In late 2010, a subsurface smoldering event was detected in the Bridgeton Sanitary Landfill in St. Louis County, Missouri. This was followed by complaints from nearby residents of foul odors emanating from the landfill. In 2016 a health survey was conducted of residents near the landfill and, as a comparison, other regions of St. Louis County. The survey was a two-stage cluster sample, where the first stage was census blocks, and the second stage was households within the census blocks. The health survey, which was conducted by face-to-face interviews of residents both near the landfill and away from the landfill, focused mainly on respiratory symptoms and diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The differences in the prevalence of asthma (26.7%, 95% CI 19.8–34.1 landfill vs 24.7%, 95% CI 15.7–33.6 comparison) and COPD (13.7%, 95% CI 7.2–20.3 landfill vs 12.5%, 95% CI 6.4–18.7 comparison) between the two groups were not statistically significant. Landfill households reported significantly more “other respiratory conditions,” (17.6%, 95% CI 11.1–24.1 landfill vs 9.5%, 95% CI 4.8–14.3 comparison) and attacks of shortness of breath (33.9%, 95% CI 25.1–42.8 landfill vs 17.9%, 95% CI 12.3–23.5). Frequency of odor perceptions and level of worry about neighborhood environmental issues was higher among landfill households (p < 0.001). We conclude that the results do not support the hypothesis that people living near the Bridgeton Landfill have elevated respiratory or related illness compared to those people who live beyond the vicinity of the landfill.

2010年底，在密苏里州圣路易斯县的布里奇顿卫生垃圾填埋场发现了地下​​闷烧事件。随后，附近居民抱怨垃圾填埋场散发出恶臭。2016年，对垃圾填埋场附近的居民以及圣路易斯县其他地区的居民进行了健康调查。该调查是一个分为两个阶段的集群样本，其中第一阶段是普查区，第二阶段是普查区中的家庭。健康调查是通过对垃圾填埋场附近和远离垃圾填埋场的居民进行面对面的访谈而进行的，主要针对呼吸道症状和疾病，例如哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病。哮喘患病率的差异（26.7％，95％CI 19.8-34.1垃圾填埋场； 24.7％，95％CI 15.7-33）。两组之间的比较（6个比较）和COPD（13.7％，95％CI 7.2–20.3垃圾填埋场与12.5％，95％CI 6.4-18.7的比较）之间无统计学意义。垃圾填埋场家庭报告的“其他呼吸道状况”明显更多（17.6％，95％CI 11.1–24.1垃圾填埋场，而9.5％，95％CI CI 4.8-14.3相比）和呼吸急促发作（33.9％，95％CI 25.1-42.8）垃圾填埋场占17.9％，95％置信区间12.3–23.5）。在垃圾填埋场中，气味感知的频率和对邻里环境问题的担忧程度更高（p <0.001）。我们得出的结论是，该结果不支持以下假设：与居住在垃圾填埋场附近的人相比，居住在布里奇顿垃圾填埋场附近的人患呼吸道疾病或相关疾病的可能性更高。两组之间比较[7]。垃圾填埋家庭报告的“其他呼吸状况”明显更多（17.6％，95％CI 11.1–24.1垃圾填埋场，而9.5％，95％CI CI 4.8-14.3相比）和呼吸急促发作（33.9％，95％CI 25.1-42.8）垃圾填埋场占17.9％，95％置信区间12.3–23.5）。在垃圾填埋场中，气味感知的频率和对邻里环境问题的担忧程度更高（p <0.001）。我们得出的结论是，该结果不支持以下假设：与居住在垃圾填埋场附近的人相比，居住在布里奇顿垃圾填埋场附近的人患呼吸道疾病或相关疾病的可能性更高。两组之间比较[7]。垃圾填埋家庭报告的“其他呼吸状况”明显更多（17.6％，95％CI 11.1–24.1垃圾填埋场，而9.5％，95％CI CI 4.8-14.3相比）和呼吸急促发作（33.9％，95％CI 25.1-42.8）垃圾填埋场占17.9％，95％置信区间12.3–23.5）。在垃圾填埋场中，气味感知的频率和对邻里环境问题的担忧程度更高（p <0.001）。我们得出的结论是，该结果不支持以下假设：与居住在垃圾填埋场附近的人相比，居住在布里奇顿垃圾填埋场附近的人患呼吸道疾病或相关疾病的可能性更高。3个比较）和呼吸急促发作（32.5％，95％CI 25.1–42.8垃圾填埋场； 17.9％，95％CI 12.3-23.5）。在垃圾填埋场中，气味感知的频率和对邻里环境问题的担忧程度更高（p <0.001）。我们得出的结论是，该结果不支持以下假设：与居住在垃圾填埋场附近的人相比，居住在布里奇顿垃圾填埋场附近的人患呼吸道疾病或相关疾病的可能性更高。3个比较）和呼吸急促发作（32.5％，95％CI 25.1–42.8垃圾填埋场； 17.9％，95％CI 12.3-23.5）。在垃圾填埋场中，气味感知的频率和对邻里环境问题的担忧程度更高（p <0.001）。我们得出的结论是，该结果不支持以下假设：与居住在垃圾填埋场附近的人相比，居住在布里奇顿垃圾填埋场附近的人患呼吸道疾病或相关疾病的可能性更高。