Guest guest Posted June 28, 2005 Report Share Posted June 28, 2005 (There was a fire here last year in an old warehouse that had many chemical containers stored in it. This was the advice given to residents: stay home, close windows/doors, and if I'm not mistaken, stay on the lower level of the home if possible. I'm not sure I agree with the advice if it's possible to get out and go somewhere - if you can head in the opposite direction of the resulting chemical cloud. They announced which way the cloud/smoke was going and what neighborhoods would be affected. Anna) Evacuation not best during a chemical incident 13:10 24 June 2005 NewScientist.com news service Gaia Vince Sheltering at home may be better than evacuation for residents living in an area during a chemical incident, concludes the evaluation of a real emergency situation in the UK. Instructing people to shelter in their homes may be better for residents’ health and could prevent loss of life during serious chemical air pollution events, researchers say. On a December evening in 1999, a serious fire broke out in a plastics factory in the town of Paignton in Devon, releasing a variety of highly toxic chemicals and smoke into the surrounding environment during the 48-hour inferno. The initial reaction of emergency crews on the scene was to evacuate local residents from the area, and during the first six hours, about 300 people were evacuated. However, following advice from hazardous incident experts, it was decided that the remaining 800-odd nearby residents should remain sheltered in their homes. Sanjay Kinra at the University of Bristol, and colleagues analysed a health survey of the residents, carried out two weeks after the incident. Respondents described a range of symptoms suffered during the incident and two weeks later, including runny eyes, swollen eyelids, skin rash, blurred vision, vomiting, skin burns, and wheezing. The team found that residents who had been evacuated had suffered twice the extent of health problems compared with those in the sheltered group (19.7% compared with 9.5%), although the difference was less marked two weeks later (3.3% compared with 1.9%). click here for full story http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7575 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.