MTIANZ responds to peer reviewed report
MTIANZ welcomes the release of the report by The International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, titled: Household Contamination
with Methamphetamine: Knowledge and Uncertainties. This
is a peer reviewed document, which holds unparalleled
credibility internationally as the most recent assessment of
available information.
The report is scathing towards the approach adopted by the New Zealand Government, and it raises some very valid concerns around the findings within the “Gluckman” report on Methamphetamine contamination (PMCSA Report), and the secrecy around the reports that informed its development, and suggests there is the potential for legal class action in the future. MTIANZ notes that the PMCSA Report is not peer reviewed and was published as a “report” only containing recommendations.
Within the Household Contamination with
Methamphetamine: Knowledge and Uncertainties report, section
2 outlines a comprehensive assessment of variable
international approaches towards methamphetamine
contamination, the following comments are made in regards to
New Zealand’s approach:
• The PMCSA report
indicates that it is preferable that residents are exposed
to “low levels” (by which they mean <15 g/100 cm2)
methamphetamine contamination in comparison to unstable
public housing situations.
• The PMCSA report
has instigated major changes in the public housing sector,
yet the public are unable to view or verify the research
that is used to support these changes.
• Many
residents from social housing are disadvantaged and from
lower socio-economic demographics. The social determinants
of health have clearly demonstrated that lower socioeconomic
groups suffer significantly poorer health outcomes compared
with their richer counterparts.
• The people in
this demographic are less able to make their own decisions
about whether to live in a contaminated environment as it is
unlikely that they can afford the costs associated with
testing and remediation.
• The acceptability of
exposing residents to “low” levels of methamphetamine
contamination to avoid disrupting their housing arrangements
is debatable and is a decision that needs to be made in
light of all available evidence.
• It is
therefore unacceptable that much of the supporting report to
the PMCSA report is redacted.
• The safety
factors and buffers that are used for California’s RfD and
Colorado’s standard are also mentioned a number of times
in the PMCSA report.
• These safety factors are
put in place for the purpose of addressing uncertainty in
knowledge and protecting public health.
• Therefore, it is concerning that there is no
regard to the criteria presented in the New Zealand Standard
(NZS 8510:2017), and instead, the report states that there
is no health concern above 1.5 g/100 cm2, as there is
already a built-in conservative safety buffer, and has
therefore deemed that 15 g/100 cm2 can actually be
considered safe.
• The reports released from
Ministry of Health, ESR and Standards New Zealand are
voluminous. The conflicting reports are likely to cause
confusion and uncertainty and could potentially increase
mistrust in government and standardisation bodies that exist
to provide support and structure for the general public.
There is also the possibility that this could potentially
lead to legal class action in the future (as happened with
asbestos and glyphosate, for example).
The report concludes
Methamphetamine contamination within properties is a growing public health concern, particularly from former clandestine laboratories. There are currently research gaps in the areas of methamphetamine exposure levels and health effects, standard methods to determine contamination levels and remediation success. The body of research that is available often has conflicting conclusions, which serves to emphasise the complexity of the issue. Residues settle on surfaces; they can be absorbed, desorb over time, can have varied recovery rates and can remain embedded in surfaces for years. There are limited longitudinal studies that evaluate the long-term success of remediation treatments, and are highly varied recorded measurements for surface recovery, deposition and environmental samples. These variations create difficulties in the measurement of, estimated contamination of and exposure to methamphetamine. The lack of legislation and standardised methods creates diversity in methodology, mistrust in remediators from property owners and difficulties in maintaining consistency for law enforcement. There are also concerns relating to variation in training and the application of guidelines by regulators, commercial cleaning companies and homeowners. This is regardless of the state or country. The lack of conclusive current research supports the need for precautionary approach to be adopted. Further research to address these knowledge gaps and provide evidence for regulation to ensure public health protection is required.
This raises some significant
concerns around the approach adopted by Housing New Zealand,
the potential for legal class action, and the reliance on
the PMCSA Report by the Tenancy Tribunal given the potential
for significant miscarriage of justice for private
landlords.
MTIANZ embrace and recommend a
precautionary approach towards methamphetamine
contamination, particularly due to the extent of unknown
health effects requiring further research before a risk
adverse approach is adopted. This peer reviewed report backs
up the intention and application of the New Zealand Standard
NZS8510:2017 and MTIANZ will continue to enforce the
requirements within the New Zealand Standard and any current
amendments until such time as Regulations are formed under
the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 section 138(c).