The Latest

Endocrine and hormonal disruption

Two new worker health studies found oil spill exposures were associated with increased risks for longer-term endocrine and metabolic conditions, increasing risk of weight gain and fatigue, high cholesterol, heart attack, stroke, and type 2 diabetes. These findings are consistent with earlier clinical studies (D’Andrea) and findings from earlier spills (the Prestige and Hebei Spirit oil spills).

Hair loss

Finally - the science has caught up with numerous reports of hair loss from oil spill exposures, dating back to the Exxon Valdez. A 2019 review article confirms that  exposure to a variety of contaminants can cause “alopecia” or hair loss. Related to oil spills, particulate matter (like from burning oil and using dispersants) can trigger “alopecia areata” – an autoimmune condition that appears as patchy baldness on the scalp, and oil chemicals (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) can trigger “androgenetic alopecia” – hair loss that follows a predictable pattern of thinning and loss.

Marine mammals

Widespread population declines in 7 species of toothed cetaceans (sperm whales, beaked whales, and small dolphins) occurred during a 10-year period following the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster. The declines “vastly” exceeded predictions based on oil spill exposure alone, leading scientists to conclude there is an ongoing decline from “heavy exploitation of Gulf of Mexico offshore resources.”

Oil Spill Studies on Worker and Public Health

Government Publications and Records

National Academy of Sciences, 2022. Oil in the Sea IV: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 

Concludes there is a causal relationship between oil spill exposures and neurological and cardiovascular harm. (Studies finding a causal relationship between oil spill exposures and respiratory harm were published too late to be reviewed). Many new disease pathways and mechanisms are described in wildlife and human health sections.

National Response Team, Emergency Responder Health Monitoring and Surveillance (ERHMS) framework, Technical Assistance Document, 2012.

Acknowledges that emergency disaster responders are getting sick below levels of pollutants thought to be "safe." Introduces "uncertain exposures" from chemical mixtures and recommends pre-, during, and post- deployment health monitoring (of individual workers) and surveillance (of the population of workers) to supplement air quality studies to better assess health risk.

National Archive and Administration Records (NARA) on the BP Deepwater Horizon oil disaster.

 

NARA, FOSC Documents, USCG Phase V, Admiral Nash Documents, Dispersants. HOV00009027 Batch B. EPA Mathy Stanislaus email, 7/3/2010, at 37-38.

Validating that coastal spraying of dispersants did occur and showing FOSC approval and records of coastal spraying were "removed from daily reports" issued by Unified Command.

NARA, FOSC USCG Phase V, Admiral Nash Documents, Dispersants. HOV00009027 Batch A. Notes from EPA-USCG Conference Call: Dispersants, 6/22/2010.

Showing concerns raised over subsea dispersant use regarding daily volume (Rear Admiral USCG "RADM" Watson at 24), lack of protocol and pre-planning (Admiral USCG "ADM" Allen at 24, and lack of data to justify BP's argument that subsea use reduces hazardous oil gases ("VOCs") at the surface (EPA Administrator Jackson at 25). Bottom line: "Don't leave it to BP" (ADM Allen at 25).

Court Documents

BP Deepwater Horizon Multi-District Litigation (MDL 2179)

Multi-district litigation rewards plaintiffs’ attorneys with a common benefits fee, whether they win or lose their cases. The fee is negotiated with and paid by the defendants. Concerned citizens recommend tying lead lawyers' common-benefits fees to the benefit those attorneys actually confer on the plaintiffs.

Lead attorneys receive $87 million each in the BP oil spill MDL 2179, Times Picayune,
4/13/2017

Plaintiffs’ attorneys to share $680 million in the BP oil spill MDL 2179, Times Picayune,
10/27/2016

MDL 2179, Eastern District of Louisiana

522-Exhibit 1:  Fairley v BP, CV No. 17-3988 Section M (4), Eastern District of Louisiana, Order and Reasons ruling, 11/03/2022.

The court ruled that BP had no “duty” to initiate a worker health monitoring program. This rule prevails in future disasters until either the regulatory agencies or Congress establishes a duty to conduct such a program to protect the health of emergency disaster responders.

MDL 2179, Northern District of Florida, Pensacola Division

 

Document 547, 10/28/22. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Admission of Plaintiffs’ Expert Opinions Because of BP Defendants’ Spoliage of Evidence of Plaintiffs’ Exposures.

Reveals how BP contrived to avoid conducting worker health programs recommended by three federal agencies to adequately assess workers’ health risk from toxic exposures.

547-Exhibit 6:  Greg Lotz (CDC/NIOSH/DART) email, 6/24/2010 at 1.
Reveals why BP’s air quality monitoring program was insufficient to assess worker exposures.

Reveals why a worker health monitoring program is critical to assess worker health and conduct long-term health studies.
Reveals the purpose of BP’s voluntary air
quality monitoring program was about public perception.