Upper Heyford residents consider blood testing amid contamination concerns
People living near the former RAF base are worried about their health after high levels of 'forever chemicals' were found in a stream
A community group in Upper Heyford is exploring blood testing for local residents after finding high levels of 'forever chemicals' in a stream near the former RAF base.
The Gallos Brook Community Group has been carrying out independent water testing for PFAS – a group of man-made chemicals which do not easily break down in the environment.
Concerns in the area initially grew after Environment Agency monitoring detected PFAS in a watercourse several kilometres from the former RAF Upper Heyford site.
The group then commissioned its own testing closer to the former airbase, with one sample returning a total PFAS concentration of more than 42,000 nanograms per litre.
Some PFAS were historically used in foams designed to tackle flammable liquid fires and commonly used at airfields.
An independent review commissioned by the Caulcott Area Residents’ Association found the mixture of PFAS detected in Environment Agency samples included chemicals commonly associated with firefighting foams.
It concluded the former airbase was a “plausible source” of PFAS contamination, citing its long operational history and firefighting training activities.
Upper Heyford residents are now considering blood testing to find out more about their potential exposure.
Charlie, who is part of the Gallos Brook Community Group, said: "In our last public meeting we mentioned the idea of blood testing.
"I haven't added up the total number of names but in that meeting I think about 20 or 30 people said that they'd like to have their bloods tested.
“So there's a big appetite for more information in the area and for us to have better data about what ways this contamination has affected the local community.”
However, the plans remain at an exploratory stage.
Charlie said an individual blood test could cost around £300, with the group looking at possible funding and whether testing a larger number of people could reduce the cost.
Campaigners have also been speaking to people with scientific expertise about how any results could be interpreted.
“It's not just the blood test, it's also knowing how to translate the data because we're not scientists,” Charlie said.
“What do these readings mean? What are the levels I need to be worried about?
“I think when we're testing residents, we have to be responsible for informing them about what the information they're getting means.”
The group is also considering producing information sheets to accompany any future testing so residents have guidance on what their results mean.
Charlie said: “We've got to be responsible about not unleashing terror into our communities and informing people of the risks.”
Cherwell District Council says there is currently no evidence suggesting an immediate risk to residents’ health.