Why Landfills Are More Harmful Than You Think

Numbers You Should Know for Seneca Meadows Landfill and LFGTE Facility

Toxic leachate produced (gal.)

1,368,750,000.00

Greenhouse gas (CO2) emitted (lbs)

4,530,334,000.00

Pollutant gases emitted (lbs)

19,286,880.00

Particle pollution emitted (lbs)

687,740.00

Landfill leachate (n.) – Rainwater filtered through decades of waste, toxic chemicals, heavy metals, and whatever horrors the garbage has been hiding—served daily (example here).

Environmental Impact

Landfills may pose significant environmental challenges and have devastating effects on air, water, and soil quality, threatening ecosystems and human health. Seneca Meadows, the largest landfill in New York State, is often at the center of debates regarding these impacts due to its scale and reported pollution concerns.

How Landfills Damage Ecosystems; Air, Water, & Soil

1. Air Pollution

Landfills release greenhouse gases such as methane and carbon dioxide as organic waste decomposes anaerobically. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, contributes significantly to global warming. Seneca Meadows is a notable emitter of these gases. Despite capturing some methane for energy generation, much of it escapes into the atmosphere, exacerbating climate change.

Additionally, the landfill emits foul odors caused by the decomposition of waste. Communities surrounding Seneca Meadows often report intolerable smells, attributed to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hydrogen sulfide. These airborne toxins may cause respiratory issues, nausea, and headaches, diminishing the quality of life for nearby residents.

2. Water Pollution

Landfills like Seneca Meadows generate leachate, a toxic liquid formed when rainwater filters through decomposing waste. Leachate contains harmful chemicals, heavy metals, and pathogens that, if not managed properly, can seep into groundwater or nearby water bodies. In Seneca Meadows’ case, concerns persist regarding the leachate’s impact on the water quality of local streams and lakes.

Despite the use of liners and treatment systems, no landfill is entirely leak-proof. Over time, barriers degrade, increasing the risk of contamination. Polluted water sources can harm aquatic ecosystems and potentially expose nearby populations to waterborne illnesses.

3. Soil Contamination

When landfill waste decomposes or leachate escapes, the surrounding soil can absorb toxic substances like heavy metals, pesticides, and hazardous chemicals. This contamination not only reduces soil fertility but also endangers plant and animal life. Seneca Meadows has faced scrutiny over its capacity to contain such pollutants effectively, especially as the landfill expands.

Long-term soil pollution can make land unusable for agriculture or development, perpetuating ecological damage in the region.

4. Community and Ecosystem Effects

The environmental degradation caused by Seneca Meadows extends beyond pollution. The landfill alters the local landscape, displacing wildlife and impacting nearby ecosystems. Residents in the Finger Lakes region have voiced concerns about its proximity to agricultural areas and wineries, fearing that just the smell alone from the gases they produce could damage the reputation of these industries.

Addressing the Problem

The currently proposed expansion of Seneca Meadows and other landfills contradicts stated regulatory agency policy and guidance which says to use landfills only as a last resort and, in so doing, hinders efforts to adopt sustainable waste management practices such as re-use, recycling and composting. Communities must advocate that their state and federal regulatory agencies actually follow their own guidance and not facilitate the creation and burial of waste.

Conclusion

A complete re-thinking of how we manage waste is urgently needed. By stopping landfill expansions, we will encourage businesses and communities to develop and adopt technologies that minimize waste generation— such as biodegradable packaging, advanced recycling technologies, and products designed for reuse—thus accelerating the development of a circular economy essential to protecting air, water, and soil for future generations.

Health Risks

Living near a mega-landfill poses potentially significant health risks. The types of airborne toxins typically released include methane, hydrogen sulfide, particulate matter, ammonia, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as benzene, toluene, and xylene, These pollutants can be inhaled and enter the respiratory system, blood, and other organs, leading to both short-term and long-term health effects. The proximity to decomposing waste and the toxic byproducts it generates exacerbates these risks, disproportionately impacting vulnerable populations like children, the elderly, pregnant women, and those with pre-existing health conditions.

  • Respiratory Disorders

  • Cardiovascular Disorders

  • Cancer

  • Neurological Disorders

  • Skin Disorders

  • Reprod. & Dev. Disorders

  • Immune System Disorders

  • Endocrine Disorders

  • Gastrointestinal Disorders

  • Psychological Effects

  • Sensory Disorders

  • Summary

Respiratory Disorders

Respiratory Disorders

  • Asthma: Airborne toxins, especially particulate matter and VOCs, may trigger asthma symptoms or worsen existing asthma in susceptible individuals. These pollutants can irritate the airways and cause inflammation.
  • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Long-term exposure to landfill emissions, particularly fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and gases like methane, may contribute to the development of COPD, which causes airflow obstruction and breathing difficulties.
  • Bronchitis: Inhalation of gases like hydrogen sulfide or VOCs may cause acute or chronic bronchitis, characterized by coughing, mucus production, and inflammation of the airways.
  • Pulmonary Fibrosis: Chronic exposure to toxins such as fine particulate matter (PM2.5) or chemical fumes may lead to scarring of lung tissue, resulting in pulmonary fibrosis, which impairs lung function.
  • Sinusitis and Rhinitis: Inhalation of pollutants from landfills, especially particulate matter and gases like ammonia, may cause irritation and inflammation of the nasal passages and sinuses, leading to conditions like sinusitis and rhinitis.
  • Coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath (as a result of irritants like ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and particulate matter)

Cardiovascular Disorders

Cancer

Neurological Disorders

Skin Disorders

Reprod. & Dev. Disorders

Immune System Disorders

Endocrine Disorders

Gastrointestinal Disorders

Psychological Effects

Sensory Disorders

Summary

(HAP)pening Locally

In addition to VOCs, there is another category of air pollutant emitted by Seneca Meadows landfill called hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).

HAPs comprise 187 chemicals including arsenic, lead, cadmium, pollutant gases, solvents, and pesticides. According to the EPA, HAPS “are those pollutants that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health effects, such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental effects.” Many, if not all, HAPs are thought to have no minimum threshold of exposure that is considered “safe” for human health.

The scrolling list below shows fugitive and other emissions for HAPs emitted from Seneca Meadows landfill per Title V Emissions Inventory Tables that area families are forced to breathe synergistic and additive combinations of, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Note: Total quantities of HAPs emitted from Seneca Meadows are measured in tons per year.

Health Risks to Those Living Nearby [Landfills] are Clear

Dr. David O. Carpenter, world-renowned research physician, expert witness, author of over 340 publications in peer reviewed scientific literature, advisor to the World Health Organization and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, recipient of numerous awards, Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the State University of NY at Albany, spoke about his research on landfill toxins and public health at a 2010 program at Hobart and William Smith Colleges in Geneva, NY.

An article in the Finger Lakes Times described his presentation as follows (emphasis added):

Carpenter said a 1998 series of air samplings of 25 landfills in New York found high concentrations of carcinogenic chemicals that contributed not only to cancer but to neurological and liver diseases as well.

He said data was collected for 10 years on exposure to these chemicals from breathing the air, having it come into contact with skin, eating food grown nearby or drinking groundwater. 

“Statistics from reports of illnesses contracted by people living in certain zip codes shows those near landfills have higher birth defects, thyroid disorders, nervous system disorders, immune system diseases and cancer,” Carpenter said. 

He also said some studies have shown higher levels of hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and cardio-pulmonary disease. 

“The facts show you are at higher risk of these diseases if you live near a landfill,” Carpenter said.

Later during the panel discussion, he told a questioner that three miles is considered close enough to a landfill to possibly be impacted by the toxins.

“There is reason to be concerned. It’s pretty clear that if you live near a waste site, you have increased exposure to toxins, and toxins increase your risk of disease,” Carpenter said.

Health Risks to Those Living Nearby [Landfills] are Clear

Photo capture of front page and reproduction of text courtesy of Finger Lakes Times

Mind you, this was in 2010. In 2016, Dr. David Carpenter wrote a letter directly to the members of the Seneca Falls, NY Town Board, restating these health risks in support of a local law of the time that would have closed Seneca Meadows landfill. And so, here we are in 2025, 28M tons of trash later, still debating what to do.

Synopsis of a Few Landfill Studies

Numerous studies have identified a strong potential link between landfills and diseases, particularly in populations living near these sites. The diseases most commonly associated with landfill proximity include respiratory disorders (e.g., asthma), cancers (e.g., leukemia, liver cancer), gastrointestinal diseases, neurological issues, and birth defects. Contaminants from landfills, such as toxic gases, leachates, and particulate matter contribute to these health risks.

  • 38 New York Landfills

  • 72 Landfills in 20 Countries

  • Montreal, Quebec

  • Montreal, Quebec (followup)

  • Hydrogen sulfide study

  • MSW Cancer Risk in Germany

  • Multisite cohort study

  • Study of Landfill Odor Impact

  • Seneca County Air Screen (2012)

  • Multisite cohort study, 2021

  • Seneca County “Cancer Cluster”

38 New York Landfills

38 New York Landfills

  • Investigation of cancer incidence and residence near 38 landfills with soil gas migration conditions, New York State, 1980-1989. Prepared by the New York State Department of Health, Division of Occupational Health and Environmental Epidemiology, Bureau of Environmental and Occupational Epidemiology. PB98-142144. June 1998.
  • This study found a statistically significant fourfold elevation of risk for bladder cancer and leukemia for women living in the areas of potential exposure.
  • Says that the statistical tests show that it is very unlikely, but not impossible, that the higher-than-expected number of cases of these two types of cancer in the area of potential exposure occurred just by chance.
  • Reference here.

72 Landfills in 20 Countries

Montreal, Quebec

Montreal, Quebec (followup)

Hydrogen sulfide study

MSW Cancer Risk in Germany

Multisite cohort study

Study of Landfill Odor Impact

Seneca County Air Screen (2012)

Multisite cohort study, 2021

Seneca County “Cancer Cluster”

Economic Impact

Landfills are often viewed as necessary for waste management, but their presence may have far-reaching economic consequences for nearby communities. While landfills generate some local revenue through taxes and jobs, their broader negative effects—such as decreased property values and diminished economic growth—can outweigh these benefits and persist for decades. One (less than savory) view of how landfills obtain their revenue—using the example of a company called BFI, the former owner of Seneca Meadows, Inc.—is described here.

Photo courtesy of Katherine Bourbeau

Photo courtesy of Katherine Bourbeau

How Landfills May Lower Property Values

One of the most direct economic impacts of landfills is the potential reduction in property values for homes and businesses near these sites. This depreciation can create a ripple effect that weakens the overall local economy.

1. Perception of Pollution and Health Risks

Properties located near landfills are often perceived as less desirable due to concerns about air quality, water contamination, and potential health risks. Even if no immediate environmental issues are evident, the stigma associated with living near a landfill can drive potential buyers away.

  • Odors and Aesthetic Concerns: The presence of foul odors, unsightly waste piles, and increased truck traffic can make areas near landfills unattractive for homeowners and renters.
  • Health-Related Anxiety: Buyers are reluctant to invest in properties close to a landfill due to the potential long-term health risks, such as respiratory illnesses and cancer, that could impact their families.

2. Documented Decline in Property Prices

Studies have shown that property values may decline significantly near landfill sites. According to one study, homes within a one-mile radius of a landfill experience a property value drop of 5-15%, with greater losses depending on the size, age, and reputation of the landfill. Larger landfills, like Seneca Meadows in New York, may depress values in entire towns due to their visibility and environmental footprint.

3. Impact on Commercial Real Estate

Businesses near landfills also face challenges:

  • Retail stores, restaurants, and hotels may lose customers due to odor or environmental concerns, resulting in reduced revenues.
  • Investors may hesitate to fund developments in areas where property values are stagnant or declining.

Photo courtesy of Katherine Bourbeau

Photo courtesy of Katherine Bourbeau

How Landfills May Hurt Local Economies

Beyond property values, harmful landfills create broader economic problems that may inhibit long-term growth and development.

1. Loss of Tourism Revenue

Communities that rely on tourism, agriculture, or wine production are particularly vulnerable to the negative image associated with landfills. For example:

  • In regions like the Finger Lakes in New York, home to wineries and outdoor recreation, the presence of a landfill may deter visitors who come for pristine scenery and clean air.
  • Tourists may avoid areas with visible or well-known landfills, further reducing income for local businesses.

2. Strained Public Resources

Landfills may place additional burdens on local governments and taxpayers:

  • Road Maintenance: Increased truck traffic hauling waste to landfills may lead to wear and tear on local roads, requiring costly repairs funded by the municipality.
  • Health Services: Residents exposed to landfill-related pollutants may experience higher healthcare costs, with local governments bearing the burden of public health initiatives or hospital expansions.
  • Environmental Cleanup Costs: When leachate or gases from landfills contaminate soil or water, towns may need to fund expensive remediation projects, diverting resources from other critical areas.

3. Inhibited Economic Development

Landfills may deter new investments and limit economic diversification:

  • Businesses looking to relocate or expand are less likely to choose areas near landfills due to concerns about employee well-being, poor infrastructure, or reputational risks.
  • Existing businesses may struggle to attract skilled workers, as professionals prefer to settle in more appealing, environmentally safe areas.

4. Lower Tax Revenue

Reduced property values may directly impact municipal tax collections, creating a cycle of financial hardship:

  • Lower property values mean lower property taxes, which reduces funding for schools, infrastructure, and public services.
  • Communities with limited budgets struggle to improve amenities, further discouraging investment and reducing economic competitiveness.

Photo courtesy of Katherine Bourbeau

Long-Term Economic Challenges

The negative economic effects of landfills are not limited to the short term. Even after a landfill is closed, communities may continue to face financial burdens:

  • Post-Closure Management Costs: Monitoring closed landfills for methane emissions, leachate leaks, and structural integrity can take decades, requiring ongoing investment.
  • Stigma Lingers: Former landfill sites are rarely viewed as desirable locations for housing or business development, even if remediated, due to persistent public perception issues.

Long-Term Concerns

As landfills grow larger, the environmental, health, and economic consequences may become increasingly severe. Expanded landfills not only exacerbate existing issues but also may pose significant long-term risks for nearby communities and ecosystems. Without proactive measures to limit their growth, landfills may cause irreversible damage to air quality, water resources, soil integrity, public health, and local economies.

1. Escalating Environmental Damage

Air Pollution
  • Increased Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Expanding landfills produce more methane, a potent greenhouse gas that contributes significantly to climate change. Methane traps heat in the atmosphere 25 times more effectively than carbon dioxide, accelerating global warming.
  • Toxic Air Pollutants: Larger landfills release higher amounts of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hydrogen sulfide, worsening air quality. This may lead to increased respiratory illnesses and makes the surrounding areas uninhabitable.
  • Odor Problems: The larger the landfill, the more waste it processes, intensifying the foul odors that affect the quality of life for nearby residents.
Water Contamination
  • Greater Risk of Leachate Leaks: With more waste comes an increased production of leachate, the toxic liquid that seeps through waste piles. If landfill liners or containment systems fail, larger volumes of leachate could infiltrate groundwater and local water supplies.
  • Pollution of Waterways: Expanded landfills near rivers, lakes, or streams pose a higher risk of contaminating these water sources, impacting aquatic ecosystems and communities that depend on them for drinking water.
Soil Degradation
  • Toxic Accumulation: Prolonged waste decomposition releases heavy metals, microplastics, and other pollutants into the soil. This compromises the fertility and safety of land, potentially making it unsuitable for agriculture or future development.
  • Land Instability: As landfills grow taller, they may become structurally unstable, increasing the risk of slope failures and waste avalanches that damage nearby properties and ecosystems.

2. Increased Health Risks

Heightened Disease Exposure
  • Respiratory and Cardiovascular Issues: As landfill emissions grow, so does the risk of respiratory illnesses, asthma, and cardiovascular diseases for people living nearby. These health problems could become endemic in communities surrounding large landfills.
  • Waterborne Diseases: If leachate contaminates local water supplies, diseases like cholera, dysentery, and gastrointestinal infections could become widespread, especially in underserved areas.
  • Cancer Risks: The expanded release of carcinogenic substances like benzene and dioxins raises long-term cancer risks for nearby populations.
Emergence of New Vectors
  • Pests and Wildlife: Growing landfills attract more disease-carrying pests, such as rats, flies, and mosquitoes. These vectors can spread diseases like typhoid fever, leptospirosis, and dengue fever.
  • Pathogen Outbreaks: Larger landfills increase the risk of pathogen outbreaks, especially from improperly disposed of medical or hazardous waste.

3. Economic Consequences

Decreased Property Values

As landfills expand, their negative effects—such as odor, pollution, and traffic—become more pronounced, possibly leading to further reductions in property values. Residents living nearby may find their homes unsellable, trapping them in declining areas.

Loss of Local Investment
  • Business Reluctance: Investors and businesses may be less likely to develop projects in areas overshadowed by large landfills, stunting local economic growth.
  • Tourism Decline: Communities that depend on tourism may suffer as the visual, olfactory, and environmental impacts of expanding landfills drive visitors away.
Increased Municipal Costs
  • Infrastructure Strain: Larger landfills may generate more truck traffic, leading to higher costs for road repairs and increased noise pollution.
  • Health Care Costs: Municipalities may face rising expenses for public health programs to treat illnesses caused by landfill-related pollution.

4. Strain on Waste Management Systems

Limited Land Availability

As landfills grow, they consume valuable land that could otherwise be used for housing, agriculture, or conservation. Expanding landfills may be an inefficient use of space, particularly in densely populated areas.

Waste Management Challenges
  • Capacity Overload: Even expanded landfills have limits. Without sustainable waste reduction strategies, they will eventually reach capacity, forcing municipalities to search for new sites, possibly at great financial and social cost.
  • Increased Illegal Dumping: Expanding landfills may lead to stricter dumping fees, which can encourage illegal dumping, further polluting the environment.

5. Climate Change Acceleration

Expanded landfills significantly contribute to climate change through the release of methane and other greenhouse gases. The cumulative effect of growing waste sites undermines global efforts to limit temperature increases, leading to more severe climate impacts such as rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and disrupted ecosystems.

6. Long-Term Community Impact

Generational Consequences
  • Health Legacies: Children raised near landfills may face long-term health challenges, including developmental delays, chronic illnesses, and reduced life expectancy.
  • Economic Stagnation: Communities burdened by large landfills may become economically stagnant, with fewer opportunities for growth and development.
Social Inequities
  • Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Populations: Expanding landfills often affect low-income and marginalized communities, perpetuating environmental injustice. These groups face higher exposure to pollution but lack the resources to relocate or fight for better regulations.

Supporting Studies and Articles on Environmental Risks

The negative environmental effects of landfills are not limited to the short term. Even after a landfill is closed, communities often continue to face environmental burdens:

Supporting Studies and Articles on Health Risks

Not all studies listed prove a direct cause and effect relationship; however, many if not most do provide support for the association if not increased risk between health issues and exposure to environmental contaminants produced by landfills.

Because the toxic potential of a municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill may be as great as a hazardous waste landfill, studies from hazardous waste landfills are also included in the list below.

An example of how toxic an MSW landfill can be is described in the study, “Acute and Genetic Toxicity of Municipal Landfill Leachate,” where the authors found MSW leachate toxicity to be “greater than both leachate from a Superfund landfill and leachate from the Love Canal landfill.”

How to Access the Articles

If there is not a direct link to the article, simply search the article title in the respective databases, and you will be able to find the full text or abstract of each study. You can access some articles directly, while others may require institutional access or a subscription. If you're affiliated with an academic institution, you may have free access through that organization.

Read More

  • Goldberg, M. et al. (1995) Incidence of cancer among persons living near a municipal solid waste landfill site in Montreal, Quebec, Archives of Environmental Health, 1995. 50(6): 416-424.
  • Goldberg, M., L. Goulet, et. al. (1995). “Low birth weight and preterm births among infants born to women living near a municipal solid waste landfill site in Montreal, Quebec.” Environmental Research 69(1): 37-50.
  • State of New York Department of Health, Center for Environmental Health. Investigation of cancer incidence near 38 landfills with soil gas migration conditions: New York state, 1980-1989, 1998. Available from: New York State DOH, 2 University Place, Albany, NY 12203-3399.
  • Berger, S., Jones P., White, M. Exploratory analysis of respiratory illness among persons living near a landfill, Journal of Environmental Health, 2000. 62.6: 19.
  • Elliot, P. et al. Risk of adverse birth outcomes in populations living near landfill sites, British Medical Journal, 2001. 323(7209): 363-368.
  • Dummer, T., Dickinson, H., Parker, L. Adverse pregnancy outcomes near landfill sites in Cumbria, northwest England, 1950-1993, Archives of Environmental Health, 2003. 58(11): 692-697.
  • Palmer, S. et al. Risk of congenital anomalies after the opening of landfill sites, Environmental Health Perspectives, 2005. 113(10): 1362-1365.
  • deFur P. Shelley S. Landfill and other waste sites in Virginia – Threats to Health and the Environment. Environmental Stewardship Concepts. Nov. 2002.
  • Goldberg, M., J Siemiatycki, et al. (1999) Risks of developing cancer relative to living near a municipal solid waste landfill site in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Archives of Environmental Health, 1995. 54(4): 291-296.
  • Griffith, J; Riggan, WB. 1989. "Cancer mortality in U.S. counties with hazardous waste sites and ground water pollution." Arch. Environ. Health 44(2):69-74.
  • Imperial College, Small Area Health Statistics Unit (London, England); Elliott, P; Morris, S; de Hoogh, C. 2001. "Birth Outcomes and Selected Cancers in Populations Living Near Landfill Sites." Submitted to Dept. of Health (London, England). Accessed on January 30, 2002 at http://www.doh.gov.uk/pdfs/report_aug13.pdf, 80p., August.
  • Mallin, K. 1990. "Investigation of a bladder cancer cluster in northwestern Illinois." Am. J. Epidemiol. 132(S1):S96-S106.
  • New York State, Dept. of Health (NYSDOH), Div. of Occupational Health and Environmental Epidemiology. 1998. "Investigation of Cancer Incidence and Residence Near 38 Landfills with Soil Gas Migration Conditions: New York State, 1980-1989." 72p., July.
  • Chiriac, R., Carre, J., Perrodin, Y., Fine, L., Letoffe, J.M., 2007. Characterisation of VOCs emitted by open cells receiving municipal solid waste. J. Hazard. Mater. 149(2)(2007), 249-263.
  • Lakhouit, A., Alsulami, B.T., 2020. Evaluation of risk assessment of landfill emissions and their impacts on human health. Arab. J. Geosci. 13(22), 1185.
  • AlAhmad, M., Dimashki, M., Nassour, A., Nelles, M., 2012. Characterization, Concentrations and Emission Rates of Volatile Organic Compounds from Two Major Landfill Sites in Kuwait. Am. J. Sci. 8(1), 56-63.
  • Marti, V., Jubany, I., Perez, C., Rubio, X., De Pablo, J.,Gimenez, J., 2014. Human Health Risk Assessment of a landfill based on volatile organic compounds emission, immission and soil gas concentration measurements. Appl. Geochemistry. 49, 218-224.
  • Scheff, P., Casten,C., Ruesch, P., Friedl, M., 2001. Evaluation of toxic air pollutants in an urban neighborhood adjacent to a municipal waste landfill. Environ. Health Risk. 13-22.
  • Wang, Y., Li, L., Qiu, Z., Yang, K., Han, Y., Chai, F., Li, P., Wang, Y., 2021. Trace volatile compounds in the air of domestic waste landfill site: Identification, olfactory effect and cancer risk. Chemosphere. 272, 129582.
  • Elliott, P.; Briggs, D.; Morris, S.; de Hoogh, C.; Hurt, C.; Jensen, T.; Maitland, I.; Richardson, S.; Wakefield, J.; Jarup, L., “Risk of Adverse Birth Outcomes in Populations Living near Landfill Sites,” British Medical Journal 323:363-368, August (2001).
  • Kouznetsova, M.; Huang, X.; Ma, J.; Lessner, L. and Carpenter,D., “Increased Rate of Hospitalization for Diabetes and Residential Proximity of Hazardous Waste Sites,” Environmental Health Perspectives 115(1):75-79, January (2007).
  • Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Register. Hazardous Substances Emergency Events Surveillance. Annual report. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 1995.
  • Vrijheid M. Health effects of residence near hazardous waste landfill sites: a review ofepidemiologic literature. Environ Health Perspect 2000; 108: 101–12
  • Upton AC. Public health aspects of toxic chemical disposal sites. Annu Rev Public Health 1989; 10: 1–25
  • National Research Council. Environmental Epidemiology: Public Health and Hazardous Wastes, vol. 1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1991.
  • Goldman LR, Paigen B, Magnant MM, Highland JH. Low birthweight, prematurity and birth defects in children living near the hazardous waste site, Love Canal. Hazard Waste Hazard Mater 1985; 2: 209–23.
  • Berry M, Bove F. Birthweight reduction association with residence near a hazardous waste landfill. Environ Health Perspect 1997; 105: 856–61.
  • Kharazi M, Von Behren J, Smith M, Lomas T, Armstrong M, Broadwin R et al. A community based study of adverse pregnancy outcomes near a large hazardous waste landfill in California. Toxicol Ind Health 1997; 13: 299–310.
  • Shaw GM, Schulman J, Frisch JD, Cummins SK, Harris JA. Congenital malformations and birthweight in areas with potential environmental contamination. Arch Environ Health 1992; 47: 147–54.
  • Sosniak WA, Kaye WE, Gomez TM. Data linkage to explore the risk of low birthweight associated with maternal proximity to hazardous waste sites from the National Priorities list. Arch Environ Health 1994; 49: 251–5.
  • Elliott P, Briggs D, Morris S, de Hoogh C, Hurt C, Jensen TK et al. Risk of adverse outcomes in populations living near landfill sites. BMJ 2001; 363–8.
  • Fielder HMP, Poon-King C, Palmer SR, Coleman G. Assessment of the impact on health of residents living near the Nant-y-Gwyddon landfill site: Retrospective analysis. BMJ 2000; 320: 19–23.
  • Dolk H, Vrijheid M, Armstrong B, Abramsky L, Bianchi F, Garne E et al. Risk of congenital anomalies near hazardous-waste landfill sites in Europe: the EUROHAZCON study. Lancet 1998; 352: 423–7.
  • Vrijheid M, Dolk H, Armstrong B, Abramsky L, Bianchi F, Fazarinc I et al. Chromosomal congenital anomalies and residence near hazardous waste landfill sites. Lancet 2002; 359: 320–2.
  • Geshwind SA, Stowijk JAJ, Bracken M et al. Risk of congenital malformations associated with proximity to hazardous waste sites. Am J Epidemiol 1992; 135: 1197–207.
  • Najem GR, Louria DB, Lavenhar MA, Feuerman M. Clusters of cancer mortality in New Jersey municipalities: with special reference to chemical toxic waste disposal sites and per capita income. Int J Epidemiol 1983; 12: 276–88.
  • Griffith J, Duncan R, Riggan W, Peloma A. Cancer mortality in US counties with hazardous waste sites and ground water pollution. Arch Environ Health 1989; 44: 69–74.
  • Goldberg MS, DeWar R, Desy M, Riberdy H. Risk of developing cancer relative to living near a municipal solid waste landfill site in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Arch Environ Health 1999; 54: 291–6.
  • Dockery DW, Pope III CA. Acute respiratory effects of particulate air pollution. Annu Rev Public Health 1994; 15: 107–32.
  • Katsouyanni K, Touloumi G, Spix C, Schwartz J, Balducci F, Medina S et al. Short term effects of ambient sulphur dioxide and particulate matter on mortality in 12 European cities: Results from time series data from the APHEA project. BMJ 1997; 314: 1658–63.
  • Zanobetti A, Schwartz J, Gold D. Are there sensitive subgroups for the effects of airborne particles? Environ Health Perspect 2000; 108: 841–5.
  • L.D. Budnick and others, "Cancer and birth defects near the Drake Superfund site, Pennsylvania," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 39, No. 6 (November 1984), pgs. 409-413.
  • Kharrazi and others, "A community based study of adverse pregnancy outcomes near a large hazardous waste landfill in alifornia," TOXICOLOGY AND INDUSTRIAL HEALTH Vol. 13, Nos. 2/3(1997), pgs. 299-310.
  • K. Mallin, "Investigation of a bladder cancer cluster in northwestern Illinois," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 132 No. 1 Supplement (July 1990), pgs. S96-S106.
  • J. Griffith and others, "Cancer mortality in U.S. counties with hazardous waste sites and ground water pollution," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 44, No. 2 (March 1989), pgs. 69-74.
  • E. Greiser and others, "Increased incidence of leukemias in the vicinity of a previous industrial waste dump in North Rhine-Westfalia, West Germany [abstract]," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 134, No. 7 (1991), pg. 755.
  • Kirk Brown and K.C. Donnelly, "An Estimation of the Risk Associated with the Organic Constituents of Hazardous and Municipal Waste Landfill Leachates," HAZARDOUS WASTES AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Vol. 5, No. 1 (Spring, 1988), pgs. 1-30.
  • Kouznetsova, M., et al. Increased Rate of Hospitalization for Diabetes and Residential Proximity of Hazardous Waste Sites. Environmental Health Perspectives (2007) 115(1): 75-79.
  • Kuehn, C.M., et al. Risk of Malformations Associated with Residential Proximity to Hazardous Waste Sites in Washington State. Environmental Research (2007) 103: 405-412.
  • Palmer, S. et al. Risk of congenital anomalies after the opening of landfill sites. Environmental Health Perspectives (2005) 113(10): 1362-1365.
  • Dummer, T., Dickinson, H., Parker, L. Adverse pregnancy outcomes near landfill sites in Cumbria, northwest England, 1950-1993. Archives of Environmental Health (2003) 58(11): 692-697.
  • Vrijheid et al. Chromosomal congenial anomalies and residence near hazardous waste landfill sites. Lancet (2002) 359: 320-322.
  • Elliot, P. et al. Risk of adverse birth outcomes in populations living near landfill sites. British Medical Journal (2001) 323: 363-368.
  • Berger, S., Jones P., White, M. Exploratory analysis of respiratory illness among persons living near a landfill. Journal of Environmental Health (2000) 62.6: 19.
  • Berry, M., and Bove, F. Birth weight reduction associated with residence near a hazardous waste landfill. Environmental Heath Perspectives (1997) 105(8): 856-861.
  • Upton, A. et al. Public health aspects of toxic chemical disposal sites. Annual Review of Public Health (1989) 10:1-22.
  • Hertzman, C. et al. Upper Ottawa Street landfill site health study. Environmental Health Perspectives (1987) 75:173-195.
  • G Vinti, V Bauza, T Clasen, K Medlicott, T Tudo.  Municipal Solid Waste Management and Adverse Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(8), 4331;
  • Yunjiang Yu, Effects of ambient air pollution from municipal solid waste landfill on children's non-specific immunity and respiratory health. Environ Pollution, 2018 May:236:382-390.
  • The life cycle approach for assessing the impact of municipal solid waste incineration on the environment and on human health. F Di Maria, M Mastrantonio, R Uccelli - Science of The Total Environment, Volume 776, 1 July 2021, 145785.
  • A Walosik, J Szajner, K Pawla. Municipal waste and related health risks - Journal of Elementology J. Elem., 26(3): 573-582.
  • M Kah, L Levy, C Brown. Potential for effects of land contamination on human health. 2. The case of waste disposal sites. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 2012; 15(7):441-67.
  • A Di Ciaula, Increased deaths from gastric cancer in communities living close to waste landfills.  Int J Environ Health Res 2016; 26(3): 281-90.
  • Y Yu, Z Yu, P Sun, B Lin, L Li, Z Wang, R Ma.  Effects of ambient air pollution from municipal solid waste landfill on children's non-specific immunity and respiratory health - Environ Pollut. 2018 May: 236: 382-390.