Two areas within a three-mile radius of a chemical plant in Lancashire have recorded higher-than-expected rates of kidney cancer, according to a government-funded study that has nevertheless concluded there is no evidence of a cancer cluster and no further investigation is warranted.
Higher kidney cancer rates recorded
The multi-agency health cell – comprising Lancashire County Council, the UK Health Security Agency, NHS partners, the National Disease Registration Service, Wyre Council and the Environment Agency – reviewed cancer incidence between 2003 and 2022 in small geographic areas around the AGC Chemicals Europe plant in Thornton-Cleveleys, near Blackpool. The factory emitted an estimated 49 tonnes of PFOA, a known carcinogenic “forever chemical” banned globally in 2020, between the 1950s and 2012. AGC acquired the plant in 1999 and stopped using PFOA in 2012.
PFOA belongs to the PFAS family of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which do not break down in the environment. At the Thornton-Cleveleys site it was used to manufacture PTFE, another forever chemical used in non-stick coatings. The broader Hillhouse Technology Enterprise Zone, where the AGC plant sits, has a history of chemical manufacturing stretching back to the 1890s.
The screening found no higher-than-expected rates for most cancers. However, one area south-east of the factory and another north of Blackpool recorded “higher-than-expected” rates of kidney cancer – a disease that international research has repeatedly linked to PFOA exposure. When the health cell conducted a more detailed statistical review, it found no evidence of a statistically significant excess of kidney cancer cases, no evidence of a cancer cluster and no indication of an environmental association. Its report concluded: “No further cluster investigation is warranted at this stage.”
Expert disagreement over study conclusions
Several independent scientists have criticised this conclusion, arguing that the findings should not be dismissed and that the study’s own limitations undermine its central claim.
Dr David Megson, a forensic environmental scientist at Manchester Metropolitan University who reviewed the full report, described the conclusion as “very contradictory” and said it “seems to downplay the findings rather than assess it objectively”. He pointed out that the study had “clearly identified a higher than expected number of kidney cancer cases in close proximity to a factory” that “released chemicals that are known human carcinogens, with links specifically to kidney cancer. This to me is a major source of concern.”
The report itself notes that the elevated rates could be the result of random variation because of the small sample size. But Dr Megson said there was “plenty of other evidence that indicates that this is not the case”. He highlighted “a large number of limitations acknowledged in their report” and said those should be “properly considered before concluding there has not been an impact”. Drawing a parallel with contaminated land designations, he added: “If a portion of land is designated as contaminated, it means there is a significant possibility of significant harm. Personally, I fear that this data is giving us strong evidence that the significant possibility has been realised, and that significant harm has already been caused.”
Dr Dan Middleton, a senior lecturer in environmental cancer epidemiology at Queen’s University Belfast, said he would be cautious about interpreting the findings as meaning no further investigation was needed, “particularly given that kidney cancer is one of the cancers most consistently linked to PFOA exposure”. He called for further evidence “particularly around historical exposures” to place the results “in their proper context”.
Dr Tony Fletcher, an epidemiologist and global PFAS expert at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, noted that the report showed a small excess in kidney cancer that in most cases was not statistically significant. But he said this was “entirely consistent with a small increase in risk due to [PFOA] exposure”.
The scientific basis for concern is substantial. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified PFOA as a Group 1 human carcinogen. The landmark C8 Health Project near a DuPont facility in the United States found a clear association between high PFOA levels in drinking water and significantly increased kidney cancer incidence. Studies have shown that even exposure levels comparable to those in the general population are associated with elevated risk, with mechanisms including chronic inflammation in renal tissues, endocrine disruption and genetic susceptibility.
All three experts called for more research, including PFOA blood testing. Dr Middleton described such testing as the “missing link” in the study.
Dr Megson also raised concerns about the scope of environmental monitoring. He noted that current regulatory testing typically targets only about 50 of the thousands of PFAS compounds, and that “total PFAS” analytical methods can reveal that targeted approaches miss more than 80% of the total PFAS load. He advocates for non-targeted methods to capture the full picture. Separately, the Environment Agency has faced criticism for not routinely testing for EEA-NH₄, a PFAS compound produced and emitted by the AGC plant that is classified as “reprotoxic category 2” and is estimated to be discharged in volumes of around 800 kilograms annually into the River Wyre. Independent assessments have already detected EEA-NH₄ in soils around the plant.
Contamination concerns and legal action
Environmental testing by the Environment Agency has already led to significant public health advice for those living near the factory. Residents have been told not to eat fruit, vegetables or eggs produced within one kilometre of the plant. An allotment on the factory border has been closed and officially classed as contaminated land after elevated PFOA was found in soil and produce. More recently, residents have also been advised not to eat domestically farmed eggs or egg-laying poultry because elevated PFAS levels were found in a small sample of poultry keepers’ eggs. One resident was told that eating a single duck egg could exceed the tolerable weekly intake for PFAS.
The law firm Leigh Day is investigating a potential legal claim against AGC Chemicals Europe on behalf of local residents. As part of that investigation, the firm plans to offer PFAS blood testing to residents. Sarah Moore, a partner at Leigh Day, said the firm would be working with its expert team to “fully understand these results over the coming months, as we offer members of the community PFAS blood tests if they wish to obtain a fuller picture about their personal exposure levels”.
The multi-agency health group standing by its original position stated: “In line with national guidance, the health cell has concluded that there is no evidence of a kidney cancer cluster and no indication of a link to environmental contamination, and that no further investigation is required at this stage.”
AGC Chemicals Europe did not respond to a request for comment. A company spokesperson previously told the BBC that all its chemical processes were “rigorously monitored and controlled and compliant with current UK and EU environmental laws and regulations” and that it took its responsibilities to protect environmental health “extremely seriously”. The company has stated that PFOA was voluntarily phased out more than a decade ago and that it has never used PFOS, while acknowledging historical use of PFOA at the site.
