The Hanyroreh reported Thursday that residents living around the USAF base in Pyeongtaek suffer from much higher rates of heart disease, nervous disorders and hearing loss due to noise from U.S. helicopters and combat aircraft. Moreover, it reported that children near the base suffer from depression, behavior disorders and autism at rates 1.5-2 times higher than the children of surrounding areas.
Pyeongtaek City said these were the results appeared in a report the city received from Danguk University medical school professor Gwon Ho-jang, to whom the city entrusted with a health study of residents living near U.S. military facilities in Pyeongtaek. The survey, taken at the request of residents who wanted a study done on sound pollution damage ahead of the relocation of additional U.S. bases to Pyeongtaek, cost Pyeongtaek City some 230 million won. The survey was conducted from July to January on 658 people who lived in eight districts immediately adjacent the USAF base, including Hwanggujiri, Seotan-myeon, 259 residents of three districts like Wolgok-dong which are located more than 5km away from the base, and 679 elementary school children attending seven schools, including Seotan Elementary School. This was the first survey on U.S. base noise pollution conducted by a local government.
The survey revealed that 47.3-52.1 percent of the residents of communities immediately adjacent the base showed signs of high blood pressure, some 6-10 points higher than residents of neighboring villages. People living next to the base who were exposed to much jet fighter noise suffered from hearing loss of some six decibels compared to neighboring areas. In the case of the U.S. bombing range in Maehyang-ni, Hwaseong-si, Gyeonggi-do, a survey by the Association of Physicians for Humanism in June 2000 revealed that those residing close to the range had hearing power some 20 decibels lower than average.
20.9 percent of residents exposed to helicopter noise suffered nervous disorders like depression, anxiety and insomnia, while 10.3-22.5 percent of residents exposed to jet noise suffered from nervous disorders. This was quite high compared to residents of neighboring districts, only 7.1 percent of whom suffered from nervous disorders. In the case of women, 57 percent of women exposed to base noise suffered from menstrual cramps, while only 45.5 percent of women in surrounding districts suffered from such cramps.
In the case of children, 15.2 percent of those exposed to helicopter noise and 7.3 percent of those exposed to jet noise suffered from signs of autism, rates some 4-8 times greater than those of surrounding districts (1.9 percent). Rates of nervous disorders like depression and insomnia where higher for children in areas adjacent to the base who were exposed to helicopter noise (23.2 percent) and jet noise (10.9 percent) than for children in neighboring districts (3.8 percent). Children living with noise pollution from the base also scored lower in mental skills like writing and arithmetic.
Prof. Gwon said, “There are almost no other examples in Korea of comprehensive research like this one on the health effects of aircraft noise polution… The survey revealed that residents living next to the USAF base are suffering from serious damage in their health, including hearing and their pulmonary and nervous systems.”
A Pyeongtaek City official said, “Because aeronautics laws have not been applied to U.S. military installations, we could not conduct projects to deal with sound polution… As the Special Law on U.S. Bases has been crafted and sound damages confirmed, we plan to demand of the Defense Ministry basic countermeasures to deal with sound pollution, including funds to pay for measures to prevent sound pollution damage.”
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
29 Comments
A proper study would analyze people of comparable living conditions and economic status (both of which could be factors in these same problems). With living standards as relatively poor as they are near, say, parts of Yongsan Garrison (e.g., the dense concrete jungle of Haebangchon), I think it’s possible you could find a similar situation, even though Yongsan Garrison lacks the problem of higher noise pollution.
I don’t feel that sorry for them. They knew the base was there when they built the apartments building, houses, etc. The Korean government failed to provide the adquate buffers around the military installation and the Korean civilians were lured by the cheap land around the base. Of course now they will want the Americans to pay. Just like every other training area in Korea. Time to get U.S. Forces out of this country and leave them to their own devices.
FlyingSword
Marmot,
Why have you gotten into the habit of posting stuff like this with zero comment?
And I wonder if there hasn’t also been a slow trend to de-Marmotize more and more posts on an increasing number of topics?
It is curious.
My initial thought is that the trend has been to slowly but increasingly drop direct statements of opinion for language and style that tends to simply say, “This is what these news items said.”
Was that always the case? I can’t remember and am too lazy right now to go back, but my initial feeling is that it wasn’t — that in the past you were more likely to speak your mind and speak it clearly with unambigious wording.
?
Where’s my ejection handle… there it is. [WHOOSH]
You know, uninkorea, I knew you were going to ask that. In fact, I was going to link to my last Hani translation/summary where you asked that very question.
The fact is, I don’t really have much to add to the piece. It’s pretty much a straight news story–Pyeongtaek released the report, and the Hani reported it. Sure, it’s part of the Hani’s offensive against the base transfer, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the issues it raises don’t need to be addressed. Besides, it’s much more important that the pieces be translated (so that at least the English-speaking world knows what the issues are) than for me to make snarky comments about said issues.
Anyway, rather than complain about my lack of comments, why don’t you tell us how YOU feel about the piece?
Oh Christ. Let’s not start talking about our FEELINGS. That’s what the “objective” journalism of the Korean press is for. “Peelings, nothing but peelings ….” We don’t have any, don’t you know!?
Don’t get upset. I am simply curious.
I could be wrong, but it seems to me over time, you have been less and less inclined to comment about more things than just stuff like this.
And I do not have in mind “snarky” comments. I mean any comments. I especially mean well thought out comments exploring the issues you feel are important enough to post about.
My thought, without having backtracked in the archives to check, is that when I first started reading this blog a long time ago, the typical post involved a good bit of what Marmot thinks about issue X Y or Z, but for some time, the typical posts have shifted from blogging type posts to Ted Koppel NightLine type posts.
Am I the only one who has read this blog for a long time that thinks this?
I am just curious why or if I am just way off base.
And for the record, Ted Koppel was one of the very few journalists I still felt was worth watching — because he tried hard to stick to what American society believes is the ideal of journalism — presenting facts unfilted by the reporter or anchor’s personal opinions.
It seems to me you have shifted in that direction.
But, I personally would rather know what the blogger thinks about X Y and Z rather than having opinion omitted.
However, the translation angle makes more sense to me — if you mean to just offer it when it isn’t offered elsewhere in English.
But again, it still seems like you have started feeling like the best thing to do is to become more journalistic than bloggeristic as the blog has gotten older, and maybe as the blog has gotten more and more popular.
And again, I mean beyond US-SK alliance issues.
As far as my own opininon about the piece — it is just typical of the culture of anti-USFK. These kinds of studies and news items appear when some other bigger issue starts to agitate things — Pyongtaek expansion and the costs and trouble with making it happen.
I also don’t think it is factually correct on one part — I believe such studies have been done before — I think the Korean government has already lost appeals in court on one or more law suits about noise pollution near US bases (I think they have also lost such suits over a Korean air base and Kimpo).
For example, I can’t remember and probably don’t care enough about the curiousity to scratch it by checking the archives, but what about the Hines Ward posts?
I vaguely remember them starting the same way — with a journalistic (not bloggeristic) type reporting of what the Korean media was saying —- but the comments about what Marmot thinks on the issue didn’t come (or at least not explicit) until you joined in the comments section itself.
But, I don’t think that was how it was long ago.
And it really doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
My personal preference is for more insightful bloggeristic posts than journalistic ones.
I don’t read the blogs to find out what journalists are saying. I also don’t read the blogs that are more about making snide comments or about what blogger X ate for lunch that day.
I like ones I read usually daily are from the longer term expats who offer their opinion and insights into a variety of issues. I like seeing how others who have much experience with Korea or other things are thinking on issues.
But again, that is my pesonal preference and doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
“As the Special Law on U.S. Bases has been crafted and sound damages confirmed, we plan to demand of the Defense Ministry basic countermeasures to deal with sound pollution, including funds to pay for measures to prevent sound pollution damage.”
So it’s all about money? Surprised, anyone?
I’d have see the study design for sure, but I am extremely skeptical of most Korean surveys of this sort, which are in my opinion made expressly to support a view, not discover the truth.
I could be wrong, but I believe Osan has already been the subject of one lost law suit where the Korean government was ordered to pay compensation for noise pollution.
I also believe a Korea air base and either Kimpo or the new airport or another one was also subject of a lost law suit by the government.
I love Korean pseudo science. The questionable cause fallacy is its hallmark. For instance, what kind of people would take up residence right next to a bombing range (perhaps even illegally)? Perhaps such people are prone to nervous and health problems due to poverty and can only afford to live in places with depressed real estate values such as these.
Not only did Marmot used to include more of his own comments, he used to be much more fouler mouthed. I’m really curious what caused his sea change. Hank Kim disapproval?
Interesting they only focus on Osan and not ROK Army installations. I guess all those Korean fighter planes and helicopters around the country are much quieter than those noisy Osan jets. This has BS written all over it as usual.
I want to stress again my wondering about the lack of commenting in posts is an idle curiosity.
It is also secondly a sign of a desire to see more insights on these issues from Marmot which is probably what led me to start reading the blog daily long ago in the first place.
Quick search found
http://www.stripes.com/article.....chive=true
No, Dogbertt, Hank didn’d disapprove. It’s just that over the course of running this blog, it’s come to my attention that not all of my readers appreciated the “potty mouth.”
But many did the insightful commentary….
Here is an article on the Kimpo airport lawsuit I vaguely remembered
http://search.hankooki.com/tim.....term=noise compensation &path=hankooki1/kt_nation/200205/t2002051417201441110.htm&media=kt
I’m pretty sure a Korean military airbase lost a similar lawsuit since 2000, but I didn’t find an article for it.
LOL! Let’s move next to a BOMBING RANGE and then complain about the noise… Better yet, let’s move to Korea and complain about the people… Err, wait.. that’s a little too close to home
I have no trouble complaining about Korea or America…err…
This is a sly bit of news *making* in that one does not hear of statistics involving koreans that have moved into apartment buildings that were knowingly built too close to road traffic — in violation of existing laws. We do hear of this simply because certain parties have political agendas.
These parties can manufacture as much data as they want but it will not change anything. The military is there for a reason and most people want them there. If people are not willing to relocate, then that is their burden and the Korean Government’s affair.
I laugh at the Hanyroreh and so should everyone else.
Mr. Koehler must be seeing the light.
american military presence on the peninsula is just difficult to defend intelligently?
Those living near the bases should also check for toxic substances in the water supply.
show me an american military base with no toxic wastes and I’ll show you an Amish playboy centerfold model
Perhaps you should say “show me a large industrial Korean factory with less toxic waste than an American military base and I’ll show you a cloned stem cell.
Though most any military base undoubtedly has toxic waste products (jet fuel, oil, etc.), it is obviously foolish and dishonest to consider American bases as being the primary source of pollution that occurs in Korea.
Well,Lux, there are plenty of people who would love to pull the troops out of here and redirect all future bills (and responsibility) for defending the place to you and your relatives here.
I hope you’re making a good salary, cause your tax bite’s going to hurt real bad-that is, unless the Roh-nothings downgrade the military to the point that they just turn the country over to kind old Mr. KJI. If it ever comes to that, who will you call for help? China?
snow
Do you want to have them troops pulled out, too? Why don’t you tell Mr. 조지 워커 부시 that?
Well, Lux, I actually don’t know if it would be a good idea to take all of them out (strategic advantage for the US, and most Koreans don’t really want them to all be gone, cause of the increased taxes), but I would like to see a drawdown to 2 or 3,000 or less. Sorry, there’s no point in me saying anything to Pres Bush. I’m not American. I just see the advantage that Korea gets from having US troops here and don’t like the commie whining over it.
Don’t leave Tripwire Lite. Take all troops out. Promise air support from aircraft carriers and bases outside NK’s effective missile range (meaning not those in Japan), or not.
Leave no boots on the ground.
show me an american military base with no toxic wastes and I’ll show you an Amish playboy centerfold model
Again, this is a complex issue that is intentionally distorted by special interest groups and the media. US Army has found numerous oil tanks left by the Japanese and removed many at their own expense. They have underwritten the expenses of numerous cleanups and even written provisions into SOFA that make it the most generous SOFA agreement in existance. And whatever the soil content, the army bases remain well upkept, spotlessly clean environments.
But the media is not revealing that the govt wants to hold them to standards far stricter than they apply to Korean sites. It is not showing how the govt has reneged on uts responsibility to upgrade rotting infrastructure. Again its wrangling over money and attempting to use the media to negotiate the issue publically. Should the US be responsible for cleaning up conditions that were preexisting or caused as a result of ROK negligence?
I talked to a high school friend of mine about this back a couple of years ago when Yongsan was in the news and the military was taking loads of soil up for treatment. He is an environmental engineer from Georgia Tech, and his job for years before that time was handling soil contamination at gas stations and other places that had large underground tanks. He said 80% of the stations you see in the US have such contamination.