validate this, as the study was based on self-reported diagnoses that weren’t medically confirmed and didn’t account for the frequency or recurrence of individual conditions.
Unexpected behavioral responses
The study uncovered some unexpected patterns in resident behavior. Typically, research indicates that individuals who feel more equipped to handle risks are likelier to take protective measures. However, in this case, those who felt more threatened by contamination were more inclined to adopt precautions.
Cost often serves as a barrier to taking protective steps, yet here, residents who viewed protection as more expensive were actually more likely to take measures. Interestingly, while proximity to SSFL didn’t influence protective action, personal experience with illness did.
As climate change continues to impact our environment, understanding the public health risks associated with this site and how the local community responds will be increasingly vital. Research indicates that drought and wildfires—becoming more common—have worsened the spread of contaminants at the SSFL.
Blyler’s follow-up study will explore how perceptions of proximity to environmental hazards affect individual and community-level protective behaviors. “It may be that wealthier communities have the means or motivation to push for broader protective actions rather than focusing solely on personal safeguards,” she shared.
