Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Implications of the Impact of Fracking on Brain Health

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Environmental ethicists and experts in human health have raised concerns about the effects of hydraulic fracking to access natural oil and gas resources found deep in shale rock formations on surrounding ecosystems and communities. In this study, we analyzed the prevalence of discourse on brain and mental health, and ethics, in the peer-reviewed and grey literature in the five-year period between 2016 and 2022. A total of 84 articles met inclusion criteria for analysis. Seventy-six percent (76%) mentioned impacts on brain (e.g., neural tube defects, neurological symptoms), and mental health (e.g., negative psychological effects, stress, depression) briefly; 11 reports dedicated substantive discourse to either or both together. References to safety (77%) dominated the ethics context. Discussion of environmental injustices as fracking sites disproportionately affect vulnerable communities appeared in 38% of the papers. We examine the findings through the lens of environmental neuroethics that brings human-made changes to the environment, brain and mental health, and ethics together into three interwoven lines of inquiry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data are available by request to the corresponding author.

References

  1. Hausman, C. and R. Kellogg. 2015. welfare and distributional implications of shale gas. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 71–139. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43684099

  2. Feyrer, J., E.T. Mansur, and B. Sacerdote. 2017. geographic dispersion of economic shocks: evidence from the fracking revolution. American Economic Review 107 (4): 1313–1334. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang, Q., X. Chen, A.N. Jha, and H. Rogers. 2014. Natural gas from shale formation – The evolution, evidences and challenges of shale gas revolution in United States. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 30: 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hassett, K., and A. Mathur. 2013. Benefits of Hydraulic Fracking. Oil and Natural Gas, Oxford Energy Forum. 91: 11–14.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Loomis, J., and M. Haefele. 2017. Quantifying Market and Non-market Benefits and Costs of Hydraulic Fracturing in the United States: A Summary of the Literature. Ecological Economics. 138: 160–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. NES Fircroft. 2022. A brief history of fracking. https://www.nesfircroft.com/resources/blog/a-brief-history-offracking/#:~:text=The%20process%20of%20fracturing%20to,in%20%27shooting%20the%20well%27. Accessed 30 Jan 2024.

  7. Thomas, M., N. Pidgeon, D. Evensen, T. Partridge, A. Hasell, C. Enders, B.H. Harthorn, and M. Bradshaw. 2017. Public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas and oil in the United States and Canada: Public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 8: E450. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brown, E., K. Hartman, C. P. Borick, B. G. Rabe, and T. M. Ivacko. 2013. The national surveys on energy and environment public opinion on fracking: Perspectives from Michigan and Pennsylvania. Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP), Survery Report: Climate Policy Options. SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2313276.

  9. Theodori, G. 2009. Paradoxical perceptions of problems associated with unconventional natural gas development. Journal of Rural Social Sciences 24 (3): Article 7.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mayer, A., S.K. Olson-Hazboun, and S. Malin. 2018. Fracking Fortunes: Economic Well-being and Oil and Gas Development along the Urban-Rural Continuum. Rural Sociology 83: 532–567. https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu, K., G. Paranjothi, J.B. Milford, and F. Kreith. 2016. Transition to sustainability with natural gas from fracking. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 14: 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2016.01.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Legrand, C. 2020. Why fracking is not an energy transition. Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). https://aida-americas.org/en/blog/why-fracking-is-not-an-energy-transition

  13. U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Global Energy Institute. energy accountability series 2020. What if. . . Hydraulic fracturing was banned? https://www.globalenergyinstitute.org/what-if-hydraulic-fracturing-was-banned-2020-edition.

  14. Concerned Health Professionals of New York and Physicians for Social Responsibility, “Compendium of Scientific, Medical, and Media Findings Demonstrating Risks and Harms of Fracking and Associated Gas and Oil Infrastructure (Ninth Edition),” 2023. http://concernedhealthny.org/compendium/.

  15. McHenry, K. 2017. Fracking Women: A Feminist Critical Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing in Pennsylvania. IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 10. 79–104. https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab.10.2.79.

  16. Beebeejaun, Y. 2021. Fracking and epistemic injustice: A feminist critique of knowledge formation. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space. 2–21; 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544211036465

  17. McHenry, K. 2021. Getting Fracked: Gender Politics in Fracking Discourse. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 47, 191 – 207.

  18. Howarth, R., A. Ingraffea, and T. Engelder. 2011. Should fracking stop? Nature 477: 271–275. https://doi.org/10.1038/477271a.

  19. Goldman, G., D. Bailin, P. Rogerson, J. Agatstein, J. Imm, and P. Phartiyal. 2013. Toward an evidence-based fracking debate: Science, democracy, and community right to know in unconventional oil and gas development. Union of Concerned Scientists. Retrieved from https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/fracking-report-full_0.pdf.

  20. Clough, E., and D. Bell. 2016. Just Fracking: A Distributive Environmental Justice Analysis of Unconventional Gas Development in Pennsylvania, USA. Environmental Research Letters. 11: 025001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/2/025001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cabrera, L. 2017. Pesticides: A Case Domain for Environmental Neuroethics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 26 (4): 602–615. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180117000111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cabrera, L.Y., J. Tesluk, M. Chakraborti, R. Matthews, and J. Illes. 2016. Brain matters: From environmental ethics to environmental neuroethics. Environmental health : A global access science source 15: 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-016-0114-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wilke, R.A., and J.W. Freeman. 2017. Potential Health Implications Related to Fracking. JAMA 318 (17): 1645–1646. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.14239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Biggs, S. 2022. Fracking water report. Retrieved from https://stand.earth/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Fracking-water-reportpdf.pdf.

  25. Chen, H., and K.E. Carter. 2017. Characterization of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids for wells located in the Marcellus Shale Play. Journal of Environmental Management 200: 312–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Webb, R., and K.R. Zodrow. 2020. Disposal of water for hydraulic fracturing: Case study on the U.S. In Regulating water security in unconventional oil and gas. Water security in a new world. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18342-4_11.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Holzman, D.C. 2011. Methane found in well water near fracking sites. Environmental health perspectives 119 (7): A289. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.119-a289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Center for Biological Diversity. 2015. Cancer-causing chemicals found in fracking flowback from california oil wells. Retrieved from https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/fracking-02-11-2015.html.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lutz, B.D., A.N. Lewis, and M.W. Doyle. 2013. Generation, transport, and disposal of wastewater associated with Marcellus Shale gas development. Water Resources Research 49: 647–656. https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. U.S. EPA. 2016. Hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas: Impacts from the hydraulic fracturing water cycle on drinking water resources in the United States (final report). Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-16/236F: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Bonetti, P., C. Leuz, and G. Michelon. 2021. Large-sample evidence on the impact of unconventional oil an gas development on surface waters. Science 373 (6557): 896–902. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz2185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lloyd-Smith, M. 2016. Unconventional gas exploration and production: Human health impacts and environmental legacy. National Toxics Network. Retrieved from https://ntn.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/NTN-Unconventional-Gas-Report-April-2016-1.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kassotis, C.D., K.C. Klemp, D.C. Vu, C. Lin, C. Meng, C.L. Besch-Williford, L. Pinatti, R.T. Zoeller, E.Z. Drobnis, V.D. Balise, C.J. Isiguzo, M.A. Williams, D.E. Tillitt, and S.C. Nagel. 2015. Endocrine-disrupting activity of hydraulic fracturing chemicals and adverse health outcomes after prenatal exposure in male mice. Endocrinology 156 (12): 4458–4473. https://doi.org/10.1210/en.2015-1375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Webb, E., J. Moon, L. Dyrszka, B. Rodriguez, C. Cox, H. Patisaul, S. Bushkin, and E. London. 2018. Neurodevelopmental and neurological effects of chemicals associated with unconventional oil and natural gas operations and their potential effects on infants and children. Reviews on Environmental Health 33 (1): 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2017-0008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Alawattegama, S. 2013. Survey of Well Water Contamination in a Rural Southwestern Pennsylvania Community with Unconventional Shale Gas Drilling (Master’s thesis, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/285

  36. Wollin, K.M., G. Damm, H. Foth, A. Freyberger, T. Gebel, A. Mangerich, U. Gundert-Remy, F. Partosch, C. Rohl, T. Schupp, and J.G. Hengstler. 2020. Critical evaluation of human health risks due to hydraulic fracturing in natural gas and petroleum production. Archives of Toxicology 94 (4): 967–1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-020-02758-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Guilarte, T.R. 2010. Manganese and Parkinson’s disease: A critical review and new findings. Environmental Health Perspectives 118 (8): 1071–1080. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0901748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gaughan, C., K.M. Sorrentino, Z. Liew, N.P. Johnson, C.J. Clark, M. Soriano Jr., J. Plano, D.L. Plata, J.E. Saiers, and N.C. Deziel. 2023. Residential proximity to unconventional oil and gas development and birth defects in Ohio. Environmental Research 229: 115937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.115937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. McKenzie, L.M., R. Guo, R.Z. Witter, D.A. Savitz, L.S. Newman, and J.L. Adgate. 2014. Birth outcomes and maternal residential proximity to natural gas development in rural Colorado. Environmental Health Perspectives 122 (4): 412–417. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Silbergeld, E.K. 2016. Drinking water and the developing brain. Cerebrum. cer-09–16.

  41. Fontenot, B.E., L.R. Hunt, Z.L. Hildenbrand, D.D. Carlton Jr., H. Oka, J.L. Walton, D. Hopkins, A. Osorio, B. Bjorndal, Q.H. Hu, and K.A. Schug. 2013. An evaluation of water quality in private drinking water wells near natural gas extraction sites in the Barnett Shale formation. Environmental Science and Technology 47 (17): 10032–10040. https://doi.org/10.1021/es4011724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mazumdar, M. 2017. Does arsenic increase the risk of neural tube defects among a highly exposed population? A new case control study in Bangladesh. Birth Defects Research 109 (2): 92–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdra.23577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Soyer, M., K. Kaminski, and S. Ziyanak. 2020. Socio-psychological impacts of hydraulic fracturing on community health and well-being. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17 (4): 1186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hirsch, J.K., K. Bryant Smalley, E.M. Selby-Nelson, J.M. Hamel-Lambert, M.R. Rosmann, T.A. Barnes, D. Abrahamson, S.S. Meit, I. GreyWolf, S. Beckmann, and T. LaFromboise. 2018. Psychosocial impact of fracking: A review of the literature on the mental health consequences of hydraulic fracturing. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 16: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Casey, J.A., H.C. Wilcox, A.G. Hirsch, J. Pollak, and B.S. Schwartz. 2018. Associations of unconventional natural gas development with depression symptoms and disordered sleep in Pennsylvania. Scientific Reports 8: 11375. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-29747-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Gorski-Steiner, I., K. Bandeen-Roche, H.E. Volk, S. O’Dell, and B.S. Schwartz. 2022. The association of unconventional natural gas development with diagnosis and treatment of internalizing disorders among adolescents in Pennsylvania using electronic health records. Environmental Research 212 (Pt A): 113167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Hays J., McCawley M., and S.B.C. Shonkoff. 2017. Public health implications of environmental noise associated with unconventional oil and gas development. Sci Total Environ. Feb 15;580:448–456.

  48. Aryee, F., A. Szolucha, P.B. Stretesky, D. Short, M.A. Long, L.A. Ritchie, and D.A. Gill. 2020. Shale gas development and community distress: Evidence from England. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17 (14): 5069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Schultz, P. 2002. Environmental attitudes and behaviors across cultures. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 8(1).

  50. Huntington, H.P. 1998. Observations on the utility of the semi-directive interview for documenting traditional ecological knowledge. Arctic 51 (3): 237–242 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40512135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Menzies, C. 2006. Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Natural Resource Management. Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Natural Resource Management. 1–273.

  52. Coffey, Y., N. Bhullar, J. Durkin, M.S. Islam, and K. Usher. 2021. Understanding eco-anxiety: A systematic scoping review of current literature and identified knowledge gaps. J. Clim. Change Health. 3: 100047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Moore, M., S. von der Porten, and H. Castleden. 2016. Consultation is not consent: hydraulic fracturing and water governance on Indigenous lands in Canada: Consultation is not consent. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water 4. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1180.

  54. Gochfeld M, and J. Burger. 2011 Disproportionate exposures in environmental justice and other populations: the importance of outliers. Am J Public Health. ;101 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S53–63

  55. Peña-Parr, V. 2020. "The Complicated History of Environmental Racism." https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/black-history/10

  56. Johnston, J.E., K. Chau, M. Franklin, and L. Cushing. 2020. Environmental justice dimensions of oil and gas flaring in South Texas: Disproportionate exposure among Hispanic communities. Environmental Science & Technology 54 (10): 6289–6298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Cotton, M. 2016. Fair fracking? Ethics and environmental justice in United Kingdom shale gas policy and planning. International Journal of Justice and Sustainability. 22(2):

  58. Omidire, K. 2020. Access to courts by vulnerable persons in relation to hydraulic fracturing in South Africa. Commonwealth Law Bulletin. 46 (4): 662–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Behn, C. 2020. Fracking. Ecological Justice. kairoscanada.org

  60. Parfitt, B. 2017. Fracking, first nations and water. Canadian centre for policy alternatives. Retrieved from: https://policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/BC%20Office/2017/06/ccpa-bc_Fracking-FirstNations-Water_Jun2017.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hsieh, H.F., and S.E. Shannon. 2005. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15 (9): 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Bondy, S.C., and A. Campbell. 2017. Water Quality and Brain Function. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15 (1): 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Janitz, A.E., H.D. Dao, J.E. Campbell, J.A. Stoner, and J.D. Peck. 2019. The association between natural gas well activity and specific congenital anomalies in Oklahoma, 1997–2009. Environment International 122: 381–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.12.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Aker, A.M., K.W. Whitworth, D. Bosson-Rieutort, G. Wendling, A. Ibrahim, M. Verner, A.C. Benoit, and E. Caron-Beaudoin. 2022. Proximity and density of unconventional natural gas wells and mental illness and substance use among pregnant individuals: An exploratory study in Canada. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 242: 113962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2022.113962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Gorski-Steiner, I. and B. Schwartz. 2019. Environmental health concerns from unconventional natural gas developmenthttps://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190632366.013.44

  66. Casey, J.A., D.E. Goin, K.E. Rudolph, B.S. Schwartz, D. Mercer, H. Elser, E.A. Eisen, and R. Morello-Frosch. 2019. Unconventional natural gas development and adverse birth outcomes in Pennsylvania: The potential mediating role of antenatal anxiety and depression. Environmental Research 177: 108598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.108598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Tesluk, J., J. Illes, and R. Matthews. 2017. Neuroethics: Perspectives on brain health from a world of change. In Neuroethics: Anticipating the future, 455.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Aczel, M. and K. Makuch. 2019. Shale, Quakes, and High Stakes: Regulating Fracking-Induced Seismicity in Oklahoma, USA and Lancashire, UK. Case Studies in the Environment. 3.

  69. Boyle, M.D., D.C. Payne-Sturges, T. Sangaramoorthy, S. Wilson, K.E. Nachman, K. Babik, C.C. Jenkins, J. Trowell, D.K. Milton, and A. Sapkota. 2016. Hazard ranking methodology for assessing health impacts of unconventional natural gas development and production: The Maryland case study. PLoS One 11(1):e0145368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Haswell, M. R., and A. Bethmont. 2016. Health concerns associated with unconventional gas mining in rural Australia. Rural Remote Health. 2016 ;16(4):3825.

  71. Gorski, I., and B.S. Schwartz. 2019. Environmental health concerns from unconventional natural gas development. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Global Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190632366.013.44.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  72. Malin, S.A. 2020. Depressed democracy, environmental injustice: Exploring the negative mental health implications of unconventional oil and gas production in the United States. Energy Research & Social Science 70: 101720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Boslett, A., E. Hill, L. Ma, and L. Zhang. 2021. Rural light pollution from shale gas development and associated sleep and subjective well-being. Resource and Energy Economics 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2021.101220.

  74. Fisher, M.P., A. Mayer, K. Vollet, E.L. Hill, and E.N. Haynes. 2018. Psychosocial implications of unconventional natural gas development: Quality of life in Ohio’s Guernsey and Noble Counties. Journal of Environmental Psychology 55: 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.12.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Mayer, A., S. Malin, L. Mckenzie, J. Peel, and J. Adgate. 2020. Understanding self-rated health and unconventional oil and gas development in three colorado communities. Society & Natural Resources 34: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2020.1734702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Lai, P., K.D. Lyons, G.T. Kyle, and U.P. Kreuter. 2017. Coping with change in rural landscapes: The psychological stress of rural residents experiencing unconventional gas developments. Land Use Policy 67: 487–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.05.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Stacy, S.L. 2017. A review of the human health impacts of unconventional natural gas development. Current Epidemiology Reports 4 (1): 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40471-017-0097-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Bastian, E. 2017. "Drilling and Community Consent: How Oil and Gas Boards Can Address the Public Health Threats Posed by Fracking". Minnesota Law Review. 87. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/87

  79. Mazur, A. 2018. Birth and Death(?) of the Anti-Fracking Movement: Inferences from Quantity of Coverage Theory. Soc 55, 531–539 (2018)https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-018-0305-3

  80. Griffiths, J. 2019. Fracking in the UK: Expanding the application of an environmental justice frame. Local Environment. 24: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2019.1566891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Holding, S., D.M. Allen, C. Notte, and N. Olewiler. 2017. Enhancing water security in a rapidly developing shale gas region. Journal of Hydrology 11: 266–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2015.09.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Montpetit, É., E. Lachapelle, and A. Harvey. 2016. Advocacy coalitions, the media, and hydraulic fracturing in the Canadian Provinces of British Columbia and Quebec. In Policy debates on hydraulic fracturing, eds. C. Weible, T. Heikkila, K. Ingold, and M. Fischer. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59574-4_3.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  83. Olive, A. 2016. What Is the Fracking Story in Canada. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien. 60. n/a-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12257.

  84. Lachapelle, E., S. Kiss, and E. Montpetit. 2018. Public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing (Fracking) in Canada: Economic nationalism, issue familiarity, and cultural bias. The Extractive Industries and Society 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2018.07.003.

  85. Berardo, R., F. Holm, T. Heikkila, C.M. Weible, H. Yi, J. Kagan, C. Chen, and J. Yordy. 2020. Hydraulic fracturing and political conflict: News media coverage of topics and themes across nine states. Energy Research & Social Science 70: 101660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Deziel, N.C., B. Shamasunder, and L. Pejchar. 2022. Synergies and Trade-Offs in Reducing Impacts of Unconventional Oil and Gas Development on Wildlife and Human Health. BioScience 72 (5): 472–480. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biac014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. British Columbia Oil and Gas Development Scientific Review Panel. 2019. Scientific Review of Hydraulic Fracturing in British Columbia [PDF]. Government of British Columbia. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/natural-gas-oil/responsible-oil-gas-development/scientific_hydraulic_fracturing_review_panel_final_report.pdf

  88. Saiers, J. 2020. Science as a Foundation for Policy: The Case of Fracking. Yale School of the Environment. https://environment.yale.edu/news/article/science-as-a-foundation-for-policy-the-case-of-fracking

  89. Caron-Beaudoin, C., and C.G. Armstrong. 2019. Biomonitoring and Ethnobiology: Approaches to Fill Gaps in Indigenous Public and Environmental Health. Journal of Ethnobiology 39 (1). https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-39.1.50..

  90. Kern, T.A. 2011. A human rights assessment of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas. Environmental and Human Rights Advisory

Download references

Acknowledgements

Neuroethics Canada and the Graduate Program in Neuroscience are located on the unceded Traditional Territory of the Musqueam People. The authors thank Alaa Yehia for research assistance and members of the Neuroethics Canada team for valuable insights. AG receives funding for her graduate work from the Weston Foundation. JI is Distinguished University Scholar and the UBC Distinguished Scholar in Neuroethics supported by the North Family Foundation. The content here has been submitted for presentation by AG at the 2024 meeting of the International Neuroethics Society; parts will be presented by JI in the David Kopf Lecture at the 2023 meeting of the Society for Neuroscience.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Neuroethics Canada, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 2B5

    Ava Grier & Judy Illes

  2. Graduate Program in Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, 3402-2215 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z3

    Ava Grier

Authors
  1. Ava Grier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judy Illes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judy Illes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grier, A., Illes, J. Ethical Implications of the Impact of Fracking on Brain Health. Neuroethics 17, 12 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-024-09546-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-024-09546-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation