The emission of dioxin has been reduced fur- ther since then. The official threshold was lowered in 2001 to 0.1 ng dioxin/m3/hr, fol- lowing EU regulations. So the ﬁrst and only data available were two measurements in autumn 2000, which do not allow for exten- sive conclusions on the amount of airborne dioxin dispersed to the adjacent surroundings. Airborne dioxin alone is adsorbed onto plants, trees, vegetables, and soil but is easily washed away by rain. A soil examination in the exposed area in the summer 2001 pro- duced no evidence of a major contamination of the area (Vejle Amt 2001). A major study on environmental and hereditably caused cancers (Lichtenstein et al. 2000) concluded that genetic factors make only a minor contribution to development of sporadic cancer, with environmental factors being the major contributor. Airborne dioxin is presumably absorbed in the lungs, making up 75% of the total con- tent. European average dioxin concentrations range between 0.01 and 0.4 pg/m3, which translated into a Danish situation for an aver- age adult is an intake via the lungs of 0.2–8 pg dioxin/day. Dioxin via the airways is not the only entrance into the body; intake via food is assumed to constitute as much as 15 pg a day (2.44 pg/kg body weight (bw)/day; 70 kg) (Danish Environmental Protection Agency 1997). If people in Kolding have had concentra- tions of airborne dioxin in their ambient envi- ronment for many years in the range of the measured values of 100–200 ng dioxin/m3/hr that produce inhalation concentrations in the range of 1–6 pg dioxin/m3/hr, then using the above estimate would have caused a daily extra intake of 20 pg dioxin in the least pol- luted area and up to 120 pg in the highest polluted area (zone 3). Tolerable daily intake is 5 pg/kg bw in Denmark (Danish Environmental Protection Agency 1997). In the Netherlands authorities recommend ﬁgures be lowered to 1 pg/kg bw (Health Council of the Netherlands 1996). An extra intake of up to 120 pg dioxin/day for an adult would entail a substantial extra bur- den for the body of a well-known carcinogen. In the Kolding case no one knows whether actual emissions over the years have been even higher (or lower) than the measured values, meaning that the measured values could just Table 1. Cumulated cancer incidence data from 1986 to 1998 for three zones. Mini-Monograph | GIS and exposure modeling as well have been in the lower range of the actual pollution of dioxin. However, the infor- mation above on dioxin in soil in the exposure area (Vejle Amt 2001), together with the fact that no excess cancers were detected in any of the years under study, in any of the zones, in any age group or any sex group, indicate that no major pollution of the study area with air- borne dioxin has taken place over the years. As the peak dioxin values were detected in late 2000, any later consequence on cancer devel- opment will not be detectable until later. The relevant authorities have decided to continu- ously scrutinize the cancer data of the area in years to come. Four years of latency has been chosen as a very conservative restriction to allow for any early effect. Most likely the latency, at least for adults, is much longer. A planned follow-up of the present study is a search in the Danish Cancer Register for cancers diagnosed outside the study area among previous residents of the study area. The tool we have developed has its limita- tions. Most environmental exposures in a modern industrial society stem from food or are widely present in the environment, for Men (N)a Men (n)b Expected (n)c 95% CL Women (N)a Women (n)b Expected (n)c RR 95% CL Age group (years) Zone 1: whole study area (estimated exposure > 0 pg dioxin/m3/hr) 0–9 10–19 20–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60–69 70–79 80+ Total Zone 2 (estimated exposure > 3.5 pg dioxin/m3/hr) 0–9 10–19 20–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60–69 70–79 80+ Total Zone 3 (estimated exposure > 4.5 pg dioxin/m3/hr) 0–9 10–19 20–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60–69 70–79 80+ Total 18.420 18.609 33.031 23.072 18.870 14.161 10.395 7.647 3.421 147.626 4.913 4.945 5.286 4.678 4.366 3.548 2.565 1.649 600 32.550 1.824 1.746 1.630 1.703 1.558 1.498 1.132 855 292 12.238 4 2 12 12 32 54 143 156 65 480 0 0 4 5 9 15 40 45 13 131 0 0 1 3 4 5 15 19 4 51 3.21 3.46 14.78 17.74 33.02 70.45 132.29 179.30 95.76 550.01 0.86 0.92 2.37 3.60 7.64 17.65 32.64 38.66 16.79 121.13 0.32 0.32 0.73 1.31 2.73 7.45 14.41 20.05 8.17 55.49 Abbreviations: 95% CL, 95% conﬁdence limit; RR, relative risk. aBackground population. bNumber of cancer incidents. cExpected numbers of cancer cases. Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 112 | NUMBER 9 | June 2004 RR 1.25 0.58 0.81 0.68 0.97 0.77 1.08 0.87 0.68 0.87 0.00 0.00 1.69 1.39 1.18 0.85 1.23 1.16 0.77 1.08 0.00 0.00 1.37 2.29 1.47 0.67 1.04 0.95 0.49 0.92 0.34, 3.19 0.07, 2.09 0.42, 1.42 0.35, 1.18 0.66, 1.37 0.58, 1.00 0.91, 1.27 0.74, 1.02 0.52, 0.87 0.80, 0.95 0.00, 4.31 0.00, 4.01 0.46, 4.33 0.45, 3.24 0.54, 2.24 0.48, 1.40 0.88, 1.67 0.85, 1.56 0.41, 1.32 0.41, 1.32 0.00, 11.62 0.00, 11.36 0.03, 7.64 0.47, 6.70 0.40, 3.76 0.22, 1.57 0.58, 1.72 0.57, 1.48 0.13, 1.25 0.68, 1.21 16.871 18.990 33.448 21.994 19.357 15.113 12.930 11.560 7.178 157.441 4.485 4.723 5.387 5.335 5.053 3.792 3.141 2.596 1.368 35.850 1.492 1.543 1.740 1.993 1.943 1.667 1.586 1.295 462 13.721 3 7 11 18 59 106 138 176 103 621 2 2 3 2 14 29 35 35 19 141 0 1 0 1 6 12 16 12 5 53 2.57 2.64 13.98 27.14 66.47 97.75 148.67 171.68 115.11 646.01 0.68 0.66 2.25 6.58 17.35 24.53 36.12 38.55 21.94 148.66 0.23 0.21 0.73 2.46 6.67 10.78 18.24 19.23 7.41 65.96 1.17 2.65 0.79 0.66 0.89 1.08 0.93 1.03 0.89 0.82 2.92 3.05 1.33 0.30 0.81 1.18 0.97 0.91 0.87 0.95 0.00 4.66 0.00 0.41 0.90 1.11 0.88 0.62 0.67 0.80 0.24, 3.41 1.07, 5.47 0.39, 1.41 0.39, 1.05 0.68, 1.15 0.71, 1.55 0.64, 1.27 0.74, 1.36 0.58, 1.28 0.82, 1.12 0.35, 10.56 0.37, 11.01 0.27, 3.89 0.04, 1.10 0.44, 1.35 0.79, 1.70 0.68, 1.35 0.63, 1.26 0.52, 1.35 0.66, 1.30 0.00, 23.28 0.12, 25.99 0.00, 7.28 0.01, 2.27 0.33, 1.96 0.58, 1.94 0.50, 1.42 0.32, 1.09 0.22, 1.57 0.60, 1.05 1035