|
 |
|
Coordinated nationally by the Institute for Children's Environmental Health |
To join the Partnership for Children's Health and the Environment (PCHE) and receive this bulletin, please complete the form at http://www.partnersforchildren.org/members.html#member.
May 10, 2006
9:00 a.m. Alaska time (1:00 p.m. EDT)
Diabetes is a serious concern in Alaska and is prevalent throughout the state. On this Collaborative on Health and the Environment -- Alaska teleconference seminar, we will discuss the complex factors that contribute to Type I and Type II diabetes. Speakers will review the current scientific literature and examine the role of environmental contaminants such as PCBs and dioxins as contributing factors in the incidence of diabetes. Although risk factors commonly associated with diabetes include obesity and a sedentary lifestyle, the role of environmental exposures must be considered. Diabetes prevention programs have generally focused on education concerning diet and physical activity. The presenters will discuss why prevention measures must also address environmental exposures. Speakers include 1) Dr. Ted Schettler, Science and Environmental Health Network; 2) Dr. David Carpenter, Director, Institute for Health and the Environment, School of Public Health, State University of New York; and 3) Dr. Gary Ferguson, Complementary and Integrative Medical Services, Eastern Aleutian Tribes in Alaska. To join this call and receive dial-in information please RSVP to Lisa Norman at Alaska Community Action on Toxics as detailed below.
Contact: Lisa Norman, 222-7714 or info@akaction.net
May 24, 2006
8: 00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Hartford, Connecticut
at the capitol building
The University of Massachusetts is sponsoring this workshop on children's environmental health, a statewide outreach program designed to educate nurses and other health professionals about existing environmental risks, problems and sources of exposures that may cause or exacerbate illness in children. The goal of the outreach program is to disseminate information on identifying sources of exposure, minimizing risk of exposure and accurately identifying environmental exposures related to disease states, and providing the tools (education material) necessary to educate the public in a meaningful way on existing and potential environmental risks and their affects on children's health. This full-day professional development workshop, which includes a continental breakfast and lunch, is provided at no cost through a grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Children's Health. This is a CEU program for nurses and health care providers and public/community health care professionals serving the pediatric population and the larger community.
May 29 - 31, 2006
Stockholm, Sweden
at the Stockholm City Conference Centre
The activities of healthcare facilities have a significant impact on the environment that contributes to the destruction of our natural ecosystems. And an unhealthy natural environment is a danger to human health. As healthcare professionals pledge an oath of "First, do no harm", allaspects of healthcare should be carried out in a way that is not damaging to public health and the environment. Forward-thinking healthcare systems must therefore be ecologically sustainable. CleanMed Europe will show you how to achieve this.
Website: http://www.cleanmed.org/europe/2006/home.html
Contact: cleanmedeurope@congrex.se
May 31 - June 3, 2006
Minneapolis, Minnesota
With the remarkable expansion of interest and investment in community-campus partnerships, the time is right to take a critical look at these partnerships in all of their iterations and ask (and answer) key questions about where we are now, where we are going and where we need to be. Community-Campus Partnerships for Health's 9th conference promises to address these questions and more as we create a vision for the future of community-campus partnerships as a strategy for social justice: How do we fully realize authentic partnerships between communities and higher educational institutions? How do we balance power and share resources among partners? How do we build community and campus capacity to engage each other as partners? How do we create healthier communities through partnerships? What are the barriers and challenges getting in our way? How do we overcome these, individually and collectively? How do we translate "principles" and "best practices" into widespread, expected practice?
Website: http://www.ccph.info
June 9 - 11, 2006
Baltimore, Maryland
Join with groups across America who are applying the precautionary approach to environmental hazards by shifting the focus to "how can we prevent harm?", instead of asking "what level of harm is acceptable?" This national event will bring together people working on conservation, disease prevention, environmental justice, environmental health, green purchasing, precautionary business practices, toxic and nuclear pollution prevention, worker safety and more to build a stronger movement to protect our health and environment. The conference will include sessions on 1) model policies and successful campaigns from Europe and U.S. national, state and local initiatives; 2) precautionary tools like safer alternatives assessments and full cost-accounting on pollution's hidden costs; 3) crafting effective messaging, countering the critics and building a broader movement for precaution; 4) collaborative opportunities, with sessions on water, land use and ecosystems, trade, energy, and a cross-fertilization session with groups working on children's health, environmental justice, health professionals, chemical, nuclear and pesticide reforms; and 5) skills trainings on organizing, campaign strategies, media outreach, partnering with tribes and more.
Website: http://www.besafenet.com/
Contact: Anne Rabe, CHEJ, 518-732-4538 or annerabe@msn.com
by Roger Sideman, Santa Cruz [California] Sentinel
May 1, 2006
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2006/May/01/local/stories/03local.htm
Unknown hazardous chemicals in everyday products are accumulating in human tissue and persisting in the environment without breaking down. That's the gloomy picture emerging from a report authored by Michael Wilson, a UC Santa Cruz graduate and Berkeley research scientist whose work has caught the attention of state legislators.
Two Senate and Assembly committees commissioned Wilson and his UC Berkeley research team to provide insight on how to move toward "green chemistry," in which policies nudge the chemical industry to invest in the design and use of safer, less toxic chemicals.
Of 80,000 synthetic chemicals that have been registered in the country, less than 10 percent have been tested for their effect on human health. Wilson calls it a "chemical data gap." "If you walk into a place like San Lorenzo Lumber and look at most consumer products, most people would be surprised that there's no requirement for chemical producers to disclose their toxicity," he said.
Wilson's report is the first in the nation to provide government with clear guidelines about how to "green up" the chemical industry. Many chemical-reduction bills that would ban or regulate individual chemicals in cosmetics, plastics and toys have been under debate recently, but most were rejected under pressure from the chemical industry. Without providing specifics, Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, said he anticipates a sweeping "package of bills" motivated by Wilson's report to be introduced next year. The report, released in April, blames weak government oversight and recommends that companies report data about the chemicals they produce. It also calls for greater funding in green chemistry research.
Few people deny the key role that chemicals play in modern life, from health care and manufacturing to electronics and petroleum refining. In California's economy, the chemical industry employs 81,000 people and contributes $1.7 billion in tax revenues, according to figures from the Chemical Industry Council of California. But even though the industry could be stung under a major chemical-reduction plan, they expressed a willingness to participate in a state task force set up by Simitian. "We might be able to improve the situation," said John Ulrich, spokesman for the Chemical Industry Council. "But if legislation is simply based on emotion, we'd reject it. To think that you can force green chemistry as a solution to all things toxic just isn't possible."
To make his point, Ulrich cites how a seemingly safe substance like hydrogen is what turned the Hindenberg blimp into a firebomb. An overdose of water killed a Chico State University student in a hazing ritual, proving that "the dose makes the poison," Ulrich said.
Wilson's report asserts the pace and scale of the chemicals produced every day in the United States is already staggering. Each day, the United States produces or imports 42 billon pounds of chemicals -- the equivalent of 623,000 gasoline trucks each carrying 8,000 gallons, which, if lined up end-to-end, would stretch from San Francisco to Washington and back, the report states. "That's projected to grow four-fold with California expected to grow 50 percent by 2050," Wilson said. "If you think we have problems today, just wait."
Each year, 23,000 workers in California are diagnosed with deadly chronic disease brought on by chemical exposure in the workplace. Another 5,600 die as a result, according to data in the report. A sustainable chemicals policy is an integral part of preparing for the state's future needs, said Wilson, who wants to see California become a global leader in green chemistry -- just as it has done with energy efficiency.
California's strategy could be modeled on legislation the European Union is considering, which would require companies to provide detailed health and safety information on about 30,000 new and existing chemicals before they can be authorized for use. Wilson credits UCSC's support of interdisciplinary thinking for allowing him to see beyond a scientific lens to understand the wider social implications of science. A 1984 graduate in biology, Wilson's senior thesis on the social and policy dimensions of genetic engineering received an award by then-Chancellor Robert Sinscheimer.
by Dorsey Griffith, Sacramento Bee
April 30, 2006
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/14249758p-15066687c.html
The term "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder" conjures up a boy who can't sit still to tie his shoes or read a book without a dose of stimulant medication. While boys are most likely to be diagnosed and treated for ADHD, another demographic is rapidly gaining ground: women. Among them are stay-at-home moms, female professionals and students who are taking their symptoms to their doctors' offices and going home with the same stimulant drugs at unprecedented rates.
Why women are rapidly falling into the growing ADHD-diagnosed population is not clear. Some argue that the trend reflects a heightened awareness among women of long-ignored symptoms and doctors' willingness to treat them. Others say it represents the "medicalization," or psychiatric labeling, of an otherwise normal condition that results from living in a society where women are overworked, overbooked and overwhelmed. National data document the trend. An analysis of federal medical data requested by The Bee found that an estimated 731,000 young women ages 15 to 24 were diagnosed with the disorder in 2003 and 2004, nearly triple that of the years 1999 and 2000.
The rate at which men are being diagnosed with ADHD also has gone up but not as rapidly as that of women. The increase is not confined to young women. For the first time, women of all ages are showing up in the statistics. In 2003 and 2004, an estimated 534,000 women ages 25 to 44, and 337,000 women 45 to 64 were diagnosed with the disorder, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, a division of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. These figures could not be compared with prior years because there were too few cases during 1999 and 2000 to report, a federal analyst said.
The increase in diagnoses is a sign that women now recognize their problems can and should be addressed from a medical perspective, and that physicians are responding to their calls for help, said Dr. Patricia Quinn, a developmental pediatrician and director of the National Center for Gender Issues and AD/HD in Washington, D.C. "Finally, we are reaching parity and equality," she said. Quinn believes that ADHD, and its related malady, attention deficit disorder, occur at the same rates in boys and girls, men and women. But because girls typically have different symptoms -- inattentiveness but not hyperactivity -- they often can be overlooked.
Problems for girls with ADD can surface in childhood but often don't become unmanageable until they leave the structure of home and parental support, Quinn said. Amy, a 27-year-old San Francisco artist, was diagnosed with ADD two years ago. "As a kid, I was always forgetting my homework," said Amy, who spoke on the condition that she be identified only by her first name for fear of employment discrimination. "I was very disorganized. I would miss appointments. I couldn't keep a calendar even if I tried. If I wasn't interested in a subject, I'd start spacing out." After college, Amy hopped from job to job, frustrated with the "grunt" work she was asked to do and even more upset that she often made errors doing menial tasks. "It would look like I was stupid, but that wasn't the case," she said.
Dr. Lawrence Diller, a San Francisco developmental pediatrician and author of the book, "Running on Ritalin," said the mothers of his pediatric patients often seek his advice after recognizing in themselves the same kinds of attention problems their children have. Most of the women work outside the home and still take charge of child-rearing and household maintenance. "Is she truly disorganized and can't follow through?" Diller said he asks himself. "Or is she simply trying to be Superwoman?"
Quinn has seen the same thing in her practice, but because ADHD can run in families, she assumes the mothers may need medical care, too. "I always tell moms, 'To be able to fully help your child, get your own ADD help first, then we can deal with the issues,' " she said. "We add to the dysfunction unless mom gets treated."
The underlying cause of attention problems in women -- and the self-hatred and shame that can accompany them -- is less significant than relieving the symptoms, said Kali Grosberg, a 68-year-old Oakland resident who runs a support group for women with ADHD/ADD. "A lot of symptoms are partially just a reflection of the world that we live in right now, being required to work at a pace that the human brain doesn't work at comfortably," Grosberg said. "It's not important to define it. The important thing is there are things that can be done about it -- support groups, coaching, exercise or medication."
As the number of women being diagnosed with ADD has increased in recent years, so too has the number of prescriptions written for women to treat the disorder. A recent analysis by a drug benefit management firm found that among women ages 20 to 44, use of ADHD medications increased 164 percent between 2000 and 2005. The analysis by Medco Health Solutions, based on review of prescription records of 2.5 million patients nationwide, also found that medication use increased 90 percent among girls 10 to 19. In both cases, the growth rate far outpaced that of their male counterparts.
Stimulants are the drugs most frequently prescribed for ADHD. They work by triggering the release of chemicals in the brain that influence attention and other important functions. Drugs such as Ritalin, Adderall and Concerta are intended to reduce distractibility and disorganization and help patients stick to a task and get it done, said Quinn. "Once you are on the medication, you can maintain a system," she said. "It really addresses core symptoms."
But Wendy Stock, a clinical psychologist in San Francisco with special training in the study of psychiatric drugs, said she worries that long-term stimulant use can lead to tolerance, which means dosages would have to increase over time to remain effective. "More broadly, why are people, especially women, feeling like they need to take a medication to get through their day?" Stock asked. "And what pressures are upon them where they feel they need to function like the Energizer bunny?"
Different women with ADD describe different experiences with stimulants. One woman, 45, felt the drugs had a calming effect. "It's like the difference between vision and seeing," she said. "You might have eyes that can look around, but with medication, you are actually able to see things. It's a fog-lifting experience."
Amy, the 27-year-old artist, said she experimented with several types of prescription drugs, and her symptoms improved -- but at a price. "It was like I was concentrating to a crazy level," she said. "I wouldn't even get out from behind the desk. I would just sit and work." One of her bosses noticed she was following directions better and was more productive. But Amy disliked the side effects -- nausea, anxiety and a loss of appetite -- so she quit taking the drugs. Today, she is managing her disorder by setting up easy-to-follow routines, keeping household items in the same places and simplifying her life. To prevent clutter, for example, she whittled her collection of handbags down to two, and donates old clothes each time she buys new ones. Mostly, she said, she better understands her condition and is less hard on herself when things go awry. "I accept that I have these issues," she said. "I don't get mad at myself."
by Molly Ball, Las Vegas Review-Journal
Apr. 30, 2006
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Apr-30-Sun-2006/news/7046805.html
Last year, Rep. Jim Gibbons co-authored a report asserting that mercury isn't as bad as many people think. That's one of the major reasons Democrats and environmental groups are decrying his record on the environment, which also includes consistent support of the mining industry, where Gibbons once worked, and a failed attempt to restructure the federal Endangered Species Act. "Gibbons' record on the environment is a train wreck that never seems to end," Dan Geary, Nevada representative for the National Environmental Trust, said of the Nevada Republican who is mounting a run for governor. Geary's group, along with Great Basin Mine Watch and the Nevada Conservation League, nicknamed Gibbons' voting record in Congress "Crimes Against Nature."
Gibbons defends his record and the report, which he said "was to separate fact versus fiction about mercury." "I'm not anti-environment. I just want to make sure sound science wins the day," he said.
But Gibbons' critics say he's put science second to political considerations. "This is a man who put his name on a report that said mercury isn't harmful because it's 'naturally occurring,' " Geary said. Plenty of naturally occurring substances, from poisons to plutonium, are harmful, he pointed out. "Among environmentalists ... he's widely known as having one of the worst records in Congress on public lands and the environment."
On the occasion of Earth Day April 22, Democratic gubernatorial candidates Dina Titus and Jim Gibson took a break from bashing each other and came together to criticize Gibbons. "Scientists have said for years that mercury exposure can be harmful to people, so why is Gibbons trying to sell us a bill of goods instead of fighting for our safety?" Henderson Mayor Gibson said in a statement. Titus, a state senator, said in a separate statement, "If Gibbons sees a tree, he wants to chop it down. He has even tried to make one of the most toxic substances on earth seem harmless."
The report in question, "Mercury in Perspective," was co-authored by Gibbons and Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif. Pombo chairs the House Resources Committee, while Gibbons chairs the Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee. Since the report's publication in February 2005, it has been widely criticized by environmentalists and scientists, who say the authors cherry-picked evidence that supported their pro-industry line while ignoring a larger body of scientific research that didn't comport with their views.
Gibbons defended the report as necessary "to overcome the emotional misunderstanding (surrounding mercury) and put a factual basis out there, to put science into the debate." The report maintains the danger of mercury has been overblown given that U.S. power plants account for less than 1 percent of global mercury emissions, that emissions in the United States have significantly decreased since 1990, and there's no peer-reviewed scientific studies that show a link between U.S. power plants and mercury levels in fish. Gibbons, a former geologist and natural resources lawyer, said it frustrates him "when people misuse science for political purposes."
But Gibbons and Pombo are accused of doing as much with the report, which states, "As a result of the well-funded effort to push their political agenda, environmentalists have caused American citizens to become unnecessarily concerned about possible adverse health effects from exposure to trace amounts of mercury." The report warns that people could face even more serious health consequences if mercury hysteria causes them to stop eating fish because of its health benefits. "Scaring people away from consuming fish is creating a public health crisis in its own right," the report states.
The report's fish stance has been cheered not only by the energy and mining industries, but also by the Tuna Foundation. Meanwhile, groups such as the Sierra Club have decried the report, and Chris Mooney, author of "The Republican War on Science," wrote in the magazine The American Prospect it was "a misleading contrarian pamphlet aimed at convincing Americans that despite everything they may have heard, mercury levels in fish aren't dangerous and U.S.-based mercury emitters aren't a significant part of the problem." Mooney noted that many of the references footnoted in the report were industry-funded groups rather than independent scientific sources.
Airborne mercury is released into the atmosphere largely by coal-fired power plants, although in Nevada, the "roasting" process that extracts gold ore from bedrock also releases airborne mercury. The metal molecules then sink to the ground; when they sink into rivers and streams, they are absorbed by fish, scientists say. Mercury builds up in some fish and shellfish. The fish then transfer the mercury up the food chain to carnivores such as bears and people, which in turn accumulate mercury over their lifetimes. Eventually, scientists say, the amount of mercury can reach levels that could harm fetal development; for this reason, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommends that women who are or may become pregnant limit their consumption of certain fish.
Gibbons said he doesn't deny that this process occurs or that mercury can be a toxic substance. "Certainly mercury is harmful if taken in any amount in excess of what is tolerable by the human body," he said. But he said it's important not to pin all the blame on American industry. Much of the world's airborne mercury comes from power plants in China and other developing countries, he said. "It remains in the air and can travel great distances," Gibbons said. As for the United States, he said, "We are doing our part" to limit mercury emissions.
The environment is seen as a potential issue in this year's political campaigns. University of Nevada, Las Vegas political scientist David Damore said national polls increasingly show voters are concerned about the environment, especially as the increasing occurrence of natural disasters drives home the effects of global warming. The question, Damore said, is whether politicians of either party are willing to embrace environmentalism when both sides rely on campaign contributions from industry. "It's a winner of an issue for the Democrats, but I think they're concerned it might hurt them in the pocketbook," Damore said. "If you look at the public opinion polls, it resonates, but there's not much national leadership on the issue."
The environmentalists also have criticized Gibbons for a provision he added to a budget bill that would make some public lands available for purchase, and another bill that would retool the Endangered Species Act. Both measures failed. Gibbons embraces other initiatives decried by environmentalists, including drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and temporarily relaxing environmental regulations on oil refining to lower gasoline prices. He also has supported billions of dollars in subsidies for the oil and gas industries. Because of such positions, Gibbons got a zero rating from the League of Conservation Voters in its 2005 scorecard, as did his fellow Republican in the Nevada delegation, Rep. Jon Porter. Eighty-eight members of the House of Representatives -- about 20 percent -- received a zero score from that group, as did 10 percent of senators. "He is viewed among his colleagues as someone who is very closely aligned with a few specific interests, and he has ignored very strong sentiment among the public," said Elyssa Rosen of Great Basin Mine Watch. "He has really eroded his credibility."
Gibbons defended his stances, saying, "I am absolutely an advocate for responsible environmental development of our abundant natural resources." The Endangered Species Act is clearly "not working," he said, because fewer than 1 percent of the species listed have ever been removed from the list. He said that proved that the law wasn't proving effective in reversing the decline of endangered species. "They're entitled to their opinion," Gibbons said of his critics, but they shouldn't pretend to have a monopoly on scientific truth. The criticisms of his record amount to "emotional attacks for political purposes," he said.
by Roberto Santiago, Miami Herald
April 30, 2006
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/states/florida/counties/broward_county/14461111.htm
Roy Dean figures people who begin their work day quietly watching the sun rise while canal fishing approach life with a great deal more patience. "It certainly has [worked] for me," said Dean, 47, who works the afternoon shift as a police officer with the Hollywood Police Department. The Hollywood angler has been canal fishing ever since his Bahamian father took him as a boy. He remembers his first trip being near the area now known as Oakwood Boulevard in Hollywood.
"If you can effectively canal fish, you can handle any body of water," said Dean, who prefers taking his boat eight miles offshore to do his best, solitude fishing. And when it comes to eating the canal fish, fishermen such as Dean say they use common sense: They will not eat fish in canals where the water does not flow or where contaminants, waste, or pesticides are concentrated. And they will avoid eating fish larger than a foot long, especially predators like largemouth bass.
"The fish that I eat are mullet and catfish, the bottom feeders," said James Moore, 57, who fishes near his home in Davie. He likes the spot on Griffin Road between University Drive and Florida's Turnpike. "What I won't eat, I release," said Moore, who said the best tasting canal fish are always under a foot long. ``I haven't gotten sick yet, so I must be doing something right."
Although Moore and Dean don't read the Florida Department of Health advisories regarding mercury levels in fish, experts say their safety instincts are right on the money. The state health department says that people -- especially pregnant women and children -- should avoid eating predator fish such as bowfin, gar, and largemouth bass 14 inches or longer -- especially in areas highlighted on its website. Predator fish have the highest levels of mercury accumulation, according to Dr. Joe Sekerke, a toxicologist with the Florida Department of Health. They eat fish that have eaten a series of smaller fish, all which may have higher-than-normal levels of mercury, he explained. "Bottom feeders -- such as catfish and mullet, which do not eat other fish, are usually the safest to eat," Sekerke said.
Fish that contains no more than 1/15th of an ounce of mercury for every 2.2 pounds are considered safe, he said. "Mercury poisoning leads to neurological damage," said Sekerke, adding that fishermen who feel a numbness and tingling in their arms should make an appointment with their doctor to have their blood examined for mercury levels. "It is a much more serious issue with pregnant women because high mercury levels may lead to birth defects," he said.
Impact on quality
The health department particularly targets canals where poor water flow and/or purity impact the quality of certain fish: The South New River Canal, which runs along Griffin Road, the Cypress Creek Canal in northern Broward and Alligator Alley itself are areas where largemouth bass over 14 inches, bowfin and gar should not be eaten.
And there is one fish that contains something even worse than mercury -- actual poison. Although nowhere near Broward canals, the puffer or blowfish, seen mostly in Brevard, Martin and St. Lucie counties, contains a natural toxin called saxitoxin that in severe cases can cause death.
Safe fish to eat -- low in mercury with no natural toxins -- are bluegill, redear, sunfish, and mullet, snappers, pompano, flounder and dolphin. And Sekerke agreed that the "Don't eat what stinks" rule among canal fishermen is a solid rule to follow.
For obvious reasons, fishing from polluted waters is not a good idea, Sekerke said. "I've never read those advisories, but I would never eat anything I fish out of Alligator Alley," said Moore, who said he remembered once hearing a story about hospital waste being dumped along spots around I-75.
Making sense
"I know we all have to die sometime, but there's no sense hurrying it along by eating fish that have been stuck with dirty needles," said Moore. Reports of medical waste dumping cannot be confirmed by the health department, but throughout the years, the area has been used to dump everything from garbage to dead bodies. The Florida Department of Health listed Alligator Alley -- Interstate 75 from the L-28 Canal to U.S. 27 -- as an area fishermen should avoid eating predator fish.
Toxic waters
Arnold Markowitz, 69, who writes about fishing for Waterfront News, South Florida's nautical newspaper, said he avoids any potential health hazards by not eating fish that he catches in the canals. In addition to mercury, he worries about pesticides and fertilizers that seep into the canals. "Why take chances?" said Markowitz, a retired Miami Herald reporter.
Instead, he practices catch and release. But beyond eating, it's the zen-like qualities of fishing that draw these fisherman. "Patience learned as a lifelong fisherman has served me well as a police officer," Dean said. "Ever see an impatient fisherman or policeman? Well, it's not a pretty sight to see," he added.
by Mary Jo Layton, Bergen County [New Jersey] Record
April 30, 2006
http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkzJmZnYmVsN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2OTI4MTE5JnlyaXJ5N2Y3MTdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5Mw==
A federal report to be released Monday has found enough evidence of a health threat from the lead, arsenic and other industrial waste polluting a mountain in Upper Ringwood to force health officials to go door to door in an unprecedented review of 500 residents. Federal officials want to determine if the elevated rates of certain cancers and other illnesses can be tied to paint sludge and other waste dumped by the Ford Motor Co. and other polluters a generation ago, a congressman said. "We know this a very toxic site," said Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-Monmouth.
Pallone said he hadn't seen the report but did speak with federal health officials, who told him that they would go house to house to gather detailed health information from members of the community. "We know that people have high incidences of certain illness, including cancer," Pallone said. "The question is, is there a link?"
The study marks the third time that state health officials and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) have issued a report on the 500-acre area, which, in a national first, was relisted as a Superfund site this month. Officials at both agencies declined to discuss the report, though a state government source confirmed the basic details. Pallone said he was promised the findings will mark a "new phase" in assessing the health of local residents. The previous two studies were harshly criticized by residents because the government issued those reports without ever interviewing them about their health concerns.
Arthur Block, a representative of the Edison regional office of the ATSDR, declined to give details of the upcoming report, but said health officials would deliver it to each of the 50 or so households in the area Monday. State health officials also refused to comment before a press conference scheduled for Monday.
Establishing a link between illness and pollution is a difficult scientific and legal task. Yet, by gathering individual health profiles for the first time, experts may come closer to learning how years of exposure to toxins may have affected the community's health.
Ford dumped millions of gallons of paint sludge and other industrial castoffs on the mountain from its former plant in Mahwah beginning in the late 1960s. The waste was pushed into mine shafts and dumped in the woods. Some of the sludge wound up around homes. The residents, many of them Ramapough Mountain Indians, have lived among the muck for generations now.
The dumping, the failed cleanups and the concerns about cancer and other unusual health problems among the residents were the subject of The Record's Toxic Legacy series last fall. After publication of the series, state health officials took the extraordinary step of sending doctors to the mine area. But, while providing routine care, they did not screen for exposure to toxins. One resident of the neighborhood says this latest effort by the government, to go door to door to figure out if and why people here are sick, is long overdue -- and maybe even too late. "If they had been really interested in the people, it's something that would have been done," said Vivian Milligan.
Now that the community has filed a lawsuit against Ford -- one of the largest environmental claims ever in New Jersey -- residents will cooperate only if their attorneys authorize it, Milligan said. Those attorneys could not be reached for comment.
The ATSDR study began when a former attorney for the Ringwood Neighborhood Action Association petitioned the federal government in September 2003 to conduct a thorough evaluation of residents of the mine area. The study was needed, Stephen Sheller wrote, to see if "historic exposure to benzene, lead, chlorinated volatile organic compounds, arsenic and other chemicals known to have been present in groundwater, surface water, soils and sediments" created a risk. At a meeting with the ATSDR in February 2004, residents complained about asthma, skin problems, cancer and emphysema. Residents were told they could expect the report to be completed by the end of that year.
The two previous health surveys, completed by the ATSDR in 1989 and 1994, concluded that there was no public health threat. In neither study did officials talk with residents. In the earliest report, the ATSDR never even visited the site. In the 1989 report, "potential" health risks were found in sludge-contaminated soil in one section of the tract. But this contaminated soil, which the federal Environmental Protection Agency said contained arsenic, cadmium, lead and methylene chloride, was removed and replaced with clean fill, an action that eliminated the exposure, the ATSDR concluded.
However, just last month, Block, the regional ATSDR representative, called the findings of the 1989 report "garbage" because they were based on only a cursory review of data that Ford supplied. "They didn't have a heck of a lot of data for us," Block said at a community meeting.
In a testy exchange, neighborhood association President Wayne Mann demanded that the federal agency take responsibility for issuing a faulty report. "Do it right this time!" Mann said. "It will be done right," Block replied.
Staff Writers Jan Barry and Barbara Williams contributed to this article.
Agence France-Presse
Apr 30, 2006
http://www.terradaily.com/2006/060430021602.860hg3q0.html
MINAMATA, Japan (AFP) First cats began to die. Then dead fish floated to the surface of the sea and crows fell lifeless to the ground. But still the people of Minamata had no idea what was about to happen to them.
Long before health problems were officially reported 50 years ago -- and much later found as being caused by massive mercury poisoning -- residents of this small Japanese fishing town in southwestern Kyushu island had seen eery portents. As rats ran amok, people began to notice inexplicable problems with their bodies -- shivering arms and legs, seizures, and difficulty in walking and talking. Some adults died and infant mortality rocketed. Even after the problems were officially reported by a local hospital on May 1, 1956, no one knew what was behind the outbreak of what would come to be named Minamata disease, but it was certain that something was drastically wrong.
Chemical giant Chisso Corp, whose factories had been dumping mercury pollution into the Yatsushiro Sea since 1932, was immediately suspected but continually rejected any link with the health problems. As years went by, babies began to be born with serious damage to their nervous systems, suffering mental and physical deformities poignantly recorded by US photojournalist W. Eugene Smith.
It wasn't until 1968 that the Tokyo central government finally declared that Minamata disease was a form of mercury poisoning caused by polluted water. The delay and the suffering it caused remain a national scandal as Japan holds 50th anniversary commemorations here on Monday. "I'm keenly aware of the government's responsibility for not being able to take appropriate measures for a long time and failing to prevent the damages from spreading," Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said last week. "I apologize with no reservations."
In all, Chisso dumped up to 150 tons, or even more, of mercury into the tiny cove of Minamata until May 1968, according to a city document. The company was not ruled responsible for the health problems until 1973.
While thousands of people suffered from Minamata disease, not all were recognized officially as patients and half a century on nearly 4,000 people are still seeking state compensation for their sickness.
While the scars of the past still run deep, however, new concerns are overshadowing the event. The people of Minamata are enraged by a plan to create an industrial waste dump on top of a nearby mountain, which they say will contaminate the town's water supply. "Methyl mercury that contaminated the fish and sea was industrial waste. Why do we have to suffer from industrial waste again?" asked Minamata city assembly member Koji Nakamura.
Having made efforts to become an environmentally friendly city, the local government has required its citizens to separate garbage since 1993. Now they feel betrayed. "We have to separate our garbage into 21 groups, so we produce less waste to dump," said a Minamata restaurant owner. "After all this effort, we don't want the dumping site in the mountain from which we get water to drink."
The proposal has been put forward by IWD Toa Kumamoto, a subsidiary of a company called IWD (Integrated Waste-management Design), which has already purchased land on the mountain. The company declined to comment over the plan which Nakamura said was opposed by about 20,000 of the city's 30,000 residents in a petition. Former mayor Ryuichi Eguchi reluctantly accepted the plan, saying the city did not have a say in the private company's business which falls under the jurisdiction of the prefectural government.
In the February mayoral election, the local residents refused to support Eguchi and replaced him with Katsuaki Miyamoto who pledged to handle the issue, but no progress has been made. Atsushi Takatori, a researcher of thinktank Environmental Research Institute, said some municipalities have an ordinance that exclusively protects areas of water reserves, but Minamata is not one of them. "If a city blindly accepts documents submitted by a private business and conducts perfunctory screening, the city wouldn't affect a prefecture's decision," he said. "But if it handles the case sincerely from the viewpoint of protecting residents' safety, the prefectural environment panel wouldn't be able to ignore its opinion."
by Gordy Holt, Seattle Post-Intelligencer
April 29, 2006
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/athome/268203_oil29.html
Wood floors are showing up just about everywhere. They are underfoot in living and dining areas, in kitchens, even bathrooms. But how in the name of Sherwin Williams do you finish them? And, the corollary to that, how should you submit them to a re-finish? The choices used to be simple: A little varnish, a little wax. No longer.
There is the now-classic Swedish finish -- the petroleum-based, two-part plastic coating that should be applied by professionals in gas masks and will require a move to the in-laws while it is being applied. As with almost all of this stuff, these chemicals are designed to stay solvent long enough to be applied, but as they dry they give off gasses that can cause harm to the environment and human health. Easier on the atmosphere and indoor air quality are water-based finishes. And there is that huge selection of factory-finished floors, which simply move the toxic mess to other parts of the country.
Pushed by health and environmental concerns, federal regulators have stiffened the rules governing these products, sending industry chemists back to their crockpots. "Sure, we're working on it," said Herb Paulson, president of Seattle's pioneer paint store, Daly's Paint & Decorating. New federal regulations due in mid-2007, he said, are forcing the issue.
In the 1960s, Paulson developed a souped-up version of his Danish Oil Finish. Called Seafin Teak Oil, it sits high on the problem-gas scale, but has long been favored by boaters and homeowners alike as a wood finish. Paulson said his company now makes a water-based "maintenance oil" that is used as a touch-up for oil-finished floors. Indeed, oils offer an attractive option. Oils don't coat the wood but are absorbed by it, leaving a satin finish that can be retouched with little more than a sponge or mop rather than a sander and another weekend at the in-laws.
While an oil can register high on the problem-gas scale, whether it does depends on the oil's source -- is it plant or petroleum-based? -- and on the solvents used to ease its application and help it dry. Don Bollinger of Seattle's Wood Floors of Greenbank offers a full range of these new products, including an oil finish called Junckers Rustic Oil (He pronounces it "Yonkers"). Its primary ingredient is linseed oil (a boiled derivative of an oil from the flax plant) and a petroleum solvent called isoparaffin. "When you built a house 200 years ago in Europe, you built it to last, and linseed oil was what you used," Bollinger said.
Warner and Jodi Scheyer of Ballard and John and Teva Goldstone of Lake Forest Park picked a competing plant-based oil, Osmo Hardwax Oil, pitched by Seattle's Environmental Home Center. Its solvent is another petroleum distillate, a deodorized paint thinner noted on the label as "white spirits." Matt Freeman-Gleason, the Home Center's founder, said the made-in-Denmark oil meets Germany's strict "green" standards for products that kids are likely to chew on -- toys made of wood and sealed with the stuff.
Aaron Adelstein, director of this region's Built Green program, says either product -- Junckers or Osmo -- is safer to use in the home than a traditional Swedish finish. "What's basically at issue here," he said, "is that both would qualify as a low-toxicity process on our Built Green checklist."
He explained that there's a difference between toxicity and volatility. In short, a perfume is a volatile organic compound or you wouldn't be able to smell it. Conversely, you can't always smell a poison that may be extremely toxic.
Osmo oil was an easy choice for Teva Goldstone, "because I have asthma," she said. "The fumes were a whole lot less than what I experienced at my dad's," she said. "He had a Swedish finish put on, and I couldn't even go in the day after." But it is also the look that oil has given the Goldstones' oak and old-fir floors that has made her an oil-finish missionary. "I'm in real estate and now I recommend it for all my clients. It's not glossy. You can see the grain. "My dad's floor looks like a sheet of glass, like it'll crack if you're not careful."
The Osmo product was ultimately the Scheyers' choice, too. Their first-born, Hans, is nosing toward four months old. With all the woodwork in his parents' home finished with the German product, he'll have plenty to safely gnaw on.
Warner Scheyer has been picking away at his 1910 Craftsman-style home for a decade. His effort added a second story, complete with re-claimed fir floors and woodwork. "Because the whole roof had to come off, we moved out for a while until most of it was done," he said. "But now that we're back, there are still a few other things to do." Just a few -- sure.
The list includes more wiring, tile work, some plumbing -- and woodwork finishing. He's using the Osmo oil. "We were putting it on up until the day we moved back in," Scheyer said, "and there's still more to do -- every place there's wood."
The hard-wax oil contrasts dramatically with the Swedish finish in the kitchen, where they learned a lesson that other soft-wood-floor owners ought to heed, Scheyer said. The Swedish coating was damaged despite a no-shoes policy "that didn't extend to contractors," he said. "If that finish had been oil, we could fix it ourselves."
by Denny Walsh, Sacramento Bee
April 28, 2006
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/environment/story/14249002p-15066147c.html
State regulators have failed to meet their legal obligation to crack down on airborne pesticides and now must do so, a Sacramento federal judge has ruled. The regulators broke a 1994 promise to reduce smog-forming emissions from pesticides by 20 percent from 1990 levels by 2005, U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton found in orders issued in February and on Tuesday. Instead, the problem has only worsened, according to the evidence in a lawsuit filed two years ago in Sacramento federal court on behalf of a coalition of unincorporated associations and nonprofit organizations.
Karlton also found the regulators did not make good on their 1995 commitment, as part of a federally approved implementation plan, to pass regulations before June 15, 1997, when voluntary practices by agricultural and industrial pesticide users did not allow the state to meet national air quality standards. In Tuesday's order, Karlton declared the state was in violation of the federal Clean Air Act and a 1994 Ozone State Implementation Plan when it used inappropriate data to establish the 1990 baseline for emission levels, "and by failing to adopt 'enforceable control measures'" in 1997 as required by the Clean Air Act.
The judge ordered the Department of Pesticide Regulation and its parent California Environmental Protection Agency and the Air Resources Board to come up with regulations to achieve the original goal and submit them to the federal Environmental Protection Agency for approval no later than Jan. 1, 2008. Under the terms of the orders, the regulations must ensure that the Sacramento, San Joaquin Valley, Ventura, Southeast Desert and South Coast air basins reduce volatile organic compound emissions from pesticides by 20 percent from 1990 levels.
Veda Federighi, spokeswoman for the Department of Pesticide Regulation, said Thursday the state is "reviewing its options" but had no further comment. She referred a reporter to a Tuesday news release announcing the agency's potential ban of 97 pesticide products because 53 manufacturers and sellers failed to submit by the end of last year data on VOCs in the products. The department has scheduled hearings June 28-30 on the proposed bans. Once ordered, they would take effect 30 days after the hearings.
Meanwhile, the department is reviewing responses to a second VOC notice with a March 1 deadline. That notice required 177 registrants to tell the department how they would reformulate 748 products to reduce VOC emissions, or explain why reformulation is impractical. The department expects to act on those responses later this year, according to the news release. VOCs contribute to ground-level ozone, or smog, an air pollutant harmful to humans and plant life. "Until now, Californians' lungs were just another subsidy for agriculture," said Teresa DeAnda, president of El Comite para el Bienestar de Earlimart, one of the plaintiffs in the suit.
Since the suit was filed, according to a plaintiffs' news release, the only step taken by regulators involved a request for manufacturers to reduce smog-forming chemicals in non-fumigant products, but only if feasible. "Asking pesticide makers to change their products if convenient will not get the job done," said Tom Frantz, president of the Association of Irritated Residents, another of the suit's plaintiffs.
by Lizz Thrall, Environmental Science & Technology
April 26, 2006
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2006/apr/science/lt_soap.html
Researchers looking for emerging contaminants in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) face a formidable challenge -- to "find the needle in the haystack," says Rolf Halden, an assistant professor of environmental health sciences at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. In a study posted today to ES&T's Research ASAP website, Halden and his coauthors report that approximately 75% of the mass of a popular antiseptic called triclocarban that enters a typical WWTP persists in the treated sludge.
Triclocarban, commercially known as TCC, is a pesticide used extensively as an antimicrobial additive in soaps and body washes; one survey of commercial products found it in 30% of bar soaps. With annual production estimated at 1 million pounds or more, triclocarban is classified as a high-production-volume chemical by the U.S. EPA.
Despite triclocarban's widespread usage -- and its chemical similarity to triclosan, another common antiseptic additive that has come under scrutiny -- relatively little is known about the compound's fate during wastewater treatment. "I think it's surprising that no one has looked at it before," says Shane Snyder, R&D project manager at the Southern Nevada Water Authority. "People have done a tremendous amount of work on triclosan."
Halden and his coauthors found that triclocarban was almost entirely removed from the WWTP's effluent after activated sludge treatment -- with an average efficiency of 97%. The compound tends to attach itself to particles in the sludge because of its hydrophobic nature. Therefore, it remains in the sludge; even after 19 days of anaerobic digestion, levels were as high as 51 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). According to Snyder, the concentration of triclocarban in treated sludge is higher than he would have expected.
The authors propose that triclocarban's chemical structure may explain its resistance to degradation. "Some chemicals don't withstand the anaerobic digestion component of wastewater treatment," explains Halden, "but this chemical does because it looks foreign to microorganisms."
In previous studies, also published in ES&T, Halden and his colleagues documented the presence of triclocarban in streams, groundwater, wastewater, and drinking water around Baltimore, Md. They found concentrations ranging from 3 nanograms per liter in treated drinking water to more than 5 micrograms per liter in streams with significant raw sewage contamination. While doing so, they developed a state-of-the-art analytical technique to selectively identify and quantify triclocarban against the complex background of sewage sludge.
The presence of triclocarban in sewage sludge raises questions about its fate when the sludge is reused as biosolids. Federal regulations classify treated sludge as biosolids on the basis of levels of pathogens and other contaminants. According to EPA statistics, about half of the biosolids generated from wastewater treatment are recycled to land for agriculture and other uses.
Hans Sanderson, director of environmental safety at the Soap and Detergent Association, comments that the research is technically sound and provides helpful information about triclocarban's fate. He emphasizes, however, that the results do not necessarily apply to the biosolids that meet the strictest pathogen requirements -- known as Class A biosolid -- which are subject to fewer usage restrictions. The heat treatments designed to kill pathogens in the sludge may also change the concentration of triclocarban in the finished biosolids. "That concentration, we don't know," says Sanderson, "but in all likelihood it's not going to be higher than the concentration you have in the sludge -- it's probably going to be lower."
The authors say that the sludge sampled in this study would meet the Class B biosolids standards, but they are in the process of measuring triclocarban levels in Class A biosolids. According to Halden, "Unpublished data from the National Biosolids Repository study show that triclocarban can withstand additional treatment steps and remains detectable at mg/kg levels in Class A biosolids."
The researchers are also investigating whether triclocarban is bioavailable in soil, or whether it stays attached to particles, which would limit its potential impact. Although relatively few data exist about the toxicity of triclocarban, the authors report that it has been found to impair reproduction in laboratory rats and that some of its degradation products are carcinogenic.
To provide researchers with more information about the composition of sludge, Halden has established the Johns Hopkins University National Biosolids Repository. This nationwide sampling project seeks to identify synthetic compounds -- such as PCBs and PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers) -- that persist in municipal sludge and to estimate the chemical input to agricultural soils by sludge reuse.
Halden suggests that triclocarban's antimicrobial properties give additional cause for concern, noting that the related compound triclosan has faced scrutiny since the late 1990s, when researchers first found that it could promote growth of resistant strains of bacteria. The conditions under which microbes encounter topical antiseptics like triclosan and triclocarban -- at low concentrations, for extended periods of time -- are considered the most likely to encourage resistance. But Stuart Levy, a professor at Tufts University and the president of the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics, cautions: "With triclocarban, we don't have any data of its relation to antibiotic resistance. So that makes this paper more speculative as to what [the residue might] do in the microbial world."
The authors plan to continue their investigations into triclocarban, and they emphasize that many unanswered questions remain. "It's kind of a detective story," Halden says. "We noticed [triclocarban] in the streams, and we followed it to the wastewater treatment plant and see it's not being degraded. We're not at the end of the story."
by Rebecca Renner, Environmental Science & Technology
April 26, 2006
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2006/apr/science/rr_produce.html
Just one serving of some fruits can contain enough perchlorate to exceed the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) safe daily dose by more than 25%, and wines and beers pack a bigger perchlorate punch than waters, according to a new study that measures perchlorate concentrations in fruits, wines, and beers from around the world. The findings are further evidence that risk models for what is turning out to be a widespread contaminant need to be revised.
High levels of perchlorate were found in cantaloupe and grapes from Central and South America. Perchlorate is well known as a major component in rocket fuel, but the chemical also forms naturally. In sufficient amounts, perchlorate disrupts the thyroid by inhibiting the uptake of iodide, an essential component of thyroid hormones.
In the study, cantaloupe from Guatemala "topped" the perchlorate charts at 463.5 parts per billions (ppb). An average serving, one-quarter of a medium melon, weighs 135 grams and would supply 62.5 micrograms of perchlorate. Fruit lovers who eat half a melon would get a 125-ppb dose. For a 70-kilogram adult, the NAS-recommended safe daily dose is 49 micrograms of perchlorate.
Some of the other high concentrations that chemist Houssain El Aribi and colleagues report in their paper include 145.6 ppb in Chilean apricots, 62.8 ppb in Mexican red tomatoes, 22 ppb in Chilean green grapes, and 39.9 ppb in raw Mexican asparagus.
Other studies have found low levels of perchlorate in rainwater and common foods produced in the U.S., such as milk and lettuce. The chemical has also been found in prenatal vitamins and seaweed. This is the first survey of foods from many parts of the world, says Purnendu "Sandy" Dasgupta at Texas Tech University. He adds that this study shows that perchlorate can be found all over the globe.
El Aribi and his colleagues from analytical instrument companies Applied Biosystems-MDS Sciex and Dionex conducted the survey to demonstrate the power of a new analytical method, which they developed in cooperation with the U.S. EPA.
El Aribi is quick to note that the survey is just a rough snapshot and not a representative picture, but other scientists say that it covers important ground. "This is a really interesting paper; at least it may explain where all the perchlorate is coming from," says thyroid endocrinologist Thomas Zoeller at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Zoeller also notes that preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that the amount of perchlorate in urine is too high to be from drinking water alone.
Overall, fresh fruits and vegetables from California and Central and South America had the highest levels, whereas produce from Canada and China had the lowest. European levels also appeared to be low. "It is interesting to note that only certain agricultural areas are associated with a strong presence of perchlorate," the authors write.
El Aribi purchased most of the food samples from Toronto-area stores between January 2005 and February 2006, but some were sent to him by colleagues overseas, he says.
The scientists analyzed 77 wines and 144 beers. In light of the relatively high perchlorate concentrations in grapes, it is not surprising that wines contain higher concentrations of perchlorate than beers. Wines from Chile generally had the highest concentrations, which ranged from 7.2 to 38.8 ppb. But some large variations occur in wines from the same country. For example, the levels of perchlorate in a selection of 8 Canadian wines were as high as 20.76 ppb and as low as 0.055 ppb. Levels in beers also varied widely. Although most contained less than 1 ppb perchlorate, El Aribi found concentrations as high as 21 ppb in a French beer.
A surprising facet of the study, says El Aribi, is that perchlorate can remain in food even after it is cooked. Asparagus from Mexico had 39.9 ppb raw but retained 24.4 ppb after being boiled in water. This is a surprising result, because perchlorate is very soluble in water, he notes. Some good news is that home water filters effectively remove perchlorate from water, at least when they are new.
The study's findings should have a significant impact on regulations that specify acceptable quantities of perchlorate in drinking water, says Gary Ginsberg, a toxicologist with the Connecticut Department of Public Health. Ginsberg has already coauthored a 2005 critique of the NAS reference dose. "Even though this is a screening study, the food contribution to daily perchlorate exposure looks to be quite substantial and so needs to be factored into drinking water criteria," he says.
In March, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection released proposed standards for drinking water and waste-site cleanup of 2 ppb; these assume that 80% of perchlorate exposure comes from food and 20% from water. "This is a standard default assumption when you know that food is a significant but difficult-to-quantify source," says Ginsberg.
EPA was also recently criticized by its Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee for setting a cleanup standard that assumes people are only exposed to perchlorate through drinking water.
by Ray Rivera and Elizabeth Williamson, Washington Post
April 26, 2006
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042502006.html
A federal appeals court ordered the Environmental Protection Agency yesterday to scrap its annual and seasonal pollution limits for the Anacostia River in favor of daily caps required by the Clean Water Act, a ruling with implications for cities across the nation. Environmentalists hailed the decision as a move toward reducing the millions of gallons of raw sewage and other toxins that flow into the Anacostia each year, making it one of the nation's most polluted rivers. But officials with the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority, known as WASA, warned that the ruling could force costly upgrades to the city's sewer system and undermine efforts to reduce pollutants.
"This leaves a huge question mark nationally, not just for WASA," said the authority's general manager, Jerry N. Johnson, who chairs the National Clean Water Partnership, which represents dozens of cities. The ruling also conflicts with a 2001 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, setting up a possible Supreme Court challenge. WASA argued in pleadings before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that a change to daily loads could force it to completely separate its sewage and storm drainage, a costly prospect that could mean tearing up streets across the city to lay pipes. WASA and EPA officials said they have to examine the ruling further to determine its full effect. Although the decision applies only to the Anacostia, attorneys for both agencies said it could have broader implications for hundreds of communities that have combined sewer and storm systems.
The Anacostia flows south from Maryland into the District. With about 1 million residents, the 176-square-mile watershed is more than half-covered in hard surface. With every rainfall, car exhaust residue, fertilizers, chemicals and trash wash into the river. A second major source of pollution stems from the city's sewage system, which uses the same pipes for sewage and storm runoff. Heavy rains can overwhelm the system, mixing storm water with untreated human waste and pouring both into the Anacostia. About 2 billion gallons of this toxic mix flow into the river each year, according to the Anacostia Watershed Society.
The EPA approved the city's annual and seasonal limits for certain pollutants about five years ago. Earthjustice, representing Friends of the Earth, filed a lawsuit in 2002 arguing that the EPA's limits violated the language and intent of the Clean Water Act, which requires states and the District to establish a "total maximum daily load" for pollutants flowing into rivers. The seasonal and yearly averages "allow more pollutants into the water over a year than a daily load allocation would, and that's a fact," said James Connolly, executive director of the watershed society, which is not a party to the suit.
After a big storm, daily bacteria levels can surge to many times the legal standard, violating the Clean Water Act. Under a daily enforcement scenario, a local jurisdiction would be cited each day it exceeded the standard. But when the load is averaged, "they'd only have to meet it occasionally," Connolly said.
Jon Capacasa, director of the EPA's water protection division for the mid-Atlantic region, said the long-term averages were the result of sound science. "Obviously, we'll take heed of the court's ruling and adjust these pollution budgets as necessary," Capacasa said. "But . . . these budgets the EPA has already approved are very thorough and protective of the Anacostia."
A lower court agreed with the EPA's contention that the word "daily" in the act was flexible enough to include seasonal or annual limits. But a three-judge panel with the Court of Appeals said "daily" is unambiguous. "Daily means daily, nothing else," Judge David S. Tatel wrote in a 14-page decision. "Doctors making daily rounds would be of little use to their patients if they appeared seasonally or annually."
by Erin Middlewood, Orion magazine
March/April 2006
http://www.oriononline.org/pages/om/06-2om/Middlewood.html
WHEN I LEARNED I WAS PREGNANT in March 2005, I did what any mother in history might have done: I marveled that the tiny blob of cells inside me could turn into a person. Then I started doing what mothers might have thought to do only recently: worry about all the hazardous substances that might keep those cells from properly multiplying and organizing themselves.
I frantically wracked my brain to remember when I last drank wine. How many glasses did I have? I stopped drinking alcohol, gave up my morning coffee, and began carefully avoiding soft cheeses, which can carry listeria. I choked down spinach, even though it didn't sit well in my queasy stomach during the early months, because I read that it would help my baby develop.
When in the past I had balked at higher prices for organic produce, I happily paid extra now. I anguished when our house was sprayed for carpenter ants and stayed away for the night. I wore a charcoal mask when I helped my husband paint the basement. I did all this because I realized that during pregnancy and for months beyond birth while breastfeeding, my body was not only connected to the environment -- it was the environment. I was the Earth, at least to my child.
Just as I had worried about purity of water and air, now I had to worry about healthful blood and milk, precious natural resources of their own. I tried as much as I could to control what I ate, drank, inhaled, or absorbed. It didn't take long for me to realize how absurd it all was, and for my sense of control to shatter.
A few months into my pregnancy, the Seattle-based Northwest Environment Watch released a study analyzing forty samples of breast milk from first-time breastfeeding mothers in my region. Despite the Pacific Northwest's conceit that it's a relatively pristine place to live, the study found the same toxic polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs, and polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, that had shown up in breast milk samples in other studies undertaken around the country.
I couldn't fool myself. There was no reason to believe that my breast milk would be any cleaner than that of any other mother who used a computer, couch, or bed treated with PBDE flame retardants. Nor did I have any reason to believe that my breast milk would escape contamination by PCBs, formerly used in transformers, fluorescent light ballasts, and other electrical equipment. Though banned in the United States in 1976, PCBs persist for decades in the environment and climb the food chain into the meat, fish, and dairy products I grew up eating.
A Canadian study recently found the same chemicals and more in the body of renowned wildlife artist Robert Bateman, who lives on an idyllic British Columbia island and eats only organic food.
After the Seattle study, my husband and I asked our obstetrician whether we should reconsider my plans to breastfeed. Our doctor told us that breastfeeding remains the best nourishment for babies, and I pursued my own research for further comfort. Scientists first discovered DDE, a residue of DDT, and PCBs in human breast milk in the 1950s. Subsequent studies have continued to find the chemicals, as well as PBDEs, in breast milk. But a long string of studies persuasively documents the benefits of breastfeeding.
I found further reassurance from Dr. Ruth Lawrence, author of Breastfeeding: A Guide for the Medical Profession and a professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and pediatrics at the University of Rochester. "The benefits are tremendous," says Lawrence, who helped the American Academy of Pediatrics draft recent recommendations on breastfeeding that urge mothers to breastfeed for a year, exclusively so for six months. "Everything in human milk is just perfect for brain growth. Many of the constituents don't exist in cow's milk and formula."
Through breastfeeding, Lawrence and others say, I will give my son my immunities, as well as 160 fatty acids that are absent in baby formula, while sparing him the difficult-to-digest cow's milk and soy found in formula -- along with its higher levels of heavy metals, dangerous bacteria, and hormone-imbalancing phytoestrogens. According to a host of studies, breastfed babies have fewer allergies, grow up to have a lower incidence of obesity and cardiovascular disease, and enjoy invaluable bonding with their mothers. And women who breastfeed enjoy a rush of feel-good hormones as they offer life-sustaining nourishment to their children.
But my inquiry into breastfeeding ultimately revealed a worse affront to my son's health, one which I had much less control over: the many toxic chemicals, including the kind found in breast milk, that reach vulnerable fetuses through the umbilical cord before they're born. The placenta filters a mother's blood before it passes nourishment to the fetus, but it can't stop a stream of industrial chemicals from slipping through. Among other hazards, fetuses are exposed to mercury from coal-fired power plants and seafood, polyaromatic hydrocarbons from vehicle exhaust and burning garbage, and perfluorinated chemicals found in Teflon, Scotchgard, food packaging, and fabric and carpet protectors.
In a 2005 study, the Washington DC-based Environmental Working Group found 287 chemicals in the umbilical cord blood of ten infants. "The dangers of pre- or post-natal exposure to this complex mixture of carcinogens, developmental toxins and neurotoxins have never been studied," the report stated. "Chemical exposures in the womb or during infancy can be dramatically more harmful than exposures later in life."
Because of the complexity and cost of analyzing the cord blood -- $10,000 for each sample -- the study was limited in scope. Nor could it yield data on the demographics or health of the mothers and babies, because the samples came anonymously from Red Cross centers across the country.
Still, the research established that the problem exists. And unlike exposure through breast milk, in utero chemical exposure evidently affects childhood development. In a sixteen-year study by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, researchers measured prenatal and infant exposure to PCBs and DDE in 856 North Carolina children through the early 1990s. The children exposed in utero experienced small delays in motor development, which they overcame after age two, said Dr. Walter J. Rogan, co-author of the study. "[But] we found no relationship between postnatal exposure (via breast milk) and developmental delay."
As it turns out, several long-term studies suggest that the nutrients in breast milk may help counteract the ill effects of prenatal exposure to industrial chemicals. As noted by the Environmental Working Group's 2003 report on toxins in breast milk, breastfed babies who had been exposed in utero to PCBs experienced less damage from the chemicals than their bottle-fed counterparts.
But even if breastfeeding and other choices can mitigate a child's exposure to toxins, the in utero exposure still occurs. It's nothing I can fix by myself. As overwhelmed as I have felt, my worries have been too narrow. The health of my child depends on more than whether I forgo dry-cleaned clothes, avoid artificial fragrances, eat organic spinach, or ventilate my computer room. As the person responsible for raising a healthy child, I need a few things from society too: mandated safety studies, bans on chemicals that aren't demonstrated to be safe, and a transformation of basic values. I need a world that no longer treats chemical-coated nonstick cookware as necessary, and the gift of life itself as expendable.
by Kim McGuire, Denver Post
April 25, 2006
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3748109
Saying Colorado's air quality is improving, Gov. Bill Owens on Monday vetoed a bill giving the state air-quality commission the power to adopt air-quality standards tougher than federal pollution rules. Owens said House Bill 1309 would also hurt some businesses if Colorado adopted air-quality regulations that weren't uniform with federal rules. "While House Bill 1309 contains exemptions for a few industries, such as agriculture, the fact is that most businesses would be at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace, making it harder to attract new jobs to our state," Owens said.
The failed bill's supporters -- environmental groups and public-health advocates -- had argued that the legislation was needed to offset federal rollbacks that will weaken air-quality standards in Colorado. Among those rollbacks are new federal rules for power plants and new limits on mercury emissions. State Rep. Anne McGihon, a Denver Democrat and the bill's sponsor, said Owens is ignoring scientific warnings about air pollution and siding with polluters. "I think Coloradans know what is best for Colorado, especially when it comes to clean air," McGihon said. "The governor apparently can't see the forest through the trees -- perhaps because of the smog."
For the past two summers, the nine-county Denver metro area hasn't violated federal standards for ozone, the prime ingredient in urban smog. Carbon monoxide levels have also plummeted since the 1970s. Still, visibility continues to worsen at some national parks and wilderness areas in Colorado, according to the National Park Service. State environmental regulators also expect pollution from Front Range oil and gas development to increase by a third over the next year.
Several business, farm and industry groups opposed the bill, arguing it did little to improve air quality. The groups said the legislation would do little more than invite legal battles to determine emission guidelines. "If this bill became law, Colorado businesses would have less ability to develop sound, effective policies to purchase and install emissions equipment," said Chuck Berry, president of the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry. "Overall, this was an unnecessary bill, and the governor clearly understands that," Berry said.
by Eric Lipton, New York Times
April 25, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/25/washington/25plant.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
WASHINGTON, April 24 -- At least 225 industrial plants in this country have switched to using less dangerous chemicals since the 2001 terrorist attacks, lowering the risk that people nearby would be injured or killed by toxic plumes, a new study has found. While these plants represent only a tiny fraction of the estimated 14,000 nationwide that store or use large quantities of extremely hazardous substances, environmentalists nonetheless cite their efforts as proof that companies and utilities can and should make the switch. "It demonstrates what is possible with a concerted national effort," said Paul Orum, the author of the report, Preventing Toxic Terrorism, which is being published Tuesday by the Center for American Progress, a liberal research and advocacy group.
The plants have often undertaken the changes with little public attention, as happened at Blue Water Pool Chemical. The company, near the airport in Scottsdale, Ariz., no longer uses chlorine gas, which is extremely hazardous, reducing the risk to an estimated 8,300 people. "I just always had in the back of my mind, what would happen if you had a leak?" said Buddy Andrews, owner of the company. "I just did not want to live with it."
Congress is debating legislation that may accelerate this process, although there is disagreement over how much pressure should be imposed on plant owners. A bill introduced by Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, would give plant owners the option of replacing chemicals as a way to improve security, while a separate bill introduced by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, would require certain plants to use safer technology if it was considered practical.
The biggest safety improvements have occurred at sewage and water treatment plants. Nationwide, 207 of them have switched to less hazardous processes, most often by replacing chlorine gas with liquid chlorine bleach or ultraviolet light as the primary treatment process. Chlorine gas is much more dangerous because if a storage tank, often a rail car, is pierced or blown up, the gas could form a cloud that could kill thousands of people. One of the plants that stopped using it, Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant in the District of Columbia, included 1.7 million people in its hazard zone. An additional 29 manufacturing or electrical power plants also switched chemicals, including Cargill Inc. factories in Memphis and in Eddyville, Iowa, which had used anhydrous sulfur dioxide to soften corn for corn syrup and animal feed. The chemical, which is extremely hazardous, has been replaced by sodium bisulfite, which is a solid and therefore considered much less of a threat.
The study was conducted by contacting 1,800 chemical plants, factories, water utilities and other facilities that had dropped off an Environmental Protection Agency list of industrial facilities that handle significant quantities of extremely hazardous substances. A total of 284 plants either replied to a questionnaire or a follow-up interview about why they were no longer on the list; of those, 225 had made the switch after the terrorist attacks. Of the plants, 217 said concern over an accidental chemical release had motivated the switch. One hundred and seventeen cited concern over terrorism or a desire to improve security. The cost of changing varied widely, from less than $100,000 to more than $20 million. Several plant managers said in interviews on Monday that the new approaches had also resulted in higher operating costs.
The total population put at risk by all 284 plants, according to E.P.A. data, was about 38 million, the report said. That number overstates the extent of the actual risk, because it assumes that a major accident would discharge the toxic chemical in a circle around the plant, when in reality chemical leaks generally form much narrower plumes driven by wind and other factors, said Richard A. Falkenrath, a former deputy homeland security adviser at the White House.
Press release from Healthy Schools Network
April 24, 2006
http://www.healthyschools.org/documents/NatlPress4_24_06.pdf
A new report released on April 24th shows an estimated 32,000,000 children at high risk for health and learning impairments triggered by their own schools. State-by-state analysis, including personal stories, illustrate the problems are deeper and more widespread than previously acknowledged. Monday, April 24th is National Healthy Schools Day.
A second report being released documents the fact that no federal agency is charged with intervening to protect children's health in schools, and meager programs are uncoordinated, leaving children compelled to attend schools that make them ill and leaving their parents without recourse.
Research indicates that children are frequently exposed to a myriad of health threats at schools: bus emissions and infiltration of fumes and carbon monoxide into classrooms; toxic construction demolition debris and toxic fumes from paints and glues and carpets; schools located in former factories or on or near Superfund sites or other hazardous facilities; use of toxic products in the classrooms or stored in schools; and chemical spills or misapplications.
Meanwhile, many health problems like asthma and autism that are linked to environmental concerns appear to be rising and the US EPA estimates that half of all schools have unhealthy indoor air quality. In addition, the underlying science also shows that children's ability to learn can also be compromised by factors such as inadequate lighting, heating, and poor acoustics.
To read the full seven-page press release, please visit http://www.healthyschools.org/documents/NatlPress4_24_06.pdf.
Portland Press Herald
April 15, 2006
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/state/060415xgrmercury.shtml
AUGUSTA -- Another piece of legislation to keep mercury out of the environment in Maine was signed into law Friday by Gov. John Baldacci, bringing to five the number of newly enacted laws to eliminate the toxic metal. The latest bill signed by Baldacci calls for reducing the existing mercury emission limit for an individual source from 50 pounds per year to 35 pounds after Jan. 1, 2007, and then to 25 pounds per year after Jan. 1, 2010.
Baldacci marked the occasion by drawing attention to other mercury-reduction bills he's signed in recent days and weeks, saying they move Maine "substantially closer to the goal of eliminating man-made sources of mercury emissions." He said the Maine laws have become models for other states. "The effects that mercury can have on your health can range from acne to impaired brain development and everything in between. It depends on the type of mercury and how you came into contact with it," the governor said.
Other newly enacted Maine laws require manufacturers to set up a system to collect and recycle unused mercury thermostats by offering incentives worth at least $5 per thermostat, and ban the sale of button-cell batteries that contain mercury -- including consumer products that contain button-cell batteries -- as of July 2011.
A new law will take initial steps toward recycling of old cell phones, which contain lead, mercury and other materials that can pose health risks if released into the air, water and ground. The final law requires the annual reporting of the volume of mercury amalgam supplied to dentists in the state.
Environmentalists applauded the legislative action to control mercury as precedent-setting. With passage of the new legislation, "Maine has effectively eliminated all household products that contain mercury from store shelves and the waste stream," said Brownie Carson, executive director of the Natural Resources Council of Maine. "Maine's 'can-do' common sense approach is leading the nation in reducing the toxic mercury in our environment."
The new legislation builds on existing laws such as one that banned the sale of new mercury thermostats as of January 2006. It's estimated that 5,600 pounds of mercury is still contained in old thermostats hanging on the walls of Maine homes and businesses, the resources council said.
