Health Risk Navigation Inc.

Would you benefit from living in a low-toxicity village, in which all the buildings are safe, low-toxicity buildings?


Yes = 84 %
No = 1 %
Unsure = 14 %
No Applicable Data = 1 %

If you need to move to a low-toxicity home, how far are you willing or able to move?


In this question, a participant could give more than one answer.


For analytical purposes, we reduced the various choices into 5 categories. Basically, in Category # 1, we combined the “Need To Stay In The Same Locality” choice with the “Want To Stay In The Same Locality” choice. We used the criteria that they were either unable or unwilling to move out of their locality. We did not include anyone in Category # 1, who also indicated that they were willing to move elsewhere. Category # 1 represents people who need a low-toxicity home in the locality in which they are currently living.


The percentage of participants for each category are:


Category # 1 – Need/Want To Stay In The Same Locality = 30 %
Category # 2 – Willing To Move Elsewhere In The Same Province Or State = 41 %
Category # 3 – Willing To Move Elsewhere In The Same Country = 35 %
Category # 4 – Willing To Even Move To Another Country = 22 %

How many bedrooms will your home need?

 

0 Bedroom = 0.44 %
1 Bedroom = 16.81 %
2 Bedroom = 46.02 %
3 Bedroom = 21.24 %
4 Bedroom = 6.19 %
5 Bedroom = 1.77 %
No Applicable Data (NAD) = 7.52 %

Would these family members or friends be willing to live a low-toxicity lifestyle, such as no scent and no smoking?

 

Yes = 58 %
No = 2 %
Don’t Know = 7 %
No Applicable Data (NAD) = 34 %

If you are in a position to rent, what type of low-toxicity home would you rent?

 

In this question, a participant could give more than one answer.


The respondents to this question were people who needed to rent, plus people who would be willing to buy or rent. The percentage of participants for each category are:


Category # 1 – A Low-Toxicity House = 67 %
Category # 2 – A Low-Toxicity Apartment = 39 %
Category # 3 – A Room With Kitchen Privileges In A Low-Toxicity House = 12 %
Category # 4 – A Room With Board In A Low-Toxicity House = 4 %
Category # 5 – A Room In A Low-Toxicity Convalescent Home = 7 %

 

Would Other Family Members Or Friends Be Living With You?

 

Yes = 45 %
No = 35 %
Don’t Know = 17 %
No Applicable Data (NAD) = 3 %

Due to your need for a low-toxicity home, are you currently homeless?

 

Yes = 10 %
No = 87 %
No Applicable Data (NAD) = 3 %


45 % of the homeless participants could afford to buy a home. So their homelessness was not due to a lack of money. This demonstrates the difficulty of acquiring or building a low-toxicity house in a safe low-toxicity locality.

 

How urgent is it for you to move into a low-toxicity home?


Don't Need To Move = 14%
Not Urgent = 26 %
Somewhat Urgent = 37 %
Extremely Urgent = 23 %
No Applicable Data (NAD) = 1 %

If you have mobility problems that need to be accommodated, which of the following do you need?
 

In this question, a participant could give more than one answer.


For analytical purposes, we reduced the various accommodating measures into 4 categories. The percentage of participants for each category are:


Category # 1 – Level Floor - No Raised Steps = 32 %
Category # 2 – Entrance Ramps, Wheelchair/Walker Accessible = 20 %
Category # 3 – Bathroom Handrails, Transfer Poles = 22 %
Category # 4 – Other = 9 %

 

Does your current home meet your health requirement needs?

 

Yes = 16 %
No = 27 %
Only Partially = 54 %
No Applicable Data (NAD) = 4 %


The Pie Chart clearly demonstrates that only a small percentage of participants have actually achieved having a home that meets their needs. Over 80 % of participants are not living in a home that fully meets their health requirement needs.

What is your Gender?

 

Here is the breakdown of the gender of participants:

  • 7 % were Males
  • 86 % were Females
  • 3 % identified as a gender other than Male or Female
  • 4 % No Applicable Data (NAD)

 

What is your Medical Diagnosis?

 

In this question, a participant could give more than one answer.


For analytical purposes, we reduced the various diagnosis into 7 categories. The percentages of the
participants for each category are:

 
Category # 1 – Chemical Injury, Chemical Sensitivity, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Toxin Induced Loss Of Tolerance (TILT) = 95 %
Category # 2 – Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) = 46 %
Category # 3 – Fibromyalgia = 37 %
Category # 4 – Environmental Illness (EI), Environmental Sensitivities (ES), Mold Sensitivity, Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) = 62 %
Category # 5 – Heavy Metal Poisoning = 14 %
Category # 6 – Electro Magnetic Field (EMF) Sensitivity, ElectroHyperSensitivity (EHS) = 23 %
Category # 7 – Other 26 %

In doing the analysis, we created a category called “No Applicable Data”. This category includes the following responses: Prefer Not To Say, Not Applicable, or leaving the space blank.


Also, most of the percentages have been rounded off. Where this has been done, the total percentage may not always add up to 100.

 

What is your Age?

 

There were participants in every age bracket from early 20s to mid 80s. Here is how it broke down into the different age groups:

  • 3 % were in their 20s
  • 12 % were in their 30s
  • 20 % were in their 40s
  • 26 % were in their 50s
  • 28 % were in their 60s
  • 5% were in their 70s
  • 1 % were in their 80s
  • 4 % No Applicable Data (NAD)

Low-Toxicity Housing Survey Results

Health Risk Navigation Inc. conducted a survey to evaluate the need of specialized, low-toxicity homes in the Chemically Injured community. The survey analysis is finished. Below is the general overview of the survey results.

 

First, we want to extend our heart-felt gratitude to each one of you who participated in this survey. Thank you for your willingness to give of your energy, strength and time to provide us with this insightful and very important data.


There were 226 survey participants. Some of you did the survey twice. Therefore, we removed the duplication by amalgamating your responses. All of your information was kept, but we used only your second survey data when we did the analysis.


The 226 participants came from the countries listed below:

  • 102 from USA
  • 95 from Canada
  • 17 from Australia
  • 5 from New Zealand
  • 5 from UK
  • 1 from Sweden
  • 1 from Italy