• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • News
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
  • Contact

The Ballenger Report

Bill Ballenger: #1 Political Pundit in Michigan
All the Truth, All the Time
Michigan's Only "No Spin Zone"
Who is Running for What? Who Will Win?
Can Democrats Seize Total Control of Michigan Government in 2022?
Flint Water Crisis: What's Really Going On!
Politicians
Politicians
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / REPORT: Flint’s Water Was Worse Nearly A Decade Ago Than It Has Been During the Ongoing ‘Crisis’

REPORT: Flint’s Water Was Worse Nearly A Decade Ago Than It Has Been During the Ongoing ‘Crisis’

June 5, 2019 by tbreport 10 Comments

The lead levels in Flint’s water were far higher back in 2011 than they were during the so-called “Flint Water Crisis” beginning in 2015 and extending, apparently, to the present day and far into the future.

At least, that’s what the prominent environmental scientist who first brought Flint’s plight to national attention is claiming.

Here is a link to an article Virginia Tech professor Marc Edwards has published about the Flint Water Crisis (FWC) —  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135419304865?via%3Dihub
Edwards used records of biosolids kept by the Flint water utility to see how much lead was in the drinking water, since the testing of drinking water by the utility was sometimes questionable. He concluded:
(1)  Lead  biosolids reached levels in 2011 significantly higher that those during the FWC;
(2) The spike in lead biosolids and blood lead levels during the FWC lasted three months in the summer of 2014 while, the rest of the time, neither lead biosolids nor blood lead levels were unusual; and
(3) Biosolids lead and predicted human water lead exposures during the FWC were in the range of what was considered normal back in 2011.
In  the paper discussing 2011, Edwards states:  “We speculate that this anomaly may have been somehow linked to treatment upsets or other events during record Detroit rainfall, which was national news in that exact time period (Bienkowski, 2013). Regardless, a key point is that both biosolids lead and %EBLL5 spiked higher in 2011 that at any other point reported in this research, including during the FWC (the boldface is in the article).”
The last line of the article states: “Biosolids lead and predicted water lead exposures, during the FWC of 2014-2015, were in the range of what was considered normal in 2011.”
Edwards thanks Hurley Hospital pediatrician Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha for providing blood lead data and does not expressly criticize her work, but the implication of the boldface language and the last sentence of Edwards’s article are rather clear. Boldface language in a peer-reviewed article is  the equivalent of shouting
In sum, Edwards’s finding that, in 2011, there were higher lead lead  levels in Flint’s water that at any time during the FWC subverts the “emergency manager/environmental racism” narrative because the 2011 water flowed directly from the Detroit Water and Sewer Department with its millions of customers.  Finding a worse lead contamination  of drinking water  in 2011 suggests such contamination events are not uncommon. What was uncommon in Flint during the FWC was not contamination but its “observation” by those who wanted to see it.
************************************************************

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. J.Dallas Winegarden Jr, says

    June 6, 2019 at 1:07 am

    “6000/8000 Brain Damaged Children in Flint”.
    Uncommon observation by those who wanted to see it !
    Another very stable Genius ? !,,,,,,,
    TOXIC TORTS as in Flint are not Junk Science.
    And Juries will decide if Crimes where Perpetrated on Flints Citizens !
    Not Willian Ballenger.

    Reply
    • tbreport says

      June 6, 2019 at 7:32 pm

      As doctors and scientists and Marc Edwards know, not trial lawyers …

      Reply
  2. Brent Nelson says

    June 6, 2019 at 3:02 am

    Nice try Bill but your comments in 2014 will not be forgotten

    Reply
    • tbreport says

      June 6, 2019 at 7:31 pm

      Nor should they be, although they were in 2016. They were right-on, as the scientists and doctors know …

      Reply
      • J, Dallas Winegarden Jr says

        June 6, 2019 at 8:20 pm

        Is tbreport president of Dow or maybe IG Farben ? , No no Nestles ?
        GET REAL!

        Reply
  3. David L Richards says

    June 6, 2019 at 8:34 am

    Query: Are the results in 2011 from water at the tap where consumers actually drink from, or were the results from testing at the point where the water is sent to consumers by the water department? As I understand it, the FWC occurred when water was untreated causing the exposure of lead in service lines at the consumer level. This would be a different thing than the status of the water where it is treated and distributed, as it would be cumulative. Either would be a problem, but if we are questioning whether the 2015 events really changed anything, we need to make sure we are comparing the same thing, not apples and oranges.

    Reply
    • David L Richards says

      June 6, 2019 at 9:10 am

      I don’t claim any expertise in this field, but after skimming Dr. Edwards’ report and the reference to 2011, it seems to me that he is analyzing the biosolids (metals) from sewage in Flint to estimate the lead levels in drinking water, an indirect method of measurement. The 2011 high levels he “speculates” are caused by an anomaly occurring when the Detroit water system (which Flint was a part of at the time) had its sewage disposal capacity overwhelmed. Edwards may be saying that his methodology would not measure the lead in the drinking water in 2011, as the results were affected by sewage overflows, and would not reflect lead in the drinking water at that time.

      Reply
    • tbreport says

      June 9, 2019 at 1:46 pm

      You raise thoughtful questions. We’ll try to get answers …

      Reply
    • tbreport says

      June 9, 2019 at 1:48 pm

      We’ll pursue answers to your questions …

      Reply
  4. popocat says

    June 25, 2019 at 7:41 pm

    There is little doubt that finger pointing is warranted with the unfortunate FWC. But the larger question is: at whom? Democrats insist on the “class warfare” / racism narrative since the FWC story erupted on the watch of GOP governor Snyder. If politicization / blame game is the Democratic modus operandi, why not also point out that the city of Flint itself has been overwhelmingly dominated by the Democratic Party. Do the local officials bear no blame?

    And if 2011 water contamination really was worse, then by that definition doesn’t that mean that Democratic Governor Grandholm is on the hook? And if the water diverted to Flint from Detroit was that bad in 2011, it should be pointed out that the Democratic Party local officials have similarly dominated Detroit’s government.

    Fair is fair. First ye remove the plank out of your eye!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter Sign-up

Receive The Ballenger Report in your inbox!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Follow on twitter

Tweets by @Bill_Ballenger
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Upcoming Ballenger Events

  • No events
  • © 2023 · The Ballenger Report · Login · Sitemap

    Support The Ballenger Report - Contribute Today!

    Thank you for visiting! You have let us know that what we produce about Michigan politics and government matters to you. More people than ever are reading and listening to what we put on our news site, and the 2022 election was especially momentous. Your support makes all the difference.

    As you know, unlike many news websites, we haven’t put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism as open as we can, but we need to ask for your help. We are editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism remains truly free from commercial influence or bias. We are not subsidized. We don’t put up paid advertisements. No one edits our Editor. No one steers our opinion.

    But The Ballenger Report (TBR) takes time, money and hard work to produce. If everyone who reads or listens to our material — and likes it! — helps to support it, our future would be much more secure.

    Whatever you might want to contribute will help TBR continue. Thank you.

    Contribute to The Ballenger Report