Coming up on KCCI 8 News Close Up, new information about Iowa’s cancer crisis and environmental exposures. Our environment and our health are very much linked. The air that we breathe, the water we drink, potential risks Iowans are facing. The things in this report are things that by and large we. Don’t have *** say in whether we’re exposed to them. It’s not just something that happened today and you get cancer tomorrow. What experts say needs to change if we can get *** better handle on monitoring what’s going on the land to make *** difference for Iowa’s future. We have to think about our children, our grandchildren, the generations that come after that. You’re watching KCCI 8 News. Close up. Iowa has one of the highest cancer rates in the country, and *** lot of people are asking why and what we can do about it. *** new report takes *** closer look at whether our environment could be part of the answer. Good morning. Thanks for joining us for KCCI 8 News Close Up. I’m chief political reporter Amanda Rooker. The Iowa Environmental Council and the Harkin Institute focused on concerns they say they hear frequently from Iowans concerns about pesticides, forever chemicals, nitrates, and radon. Is there *** link between those factors and cancer? KCCI chief investigative reporter Suzanne Benky sat down with the report’s authors to talk about what they found. Why do this study overall? About *** year and *** half ago we had hosted *** conference that was focused on agriculture and public health at the Harkin Institute, and um we had collaborated *** little bit with Iowa Environmental Council. They were having some events that same week. And we were, uh, the conference invited in experts from all around the country. People were really excited about it, and we got approached by *** group of citizens afterwards who were really focused on the fact that Iowa had had the #2 highest rate of cancer incidences for at that 0.2 years in *** row, now 3 years in *** row. Uh, and they felt like there was an elephant in the room that wasn’t really being discussed enough in public, and that was the potential connection with environmental risk factors and, uh, especially industrial agriculture risk factors, um, and so IEC and the Harket Institute decided to team up. We have *** focus on public health. They’re, uh, of course experts on the environment and, um. We got together and planned and decided to do this this project where we could get as much information as possible about this topic in order to just present like, you know, *** clear picture to see uh you know if if these concerns are justified. How does cancer meet the mission? Of the IEC, one thing that is really clear and that people have understood for *** long time is that our environment and our health are very much linked. The air that we breathe, the water we drink, all of those elements become *** part of our body and they can impact it in *** lot of different ways. We went to 15 different communities in every corner of the state. And in particular in rural areas where smaller communities, everybody knows everybody, we had *** lot of turnout, especially in rural areas and people sharing stories about, you know, week after week walking into the local Casey’s and just seeing another cancer benefit, another obituary just again and again. And people, as we went from place to place, it felt like starting to sort of realize, oh, maybe this isn’t normal. This has become normal and it should not be normal. And that was something that really struck us as well and really motivated us to keep going. We know we have *** cancer crisis. How does the water quality issue intersect with that? And when we’re looking at pesticides, PFASS, nitrate, even radon, we know that drinking water is *** potential pest. Pathway for each of those contaminants. Some of those contaminants are more prevalent, some of them are not. Some of them we don’t have testing for yet. The section on pesticides and cancer, you know what is it that you would want? There’s so much in there, but what is, what’s the overall message? Iowa uses. *** lot more pesticides than almost anywhere in the country, you know, pound for pound we have the 4th highest use of pesticides, and that even compares to states like California which have much more square footage than we do to put those pesticides on and the pesticides that we use the most glyphosate, acetochlor, and atrazine. You know, Acetylchlo and atrazine have been banned in the European Union for many years because of known toxicity. Glyphosate has been categorized as *** probable human carcinogen, and for glyphosate in particular, Iowa uses more glyphosate than any other state uses of any pesticide. Um, we are really an outlier in our use of pesticides, and that is related to the kinds of intensive cropping systems that we use here, um, and the way that companies have really marketed pesticides for *** lot of different inappropriate uses over time. Could we talk about nitrates? I have done *** lot of learning on nitrates in the last year, um. How does that play *** role here in this report? Again, the evidence is really compelling on the connection, the increased risk of certain types of cancers related to nitrates, as well as some studies have shown birth defects related to nitrates and um. The, uh, the standards that are currently set at 10. Milligrams per liter are based on research that is very outdated and it was, it was set based on protecting newborns and infants under the age of 6 months from *** condition called meth hemoglobinemia. If you look at the report, there’s not only many studies that show that levels of nitrate below 10 mg per liter. Are connected to certain types of cancer, but there’s also really high quality studies so there was *** study from Denmark that looked at over 1.2 million people. Over *** long period of time and had very precise linkages to the nitrate levels in their drinking water, uh, moving from nitrates into radon, um, this was, uh, the radon chapter is *** little bit of *** departure for the IEC, correct? Yeah, when we went and did, uh, listening sessions all over the state, um, we. Particularly heard from county public health officials who were really struggling with getting the word out on radon. Radon, because it is so prevalent in Iowa at high levels in many homes, is sort of *** background risk factor that many of us deal with. So when we start to put these other elements on top of it. It’s something that if we could address that at *** baseline level it could maybe start to make *** difference. Last chapter, the, the, it felt like and now here are all the other things. What is the summary of that chapter during the listening sessions we heard that legacy land contamination in specific communities and. Air pollution was of utmost concern for Iowans and so we felt it was really important to include some of the information because Iowans are so concerned about those issues but on on the opposite hand um. Because it is so community based, um, the contamination really varies by community community when we’re talking about Superfund sites or that legacy land contamination or *** location near an air polluting source that. Um, it’s harder, it’s harder to pinpoint for the entire state and so that’s why we wanted to focus on these separate sections. These are the things you need to consider when you’re looking at your own community and your own exposure. When close up returns, what this panel wants lawmakers to hear and the changes they say could help protect Iowans from cancer. Welcome back to Close Up. *** new report is raising questions about whether environmental risks are fueling Iowa’s cancer crisis, and if so, what lawmakers should do about it. It’s something that KCCI has been investigating for more than *** year. I also sat down with the report’s authors to hear about the evidence, the policy gaps, and what action they say should come next. One of the things that I hear from lawmakers as we talk about Iowa’s cancer crisis is they’re some of them say they’re waiting and searching for answers, hoping to hear more about the research. This study specifically looks at the cross section between. Environmental risk factors in Iowa’s cancer crisis. What do you want lawmakers to know about the link between environmental risk factors in Iowa’s cancer crisis and the evidence and research you feel this this study provides? I think it’s important to start with the knowledge that cancer is multifactorial and that we have taken *** look at lifestyle. Risk factors and that the environmental risk factors there is research out there which is what we were hoping to show with this report, but it’s *** really. Complex mathematical equation for how someone gets cancer and we have to make sure that we’re looking at every single variable that contributes to someone’s cancer risk and not leave out an important variable like environmental risk factors. That’s part of the complexity of trying to find the cure for cancer. It’s not one disease and the risk factors vary by type of cancer and so. Um, to consider all of the factors and not just focus on personal lifestyle factors which are important and which are linked to increased risk but not to the ignoring of of areas of research that have just compelling evidence. There are certain things that are happening right now that don’t really make sense if you’re trying to get as much information as possible. So for example. Um, there’s *** risk that the water monitoring system in the state isn’t going to get funded for the next few years. And so if you think, well, we don’t know enough about cancer, it seems pretty obvious that you should be trying to gather as much information as you can about what’s in our water. um, and similarly there are things about the way our policy works in our state that don’t make *** whole lot of sense. In terms of we don’t really have *** great way of mapping where manure is applied. We don’t have *** geospatial system of mapping where the manure is applied, and that’s the kind of information that would be really helpful if you’re trying to have *** precise picture of what’s in our water and how it might be contributing to cancer. *** lot of the lawmakers at the state house come from farming. Backgrounds we talk about pesticides there is kind of *** lot of conversation around what, what do we know, what don’t we know, um, you know, what do we need to do based off of what information we have what would you like lawmakers to hear specifically on pesticides about what this study found and what potential legislative action there could be in response. There’s *** lot of strong and compelling evidence that there are linkages between certain pesticides and cancer in Iowa among other health effects. Farmers are, you know, they use these pesticides with the understanding that they’re safe, um, but farmers and their families and rural communities where they live are being impacted by these cancers. So There needs to be. An understanding and an acknowledgement that pesticides were designed to impact living things in *** negative way and that we are seeing that happening and so in Iowa part of what we need to do first is to understand. That where where pesticides are being applied and how much and to start to think about the most vulnerable populations, um, what are we doing with schools, daycare centers, how are we making sure that those vulnerable populations are protected from pesticides and how do we make sure that people have enough knowledge to protect themselves, for example, if there’s going to be overhead spraying in an area, do the neighbors deserve to know so they can. You know, not be around and not get accidentally sprayed when that’s happening. We’ve heard that story too many times, so there are some basic informational things, but there’s *** larger conversation that needs to happen around how do we lead on transforming to *** system that requires fewer of those kinds of chemicals to begin with. There are also *** lot of different policy recommendations and action steps in this report. What are some areas that may be low hanging fruit or or solid starting points for policymakers and lawmakers to take right now? session is still happening, you know, it, it’s late in the session, but what are some things that you, you think could be achieved immediately? We don’t have *** complete monitoring system for all of the chemicals that are being applied to our land like Adam mentioned earlier. With manure, but also the same thing goes for fertilizer and pesticides. We don’t know where they’re being applied in the state and in what amounts. So if we can get *** better handle on monitoring what’s going on the land and making sure that everyone has that access to that data, then we can start to troubleshoot where we have issues the way farming is done in Iowa. Is based on policies that were put in place to prioritize certain things and unfortunately what’s being prioritized now doesn’t really include public health and so I feel like the recommendations in this report are *** way of ensuring that public health. Is one of the things that is taken into consideration whenever we’re setting policy around agriculture. We’ve heard from people in communities across the state that this is the most important issue in their lives that they want to see solved, and so that message isn’t necessarily getting through or perhaps policymakers are *** little frozen and not knowing exactly what to do. Um, but starting the conversation and sitting down together with *** focus on public health to really have *** serious conversation about, um, workable solutions would be *** fantastic first step. Coming up next, why researchers say Iowa is different when it comes to pesticides and nitrates from the rest of the country and why the health impacts may take decades to show up. Adam, you had said kind of at the beginning of this conversation was around during the listening tour. There were *** lot of Iowans who felt like, you know, environmental factors may be playing *** role as we’re looking at this cancer crisis, potentially worried about water quality or things like that and that. This data can kind of confirms some of those concerns. Are there areas or things that you can point to to say why this may confirm some of those concerns? What stood out to me was just that not only that people had these concerns, but that they often felt like they didn’t have *** good place to talk about it and express the worry that, well, maybe this is coming from. Somewhere you know maybe this is coming from the air that I’m breathing or the water that I’m drinking, and you know so much focus at the level of decision makers or policy makers is focused on these personal behaviors and being careful what you eat and smoking and drinking and all of those things are important, but people also. You know, have these other concerns and think that they’re they’re worth talking about and those are things that are largely outside of their control. We felt like we were in *** unique position to take the scientific research and make it more publicly accessible so that people felt like they had more scientific information to. Based their concerns on, so we were helping to bridge that gap between what Iowans’ concerns were and what scientists have already determined. Why are we 2nd in the nation? Why are we one of the only states with an increasing rate of cancer? Why are young people here getting cancer at disproportionate rates? And when we looked at. Our use of pesticides, we are an outlier nationally for the amount of pesticides that we use in this state. When we looked at nitrate, we are an outlier nationally for the amount of nitrate that ends up in our drinking water. So not only is there strong scientific evidence that there’s *** relationship between these pollutants and. Cancer, but we know that Iowa is an outlier in these areas. The things that people are being exposed to right now may not show up for another 20 or 30 years. The things, the cancer that we’re seeing now may be traced back to things that people were being exposed to, you know, 2030, 40 years ago. Does that make you think at all about. The urgency of what we may need right now and also what we what we don’t know and the impact that it may be having in *** long term way. We have an understanding that this problem developed really over decades and it’s going to take time to fix. We are looking at, we would love to see *** lot of change happen in the next 10 years because we have to think about our children, our grandchildren, the generations that come after that. It’s hard to have to think in that time scale, but we know that kind of long term commitment and thinking is what is going to be needed to turn this around. It shows the importance of policy. Certainly the voluntary limits that are in place are not being effective in making *** difference. And so having policy that actually has weight to it. is critically important. It’s scary that we’re seeing these trends that it’s really in younger people, especially where *** lot of the growth in cancer in Iowa is occurring. And so that to me just underlines the importance of this report because it’s, it’s going to be the next generation that’s facing these burdens even more dramatically than we are if there aren’t changes made. Coming up next, how researchers hope this report shifts the conversation and why they say Iowans’ health should come first. Welcome back. As the Iowa Environmental Council and its research partners wrap up this report, they say the findings are sobering but also *** call to action. They say they hope the science can move the conversation beyond politics and toward meaningful change for Iowans. I want to say how proud I am of the work that the Harkin Institute is doing in collaboration with the IEC and all of the researchers who were involved um and the the critical importance of independent. Information that doesn’t. Swing back and forth, but it looks for the truth in what the scientific evidence has been really clear in showing the Harkin Institute, we feel really fortunate to be at Drake University where we have so much support from leadership of being able to investigate issues without fear of political pressure or any sort of top down. Influence but just following the facts and and looking at the results now that we know better we can do better um we need to found our work in science but then go from here and educate and change policy to make *** difference so it might be overwhelming when you look at the whole report, but I’m really hopeful about the fact that this report can be *** great launch. off point for change across the state. Almost everyone in Iowa at this point has had *** close encounter with cancer in their own families or for themselves, and regardless of what political side you may identify with, this is *** personal issue for people. And you can find *** link to the full report on our website KCCI.com. Just click on the politics tab and then close up. Thank you for joining us this morning. We’ll see you back here next Sunday. Have *** great day.