Arizona Environmental Health Bulletin: June 2009

Posted on Jun 22, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, MCS

The Arizona Environmental Health Bulletin reports monthly on news, activism, announcements, housing and more. The bulletin is distributed through email and provides a wealth of information for people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and other environmental illnesses. Editor Kathy Hemenway has graciously given The Canary Report permission to republish select entries of the bulletin each month. At the editor’s request, all entries that include personal contact information have been excluded in the online version. To subscribe to the newsletter in its entirety, send an email to aehb@frontiernet.net.

Many of you noted that the mid-May issue of AEHB never arrived. My apologies! I got distracted doing research on wind farms. As it is a topic I will be working on for some time now, I plan to move to a monthly schedule for AEHB. I would like to keep AEHB focused on the topics that are most important to you the readers, and that will mean taking time off from the wind farm project to focus on the broad range of topics of concern to people with environmental illness.

This issue has a lot of ads and news items, and several items listed under Opportunities to Take Action. I hope you find some topics of interest to you. And thank you for your patience.

Kathy Hemenway, Editor

IN THE NEWS

Disclosure of Chemicals in Household Cleaners.

In February Earthjustice filed a lawsuit against four manufacturers of household cleaners to urge them to “come clean” about the ingredients in their products. The companies are Proctor & Gamble, Colgate-Polmolive, Church and Dwight, and Reckitt-Benckiser. They manufacture the Tom’s of Maine product line, Murphy Oil Soap, Ajax, Lysol, Joy, Cascade, Tide, Bounce, Parsons’ Ammonia, and many other products (for a complete list, check out the Earthjustice website).

Earthjustice filed the lawsuit on behalf of several non-profit organizations, including the American Lung Association in New York and the Sierra Club, because these four manufacturers are refusing to file semi-annual reports that list chemical ingredients and describe research they are conducting on health and environmental effects. The reports are required for products sold in New York state under a right-to-know law that’s more than 30 years old. Not a single report was filed until advocates requested compliance from more than a dozen companies earlier this year. Seventh Generation, Sunshine Makers (“Simple Green”), Method Products, and SC Johnson are among the companies that complied.

According to an article on CleanGreenCertified.com, the Federal Hazardous Substances Act protects against disclosure of trade secrets such as fragrance formulas, making it difficult for consumers to identify product ingredients. Aside from the requirement in New York, companies are not required to reveal ingredients on product labels, on websites, or anywhere else.

For a more complete analysis of the regulations that exempt fragrance ingredients from disclosure in products, check out “Fragranced Consumer Products and Undisclosed Ingredients” by Anne C. Steinemann at the University of Washington.

Insecticide Residues Likely on Floors in Most Homes.

A study in Environmental Science and Technology reports that insecticide residues were found on hard flooring in most of the 500 homes tested. The most commonly detected insecticides were permethrin (89%), chlorpyrifos (78%), chlordane (64%), piperonyl butoxide (52%), cypermethrin (46%), and fipronil (40%). For more information, check out American Healthy Homes Survey: A National Study of Residential Pesticides Measured from Floor Wipes.

Toxins in Blood and Urine.

The American Association for Health Freedom website has an article about a two-year sampling of chemicals in the blood and urine of a group of women from Green Bay, New Orleans, Corpus Christi, and Oakland. Fire retardants, Teflon chemicals, fragrances, bisphenol A (BPA), and perchlorate were found in the blood and/or urine of every woman tested. A senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, which completed the study, said that this is evidence that the Toxic Substances Act is outdated. For more information, check out Toxic Americans–Chemicals Used in Everyday Consumer Products Show Up in Blood and Urine Specimens.

Biological Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation.

According to a recent article in Ljusglimten (a publication of FEB, the Swedish organization for people with electrical hypersensitivity), a doctoral project was recently completed on the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation from cell phones. Henrietta Nittby’s research showed that when rats were exposed to cell phone radiation for different lengths of time, a variety of effects resulted, including increased leakage of albumin across the blood-brain barrier; decreased memory function; and changes in groups of genes that are associated with the functioning of cell membranes. Although the extrapolation of the results to humans is not simple, they are suggestive and they are consistent with many other studies that support the work of the research group Nittby belongs to. Dr. Henry Lai, whose role was to question Nittby during her doctoral defense, said that although the studies on the biological effects of cell phone radiation are divided–some showing results and others not–the collective results are more clear when you separate studies funded by the cell phone industry from those funded by other sources.

The article about Nittby’s dissertation (Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation upon the Mammalian Brain) was originally published in the Issue No. 4, 2008, of Ljusglimten. It was written by Lennart Olofsson and translated to English by Steen Hviid.

Portland Resolution on Wireless Health Effects.

The City Council of Portland, Oregon adopted a resolution calling for “the FCC to work in cooperation with the FDA and other relevant federal agencies to revisit and update studies on potential health concerns arising from RF wireless emissions in light of the national proliferation of wireless use.” For more information, check out the resolution.

Hazards of Fertilizer Made from Sludge.

Mother Jones’ May issue has an article about the common practice of making fertilizer from recycled sewage, and the risks that entails. According to the article by Josh Harkinson, the EPA has promoted fertilizer made from “biosolids” since the 1990′s, and regulates it less strictly than it is regulated by 37 states. The problem with sludge, aside from its smell, is that it may contain anything that goes down the drain (e.g., industrial waste). Various studies have reported that sludge may contain human pathogens, radioactive waste, flame retardants, and pharmaceuticals, as well as other contaminants. Some scientists are concerned that contaminants may be passing from the sewage-derived fertilizer into crops and groundwater, as well as blowing off fields. The contaminants have been found in milk and meat. For more information, check out Sludge Happens on the Mother Jones website.

Global Warming and Public Health.

An article on the Bloomberg.com website describes a report from The Lancet about the health effects of global warming. Describing it as the worst public health threat of the 21st century, the article says that rising temperatures will lead to more deaths from catastrophes such as hurricanes and floods, and to increases in the numbers of deaths caused by climate-sensitive conditions such as heart disease, diarrhea, malaria, and malnutrition. For more information, check out Global Warming May Exceed Infections as Health Threat.

Formaldehyde Linked to Blood and Lymphatic Cancers.

A recent article in The New York Times describes a study of cancer deaths in factory workers exposed to formaldehyde. Workers with high levels of exposure to formaldehyde were more likely to die from blood and lymphatic cancers than workers with low exposure levels. The risk diminished over time after the exposures stopped. Formaldehyde has previously been linked to nasopharyngeal carcinoma, and is classified as a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. For more information, check out Formaldehyde Linked to Cancer Deaths on The New York Times website.

Soy Protein Processed with Hexane.

An article by Mike Adams, the NaturalNews editor, says that soy protein is frequently processed using hexane, a neurotoxic byproduct of gasoline refining. A study NaturalNews conducted in collaboration with the Cornucopia Institute found hexane residues of 21 ppm in soy meal commonly used to make soy protein for infant formula, protein bars, and vegetarian foods. A related report published by the Cornucopia Institute says that hexane is used to process nearly all conventional soy ingredients, and is prohibited when processing organic foods. However, the report says that products such as Clif Bars, “made with organic oats and soybeans,” are required to have only 70% organic ingredients, and ingredients extracted using hexane may be included in the remaining 30%. For more information, check out Soy Protein Used in “Natural” Foods Bathed in Toxic Solvent Hexane on NaturalNews.com and Behind the Bean on the Cornucopia Institute website.

Cigarette Smoke Decreases Allergic Response.

A study summarized on the Faculty of 1000 Biology website reports that the reactions of mast cells in response to allergens was dampened in mice by treatment with a cigarette smoke-infused solution. Neil Thompson, the scientist who wrote the summary, says that the same effect is likely in humans, but of course he doesn’t recommend taking up smoking to cure allergies. For more information, check out Cigarette Smoke Suppresses In Vitro Allergic Activation of Mouse Mast Cells.<

The www.f1000biology.com website provides links to articles that have been selected by researchers as being the most important papers in the biological sciences, as well as ratings and reviews of papers. It is intended to provide a new model for scientific progress based on consensus peer review.

OPPORTUNITIES TO TAKE ACTION

Investigate and Regulate Factory Pig Farms.

Diane Ensign forwarded information about a petition calling for the United Nations World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization to investigate and develop regulations for factory pig farms. Citing a possible link between swine flu and a factory pig farm in Mexico, the article says that these farms are “dirty, dangerous, and inhumane” and that they need to be regulated to protect the global public health. The organization managing the petition, AVAAZ, says that it will deliver to WHO in Geneva one cardboard pig for each 1,000 signatures. To date, it has more than 225,000. For more information, go to Swine Flu: Investigate and Regulate.

Possible Campaign for Product Ingredient Accountability.

Julie Mellum, President of Take Back the Air, wrote in from Minneapolis to say that if she can get some help, she would like to start a national campaign to boycott Proctor & Gamble products, and to work on legislation to hold P&G and other companies accountable for the health effects of product ingredients. She says that the worst offender is Bounce Free in the P&G “Laundry & Fabric Care” product line, because it is claimed to be unscented, causing customers to think it’s safe when it isn’t.

Coalition for Local Oversight of Utility Technologies (CLOUT).

Susan Molloy forwarded an announcement for CLOUT, “a new, nationwide grass-roots coalition of individuals and organizations committed to restoring local governmental control over telecommunications towers and related wireless facilities in the United States.” CLOUT has a petition calling for an amendment to Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 “to allow state and local governments to regulate the placement, construction, and modification of telecommunications towers and other personal wireless services facilities on the basis of the health and environmental effects of such facilities.” One of the public endorsers of the petition is Sharon Bronson, Pima County Supervisor, District 3, Tucson. You can find the petition on www.cloutnow.org.

National Broadband Plan.

Steen Hviid wants to remind us that our input on the National Broadband Plan is due to the FCC by June 8. The FCC is responsible for developing the plan and delivering it to Congress in February 2010. According to a representative, the FCC is interested in input from people with electrical sensitivity and other health-related concerns, and urges us to be sure to write in. All input to the process must be in the written record.

For more information, go to www.fcc.gov and look under “April 8″ for the headline “FCC Launches Development of National Broadband Plan.” In the Notice of Inquiry you can find out how the FCC is framing the problem, and what the issues are that they have identified. Comments can be filed by using the “E-File” button at the top of the main FCC webpage. Be sure to include the proceeding number “09-51″.

Apache County Hearing for Potter Mesa Wind & Solar Farm.

The Apache County Planning and Zoning Commission is meeting on June 4 at 1 pm, and Item #3 on their agenda is a Conditional Use Permit for the Potter Mesa Energy Project. For more information, check out the Apache County website at www.co.apache.az.us.

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY

By “social regulation,” I refer to governmental programs, many of which were initiated in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s to protect the quality of the environment, reduce risks and hazards in the workplace, ensure the reliability and safety of consumer products, and provide equality of opportunity in housing and employment. These efforts at societal self-improvement reflect a consensus that a safer, cleaner, healthier, more equitable society is to that extent a better society, one more in keeping with long-recognized national ideals and aspirations.

The Economy of the Earth: Philosophy, Law, and the Environment
by Mark Sagoff, 1990

AEHB EDITORIAL POLICIES

In the tradition of the original newsletter, Tucson Chemical Sensitivity Bulletin (TCSB), AEHB is a compilation of items on a variety of topics from many different individuals, providing a forum for readers to let one another know about news articles, events, needs, and opportunities.

Items are edited for readability, style, tone, brevity, currency, and sometimes to fill in gaps in context or to remove information that isn’t essential to the topic of environmental health. Articles that are available on the web are summarized for brevity, and preference is given to items that are clear and content-rich, and that provide details in support of conclusions. In all sections except “In the News,” the submitter’s name and email address or phone number are given [omitted in online edition].

Inclusion of an item doesn’t imply endorsement. In fact, readers sometimes submit, and the bulletin publishes, opposing perspectives on the same topic. Whereas in some cases submitters are experts on the topics their items address, in most cases they are not. You are urged to check things out for yourself and make sure you are comfortable that you have all the essential information before you take action. And that goes for assessing the degree of importance and urgency of a topic as well — naturally, something that is very important and urgent to some of us may not be important or urgent to others.

Items can be omitted for a variety of reasons, including time limitations, redundancy with other recent items, or because they are out-of-date, overtly religious, or not directly germane. There is an attempt to balance the coverage of different topics over time. In effect, you, the readers, define the scope and focus of the bulletin by the items you send in.

In addition to items sent in by readers, AEHB also often includes a section called “Special Features.” The features have included readers’ personal stories, educational articles, and resource lists. Special Features are sometimes reviewed by subject matter experts and others, whereas the individual items submitted by readers are not.

MORE ABOUT AEHB

AEHB is produced privately by amateur journalists, usually on a bi-weekly basis. It is provided free of charge. The contents are from readers and do not necessarily reflect the position of the editors or any organization. AEHB is not affiliated with any organization.

The editors reserve the right to edit and/or withhold items. They claim no liability for items in the bulletin nor for any results anyone obtains by following up on a particular item. Readers use their own discretion and are responsible for checking out the items for themselves. Unless otherwise stated, items may be republished with appropriate credits (that is, the words “Originally published in the Arizona Environmental Health Bulletin” and the Issue number and the date should be included).

To submit an item, email aehb@frontiernet.net. To respond to an item, please use the information provided in the item.

Send email to aehb@frontiernet.net to subscribe to the newsletter in its entirety.

Editor: Kathy Hemenway
Editorial Assistant: Stephanie Smith
Consulting Editor: Steve Ross
Banner Photo: Aloe Flowers by Steve Ross