Australia refuses to ban highly toxic pesticide
January 8, 2009 by Susie Collins · Leave a Comment
Australia refuses to join ban on endosulfan, a highly toxic agricultural pesticide linked to small testicles, low sperm count and miscarriages.
Despite the fact that young males exposed to the pesticide endosulfan see a delay in sexual maturity, and further, that studies have linked the pesticide to an increase in the risk of miscarriages, Australia refuses to ban the toxic chemical from its food crops.
This is hard to believe, since more than 55 countries (not the United States, of course) have banned the use of endosulfan as an agricultural pesticide. The ban makes sense given that acute poisoning from endosulfan can cause headaches, nausea, vomiting, convulsions, and in extreme cases, unconsciousness and even death.
But it appears that in this age of a global marketplace, countries who stubbornly cling to bad policy about the use of toxic chemicals on food crops will be forced to take care of the health of their own citizens by an international community concerned about ensuring a safe food supply.
AN INTERNATIONALLY recognised highly toxic insecticide will continue to be used widely by Australian horticultural industries, despite New Zealand becoming the most recent country to institute a total ban.
More than 55 countries, including Britain, most other European Union members, and a number of Asian nations including the Philippines, Indonesia and South Korea, have outlawed the use of endosulfan as a pesticide for crops.
The New Zealand ban was prompted in part by a number of recent biosafety scares, including unacceptably high residues of the pesticide found in local and imported Australian produce last year. Farmers have been given 12 months to surrender all stockpiles.
In October, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, to which Australia is a signatory, will consider elevating endosulfan to the final stage of assessment. If passed, this would trigger a global ban.
Link to full story at The Sydney Morning Herald
Photo of Australian fruit by Justin Knol
Veterinarians asked to report pesticide poisoning incidents
January 5, 2009 by Susie Collins · 6 Comments
A new website is launched for veterinarians to help track pesticide poisoning incidents.
The data is supposed to be evaluated by the EPA. What they will do with it is yet to be seen since, as evidenced in yesterday’s post, they don’t seem to be doing much to protect people let alone pets. But I suppose it will start a database that may some day be useful if anyone wishes to change pesticide policy for the health of pets.
(”Beyond Pesticides” January 2, 2009)– Household pets and other animals are commonly exposed to toxic pesticides in lawns and parks, from homeowner use of bug sprays, in contaminated air or water, or from flea and tick control products, potentially poisoning the animal and causing acute and chronic health effects. A new website has been designed for veterinarians to help track these pesticide poisoning incidents.
The incident reporting website is part of the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) webpages. It was developed by the National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC) with input from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Pesticide Program, AVMA’s Clinical Practitioners Advisory Committee and Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents “to capture the optimal amount of relevant information using a form that is quick for busy practitioners to fill out.” The data is to be evaluated by EPA.
According to EPA, “Most of the reports of more severe pesticide-related incidents EPA receives are neurological or dermatologic in nature. The reports from veterinarians will help improve the quality of all animal incident data.”
Numerous studies have documented the risk of pesticides to pets over the years. A 1991 National Cancer Institute study, finds that dogs whose owners’ lawns were treated with 2,4-D, four or more times per year, are twice as likely to contract canine malignant lymphoma than dogs whose owners do not use the herbicide. Exposure to herbicide-treated lawns and gardens increases the risk of bladder cancer by four to seven times in Scottish Terriers, according to a study by Purdue University veterinary researchers published in the April 15, 2004 issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.
Research published in the December 1988 issue of Preventive Veterinary Medicine links hyperthyroidism in cats to flea powders and sprays, lawn pesticides and canned cat food. Allethrin, a common ingredient in home mosquito products (coils, mats, oils and sprays) and other bug sprays, has been linked to liver problems in dogs, according to a 1989 study by the World Health Organization. The 1989 edition W.C. Campbell Toxicology textbook reports that chronic exposure to abamectin, an insecticide often used by homeowners on fire ants can affect the nervous system of dogs and cause symptoms such as pupil dilation, lethargy, and tremors.
According to 2004 statistics compiled by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ Animal Poison Control Center, 22% of approximately 880 cases of pet birds being exposed to common household items involved pesticides (including rat bait and insecticides).
“I can think of numerous cases over the years of abnormal neurologic signs in dogs after exposure to ‘benign’ herbicides and a pretty severe contact dermatitis in a cat after exposure to a pesticide,” states an ER vet in California. “I will try to encourage my colleagues to report any questionable adverse event in the future.”
If you suspect your pet has been poisoned, contact the Animal Poison Control Center at 888-426-4435. Encourage your veterinarian to document the pesticide poisoning through the new AVMA website. To be sure the incident does not go undocumented, complete Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide Incident Report.
For more information on how your pet may be poisoned, what pesticides do to pets, and alterative pest management strategies for your home and pet pest problems, see Beyond Pesticides factsheet Pesticides and Pets: What you should know to keep your pets safe.
Gee, I can think of numerous times over the years of abnormal neurologic signs in me after exposure to “benign” herbicides. Anyone care to send a report in on that?
Photo of dog on safe lawn by Anita Thomhave
Thanks, Linda!
No comment
January 4, 2009 by Susie Collins · 2 Comments
Firefighters exposed to hazardous food additives
New Zealand– Christchurch firefighters were put to the test on Thursday night dealing with a dangerous cocktail of flames and chemicals.
The first on the scene at the Hornby hazardous goods warehouse turned back after chemicals burned through the gloves of two firefighters.
Decontamination units were brought in and the toxic fire was fought from a safe distance.
Chemicals stored at the warehouse included food processing additives.
Link to TVNZ
Pesticide exposure kills elderly woman
January 4, 2009 by Susie Collins · 16 Comments
EPA files complaint three years later; federal pesticide law limits the penalty EPA can seek to a maximum of $4,550.
(Beyond Pesticides) The U.S. EPA has filed an administrative complaint, seeking a maximum penalty of only $4,550, against a pest control company that sprayed pesticides in a couple’s home, causing the wife to die shortly thereafter. It has been more than three years since the incident took place in Florence, Oregon.
Swanson’s Pest Management of Eugene, Oregon sent an employee to a home on June 29, 2005 to apply Conquer Residential Insecticide Concentrate, active ingredient esfenvalerate, and ULD BP-100 Contact Insecticide, active ingredient pyrethrin. The couple returned to their home two and a half hours later and immediately fell to the ground due to the fumes. Paramedics were called in and they too experienced respiratory distress or became ill when they entered the treated home. According to The Oregonian, Florence Kolbeck was 76 years old and died of cardiac arrest as a result of the exposure. Her husband, Fred, was hospitalized for respiratory distress.
The complaint was filed following a review of Swanson’s use of the two pesticides, finding that the company failed to properly ventilate the home prior to the occupants re-entering, and improperly applied Conquer as a “space spray” at nearly three times the allowable rate. All of which are violations of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The U.S. EPA complaint also contains alleged violations pertaining to an application at another residence that took place prior to the application that led to the women’s death. In this case, the applicator allegedly used the same tank mix of pesticides, though no adverse health affects were reported.
A 2006 article in the Seattle Times reported that Swanson’s general manager, Steve Fisher, “said his review of the case showed that the technician sprayed the home as he normally would… ‘Unfortunate things happen in just about every walk of life.’”
This past March, Fred Kolbeck settled a $2.5 million lawsuit against Swanson’s for an undisclosed amount, according to The Oregonian.
Swanson’s has 30 days from the day they received the U.S. EPA complaint to either arrange a settlement conference, file an answer to the Complaint, or pay the proposed penalty. Swanson’s operation manager, Joan Jensen told The Oregonian, “that the EPA’s allegations are not accurate” and that the “negotiations with the agency are ongoing.”
According to EPA, “The consequences of Swanson’s alleged violations were extremely serious,” yet the federal pesticide law limits the penalty EPA can seek to a maximum of $4,550.
With the phase-out of most residential uses of the common organophosphate insecticides, chlorpyrifos and diazinon, home use of pyrethrins and pyrethroids, such as the ones applied at the Kolbeck home, has increased. According to a 2008 report, pyrethrins and pyrethroids were responsible for more than 26 percent of all major and moderate human incidents involving pesticides in the United States in 2007, up from just 15 percent in 1998 - a 67 percent increase. This is based on an analysis of adverse reaction reports filed with the Environmental Protection Agency by pesticide manufacturers.
While pyrethroids have been characterized as less toxic than organophosphates, the number of reported human health problems, including severe reactions and even deaths attributed to pesticides containing pyrethrins and pyrethroids, increased from 261 in 1998 to 1,030 in 2007, nearly a 300 percent increase. Pyrethrins and pyrethroids account for more incidents than any other class of pesticide over the last five years. EPA data shows at least 50 deaths attributed to this supposedly safer class of pesticides since 1992.
Pesticide products containing synthetic pyrethroids are often described by pest control operators as “safe as chrysanthemum flowers.” While pyrethroids are a synthetic version of an extract from the chyrsanthemum plant, they are chemically engineered to be more toxic, take longer to breakdown, and are often formulated with synergists, increasing potency and compromising the human body’s ability to detoxify the pesticide. Pyrethroids may affect neurological development, disrupt hormones, induce cancer, and suppress the immune system. Researchers at Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) find that residential pesticide use represents the most important risk factor for children’s exposure to pyrethroid insecticides.
There are clear established methods for managing homes that prevent infestation of unwanted insects without the use of synthetic chemicals, including exclusion techniques, sanitation and maintenance practices, as well as mechanical and least toxic controls (which include boric acid and diatomaceous earth). Based on the host of health effects linked to pesticides, their use in the home is hazardous and unnecessary. Most pest problems can be solved without toxic pesticides, through sanitation, proper storage of food and trash, exclusion (sealing entryways), traps and non-volatile baits. For detailed information on preventing specific pests, see Beyond Pesticides’ Alternatives Factsheets.
For more information on the details of the Kolbeck/Swanson incident and the issues surrounding ventilation after a pesticide application, click here.
Growing trends in healthy house construction
January 4, 2009 by Susie Collins · 6 Comments
Paula Baker-LaPorte at Healthy House Institute writes about Building Biology and the Healthy House.
“Building related illness, 20th (21st) century disease, multiple chemical sensitivities, sick building syndrome, environmental illness: these terms are recent additions to our vocabulary,” she writes. “Until about 25 years ago, indoor air pollution was a very limited phenomenon.”
But, she says, three basic things have changed in the evolution of building technology resulting in the current widespread concern about the environmental quality inside our homes: the very fabric of our homes, products that have a negative and costly impact on our health, and performance demands on our buildings such as dealing with trapped moisture from sealed bathrooms.
In response to these problems, she sees two different models emerging for a healthy home. One– the most common– is to seal the home very tightly on the inside, so nothing toxic from the building materials can leak into the living space. (This is akin to what people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity try to achieve with foil barriers.) And the other, more in line with what chemically sensitive people would like to see, is to build with nontoxic materials in the first place.
But the natural building materials solution is difficult to implement, most notably because of current building codes backed by corporate interests. Still, Baker-LaPorte sees building trends moving in the right direction.
…building systems that use natural materials as their base, once the norm for us and still the norm for the majority of humankind, are viewed with great suspicion and skepticism in the current mainstream building culture. If one chooses to build with natural materials one quickly learns that natural building systems have become the orphans of the modern building industry. Whereas huge corporate resources back industrialized building products, funding for code required testing of natural non-proprietary materials has, to date, been a grass roots pass-the-hat affair. Even though people have surrounded themselves with natural permeable materials throughout human history, and even though enduring models of these buildings are found throughout the world, mainstream building practices and codes are dominated by manufactured building commodities that are laboratory tested, standardized, stamped, packaged and shipped. When one applies for a building permit for a home to be made with natural building materials, the applicant may be rejected, or if permitted, the building may bear a dubious “experimental” status.
The natural building movement championed by the theories of Building Biology and a small but growing sector of environmentally concerned builders, designers and homeowners is however gaining momentum. And I believe there is a synthesis at hand between the two seemingly opposite approaches to healthy building. A natural home equipped with all the amenities of modern life faces many of the same indoor environmental qualities as does a sealed construction, and ventilation systems are becoming more common in natural buildings. On the other hand manufactured, code pre-approved permeable wall systems such as aerated autoclaved concrete are being introduced in to the mainstream market place. Straw bale construction has now been tested and codified in many locations. More and more construction products now advertise being “environmentally friendly” and “non-toxic”. Green building rating systems that reward healthier building practices are springing up all over the country. Regardless of the starting point we are moving towards healthier homes that are freer of toxic chemicals, more energy efficient and kinder on the environment.
Link to full article
Photo of straw bale house in Taos by mari-posa. The straw bales are covered over by adobe, and it’s solar powered, with a cistern to recycle rainwater.
Paint the town green
January 3, 2009 by Susie Collins · 2 Comments
The good folks at Common Ground give high marks to LoVo paint, a nontoxic, low-VOC alternative with a beautiful color selection. LoVo might not get a pass from every canary, but it’s always good to see people making smarter choices about office and household products.
When our building manager informed us it was time to freshen up the lobby of the Common Ground office, we lobbied him for the chance to put our principles into practice. We headed down to G&R Paint Company on Sutter Street in San Francisco, to talk to owner/colorist Philip Reno about eco-friendly paint options (philipsperfectcolors.com) and left with four gallons of C2 LoVo paint (c2color.com). Our building manager loved the nontoxic, low-VOC paint’s rich color and smooth and even finish, and we all loved that the paint was virtually odorless (sparing us all the cloud of stinky, toxic fumes, thank you very much). Now we’ve got a dazzlingly white lobby and a new favorite paint! Oh how we love happy endings.
Link to LoVo Paints
Canary’s Cry for Saturday, January 3
January 3, 2009 by Susie Collins · 4 Comments
A patron at Sheraton’s Four Point hotel in San Francisco discovers a disturbing environmental hazard inside the building.
The World According to Monsanto
January 3, 2009 by Susie Collins · 2 Comments
Filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin on the troubling past of one of the world’s biggest agricultural companies.
Don’t miss the very last line by Poppy Bush.
Who’s chirping about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity?
January 2, 2009 by Susie Collins · 15 Comments
Green Living has a article in the Winter 2008 issue called “Wake Up and Smell the Chemicals,” with a section on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. The link will take you to the online version of the issue, go to pages 46-47 for the story, it’s chock full of good information.
Articles like this validate claims made by those of us with MCS, who say chemicals found in many everyday personal care products are toxic not only to us but to everyone. Further, as the article explores, scientists are starting to understand the ways in which low levels of toxic chemicals, such as those found in perfumes and other fragrance, adversely affect the body. Take heart, Canaries, because eventually, science will catch up with us and our claims of exquisite sensitivity.
Glenda at Writing Life Stories tells a story about getting assaulted by fragrance from fellow patrons at a fast food restaurant. She writes:
As soon as I sat down, the smell hit me again. I looked up and saw the guy who had been standing in line near me. He had plopped down fifteen feet away from my table. The odor emanating from him smelled worse to me than a skunk’s spray, the chemicals in that fragrance he wore poisoned me. By the time I got out of there, hoarse and coughing, I gasped, sucked in the fresh outside air like it was my final breath.
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. More and more of my friends are experiencing the same symptoms — spending tons of money on doctors who run tests and tell them they have asthma and to stay away from chemicals. Duh!! The asthma is caused by the chemicals we breathe every day, the chemicals all around us, the chemicals we can’t escape.
Thanks, Linda!
Officials watching Hawaii’s air quality tonight
December 31, 2008 by Susie Collins · 16 Comments
Hilo Medical Center’s emergency department gearing up for holiday
I think this report on extra air testing and a prepared hospital is supposed to make people like me with respiratory problems feel safer, but it doesn’t! It just gets me more worried about what the night will bring.
Right now my neighbors are erecting tents for a big party. So my health over the next 12 hours depends solely on the weather: if it rains as forecasted, the firecracker maniacs will be deterred, and if the wind is blowing the smoke away from my house, then I might be okay no matter if it rains or not. Last year was very difficult. It’s not just problems with my breathing and how the toxic smoke makes me feel (sick), but my eyes become so horribly irritated that I can’t read or watch TV or do anything but sit here and endure it.
And no matter what the officials say, staying indoors with air filters does nothing to keep the toxic smoke from entering our homes. In Hawaii our homes are like sieves, they are not sealed in any way, shape or form. What is outside is inside, and inside our bodies.
No one wants to ring in the New Year with a trip to the emergency room.
But Hilo Medical Center’s emergency department staff is taking extra steps to prepare for a possible influx of people with respiratory conditions from smoke caused by fireworks, said Reggie Agliam, nursing supervisor for Hilo Medical Center.
The hospital is also ready for any burns or fireworks-related injuries that might occur, he added.
As far as increased emergency department activity on New Year’s, Agliam said, “last year wasn’t too bad,” but added the hospital would rather be safe than sorry.
The state Department of Health will be monitoring Hawaii’s clean air quality throughout the state during New Year’s Eve and comparing it with national ambient air quality standards. The heavy use of fireworks during the annual holiday celebration can significantly increase the amount of particulates in the air, especially on Oahu, according to the department.
“We are going to be measuring particles in the air. Smoke is made out of particles,” said Lisa Young, environmental health specialist for the Department of Health. The smoke caused by fireworks can aggravate conditions such as asthma, emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
Young said the same monitoring stations that test for vog on the Big Island are being used to record fireworks-related smoke levels. The department will be monitoring particles from smoke in Hilo, Kona, Pahala and Mountain View, Young said.
The department is encouraging the public, especially people with respiratory conditions, as well as young children and the elderly, to be properly informed and prepared for the upcoming New Year’s firework celebration.
According to the department, people who suffer from respiratory conditions may want to take certain precautionary measures during fireworks celebrations, including: staying indoors and closing windows and doors, avoiding people with colds and other lung infections, making sure air conditioners or air purifiers are working properly and filters are changed, avoiding smoking or second-hand smoke and washing hands often and thoroughly.
The department also recommends people make sure they have an adequate supply of medication on hand, as directed by a physician, and that people contact a physician if they need more medication or want to get clear instructions of what to do if health conditions suddenly worsen.
While the suggestions are intended for those with existing conditions, they are also useful for healthy people during high air pollution episodes, including times of high particulates dust, fireworks smoke and volcanic haze, according to the department.
Take care, dear canaries, wherever you are: Stay safe out there!
Link to story by Terri Henderson at The Hawaii Tribune-Herald
Photo by kolix
No comment
December 31, 2008 by Susie Collins · 6 Comments
Who’s chirping about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity?
December 31, 2008 by Susie Collins · Leave a Comment
Not to be outdone by Leslie at The Oko Box Blog and her post on The Crazy Sh!t We Gotta Do where she sealed off a door with foil to keep safe from her roomie’s fumes, Mokihana at Vardo for Two writes about her Denny Foil, golden folds of fabric, and The Kitchenette. “Leslie from The Oko Box Blog posted pictures and story of what it takes to live in ’safe’ fashion with stuff that ‘ordinaries’ or ‘civilians’ have/build with …Least I forget how MUCH WE HAVE living in The Kitchenette I felt compelled to make her our very special pin-up girl. With out her we would be dead meat!”
Keith at Digital Doorway writes about the exclusion of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in the recently released U.S. Census on Americans With Disabilities: 2005. In Keith’s post, “The Census and Americans with Disabilities,” he expresses his profound disappointment that illnesses such as MCS and Gulf War Syndrome are once again left out of the data.
While not addressing Multiple Chemical Sensitivity directly, Julie Mellum, president of Take Back the Air, writes at StarTribune.com about the absurdity of men using fragrances as a secret to business success. In her opinion piece, “Scents do not line the path to success,” she says:
…fragrances contain many of the same toxicants that are in tobacco smoke. These include formaldehyde, benzene, toluene and other hazardous volatile organic compounds that pollute the lungs and airspace of those around them.
Synthetic fragrances are about as romantic as a toxic-waste site, for many of their shared toxicants are on the EPA’s list of most hazardous wastes. They also contain highly addictive class A carcinogens. See www.takebacktheair.com for the facts.
Just as bottled deer musk masks the human scent as a hunting aid, so synthetic fragrances mask natural pheromones in people. Burger King has actually leapt into the fray with a new fragrance that smells like meat. That is downright comical, except for the fact that fragrance chemicals mimic estrogen with hormone-disrupting chemicals that are implicated in early puberty, reproductive birth defects and infertility.
Note: I neglected to add a link on Monday’s story to Leslie’s post on her door project. My apologies for the omission.
Thanks, Linda, for sending the second two stories my way! You find the best stuff on the Interwebs.
Canary’s Cry for Wednesday, Dec. 31
December 31, 2008 by Susie Collins · 1 Comment
Bloomberg.com reports that a “Coal Ash Spill Leads to Arsenic Warnings for Tennessee Wells” :
Water samples near a billion-gallon spill of coal ash in eastern Tennessee have found levels of arsenic and other heavy metals higher than drinking-water standards, prompting a warning against using private wells in the area.
Samples taken at the site of the spill in Harriman, 35 miles southwest of Knoxville, “slightly exceed” the standards for some metals, according to a statement from the Tennessee Valley Authority, owner of the coal power plant where the Dec. 22 accident occurred. Results from well-water and air tests won’t be known until later this week, the utility said.
The spill at the utility’s Harriman Fossil Plant deluged more than 300 acres of rural Roane County, destroying three homes and damaging 42 other properties. In nearby Kingston, that raised fears of fouled water and air, while 13 families wait to see if their homes can be salvaged, said Carolyn Brewer, finance director for the city of 5,300.
“Some of them are staying with families; some are working with real estate agents, leasing homes, buying homes,” Brewer said in a telephone interview today. “There’s two or three that will just never be able to get back in their homes. They’re just destroyed.”
The sludge-like spill, a mixture of water and residue from burned coal, escaped from a 40-acre holding pond after a retaining wall burst last week. After repeatedly saying the spilled material isn’t toxic, the TVA cautioned residents in its latest statement against touching or stirring up the material.
Leslie at The Oko Box Blog says the same coal ash spill, which happened “just around the bend” from where she lives, is polluting the air in her neighborhood to the point of making her “nauseous, lethargic, and seizure prone.” Take care, Leslie!
On the same topic, the New York Times reports “At Plant in Coal Ash Spill, Toxic Deposits by the Ton.” NYT says, “The spill has reignited a debate over whether coal ash should be regulated as a hazardous waste. In 2000, the E.P.A. backed away from its recommendation to do so in the face of industry opposition, promising instead to issue national guidelines for proper ash disposal, though it never did.”
In other disturbing news, Utne Reader reports about the consequences from marketing chemical-laden cosmetics to younger and younger consumers. In “Not So Pretty in Pink: Marketing Toxic Makeup to Young Girls,” Utne notes, “This rush to cosmetic beauty also represents increased exposure to toxic chemicals. Scientists now suspect that chemicals found in many of the cosmetics for which young girls clamor contribute to a disturbing trend. Girls in the United States, especially African American girls, are entering puberty earlier than their grandmothers did. Half of all American girls now show signs of breast development by age 10—one to two years earlier than 40 years ago—and a significant number show signs as early as 8 or 9.” Take a look at the article to find out why.
Thanks, Leslie and Linda!
Low levels of cigarette smoke residue highly toxic
December 30, 2008 by Susie Collins · 8 Comments
“Similar to low-level lead exposure, low levels of tobacco particulates have been associated with cognitive deficits among children, and the higher the exposure level, the lower the reading score.”
So basically, once again, people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity are way ahead of the curve on knowing that even extremely low levels of toxic chemicals can be neurotoxic.
Need another reason to add “Quit Smoking” to your New Year’s resolutions list? How about the fact that even if you choose to smoke outside of your home or only smoke in your home when your children are not there – thinking that you’re keeping them away from second-hand smoke – you’re still exposing them to toxins? In the January issue of Pediatrics, researchers at MassGeneral Hospital for Children (MGHfC) and colleagues across the country describe how tobacco smoke contamination lingers even after a cigarette is extinguished – a phenomenon they define as “third-hand” smoke. Their study is the first to examine adult attitudes about the health risks to children of third-hand smoke and how those beliefs may relate to rules about smoking in their homes.
“When you smoke – anyplace – toxic particulate matter from tobacco smoke gets into your hair and clothing,” says lead study author, Jonathan Winickoff, MD, MPH, assistant director of the MGHfC Center for Child and Adolescent Health Policy. “When you come into contact with your baby, even if you’re not smoking at the time, she comes in contact with those toxins. And if you breastfeed, the toxins will transfer to your baby in your breastmilk.” Winickoff notes that nursing a baby if you’re a smoker is still preferable to bottle-feeding, however.
Particulate matter from tobacco smoke has been proven toxic. According to the National Toxicology Program, these 250 poisonous gases, chemicals, and metals include hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide, butane, ammonia, toluene (found in paint thinners), arsenic, lead, chromium (used to make steel), cadmium (used to make batteries), and polonium-210 (highly radioactive carcinogen). Eleven of the compounds are classified as Group 1 carcinogens, the most dangerous.
Small children are especially susceptible to third-hand smoke exposure because they can inhale near, crawl and play on, or touch and mouth contaminated surfaces. Third-hand smoke can remain indoors even long after the smoking has stopped. Similar to low-level lead exposure, low levels of tobacco particulates have been associated with cognitive deficits among children, and the higher the exposure level, the lower the reading score. These findings underscore the possibility that even extremely low levels of these compounds may be neurotoxic and, according to the researchers, justify restricting all smoking in indoor areas inhabited by children.
Photo by lanier67
Thanks, Linda!
Canary’s Cry for Saturday, Dec. 27
December 27, 2008 by Susie Collins · 2 Comments
A new Cal State Long Beach study finds high levels of DDT and PCB in seals and sea lions that died between 1994 and 2006, suggesting possible danger for humans.
The Los Angeles Times reports Old Chemicals Found Years Later in Marine Mammals. The new study found DDT, a once widely used agricultural pesticide now banned in the United States, in slightly lower concentrations in sea lions than was found in studies of marine mammals conducted in the early 1970s, according to the report published in the Marine Pollution Bulletin. Adult male sea lions and seals had the highest concentrations because they had the highest fat content. But the chemicals were also present in pups, who absorbed them from their mothers’ milk.
The Philadelphis Inquirer reports that fumes from a chemical used to deice planes got into the passenger cabin of an Alaska Airlines jet yesterday at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, irritating the eyes of people on board, officials said. Paramedics treated 26 people, and seven, including all five crew members, decided to go to a hospital, an airline spokeswoman said.
Chicago News reports that a South Side meat-packing plant containing hazardous chemicals burned for approximately three hours on Christmas Day before more than 160 firefighters extinguished the blaze.
The Ithaca Journal reports on more protest against the decision by the Consumer Product Safety Commission to allow retailers to sell toys in inventory that may contain a potentially harmful chemical. Continued sale of toys with phthalates - a class of chemical compound used as a softener for plastics that seeps out of toys when chewed - is possible because of a safety commission ruling that Congress’ Consumer Product Safety Act pertains only to newly manufactured or imported toys containing phthalates. In a press release, [Assemblywoman Barbara] Lifton said animal toxicity data shows that phthalates could be harmful to infants or children. Toys that are already in stock can still be sold because of pressure applied from toy and chemical companies such as ExxonMobil, she said. The Consumer Product Safety Act became law in August.
Photo by Tom Clifton
Who’s chirping about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity?
December 27, 2008 by Susie Collins · 4 Comments
The Pilot reports on a ruling favoring former county employees who claim they suffer myriad environmental illnesses caused by a sick building :
Seven former Moore County employees can continue pursuing their worker compensation claims that a county building made them sick in the early 1990s, the N.C. Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday. The seven employees filed worker compensation claims against Moore County and its insurance company, Sedgwick of the Carolinas, in 1995 and 1996. The county and the insurance carrier have disputed the claims, arguing that there was no proof that the building made them sick. [...]
The appeals court also said that since the workers first filed their claims, medical science may have made advancements to understand the situation better, so the commission could consider reopening the case.
“We also note that expert testimony in this case reflects the uncertainty about fibromyalgia and multiple chemical sensitivity that existed when the depositions were taken,” the ruling said. “However, plaintiffs originally filed their workers’ compensation claims more than 10 years ago, and in the intervening years the medical community may have gained a greater understanding of these conditions. Accordingly, the commission may, in its discretion, reopen the case for new evidence.”
Philstar.com reports that firecrackers are harmful to people, animals, the environment and create toxic waste :
[Ecowaste President Manny] Calonzo said firecrackers contain harmful substances that could trigger chemical sensitivities, asthma and other respirator ailments.
“The bursting of firecrackers (violates) the fundamental right of the people to breathe clean air and goes against the effort of the health and environmental authorities and the citizenry to improve air quality,” he added.
Exploding firecrackers, according to Calonzo, also results in “toxic litter” that adds to the heaps of holiday trash.
And the “loud bangs” of exploding firecrackers also torture and traumatize animals that are “most sensitive” to sound than humans, “hurting their ears, terrifying them and making them flee to safety.”
Ecowaste is promoting the use of “emission-free, zero waste” noisemakers from recycled materials such as tambourines made from bottle caps, maracas from tin cans, cymbals using pot lids, and shakers from plastic bottles, among others.
No 5 Chanel means no 5 Chanel
December 24, 2008 by Susie Collins · 2 Comments
Cheryl at Leaves and Petals writes today about a recent experience with Chanel Number 5 perfume at a local department store. She’s a very good writer and in this post effectively explores the conflict of emotions evoked in her by a whiff of the fragrance she used to wear, contrasting the perfume’s meaning in her life before she developed chemical sensitivity and after. Those of us with chemical sensitivity have to give up so much, including what should be the most pleasant of daily rituals.
Here’s an excerpt of Cheryl’s perfume experience:
For the holidays, they had set up a huge display of Chanel No° 5; the scent filled the air. My first thought was to be angry (sometimes it feels like I can’t ever get away from other people’s perfume), but then my brain started doing flip-flops and memories came rushing back. Dancing to “Low Rider” in the basement of the Tasmanian Ballroom in that 50s black silk dress I had scooped from work; drinking Absolut before heading out to Komrads with my boys; a pair of huge hoop earring with iridescent marbles attached to them that I wore constantly; fries and sangria at the Bloor Street Diner.
I stood for a moment, looking up at the war memorial in the foyer that commemorates Simpsons employees in the first and second world wars, and just let the scent waft over me. I was tempted, ever so briefly, to ask the clerk for one of those scent strips they’re normally trying to jam in my face when I zip through the perfume department, but thought better of it. I was even tempted to buy some, I have no idea why, although I knew I could never actually use the stuff.
Link to Cheryl’s full post “Number 5″
Photo by Liutao
Pesticide bans boost local economies
December 24, 2008 by Susie Collins · 2 Comments
A letter to the editor in the Peterborough Examiner argues that regional pesticide bans give a big boost to the local economy.
The Ontario government’s new lawn pesticide ban - which should come into effect in early 2009 - will do much to protect human and environmental health. But it’s also becoming clear the legislation will be a boon to our economy-boosting business and creating green jobs.
Communities across Canada which already have pesticide restrictions have enjoyed a major expansion of their lawn care sector. For example, in the five years following a pesticide ban in Halifax the number of lawn care firms in the city grew from 118 to 180 -an increase of 53 per cent, according to Statistics Canada. The number of employees in the sector also grew. Stats Can also reports the number of landscaping and lawn care businesses in Toronto has grown each year since its ban.
Why does the non-toxic route help the economy? For one thing, it relies less on chemicals and more on workers -meaning it creates local employment. It also requires some specialized knowledge of plant and soil ecology which homeowners often lack -hence their increased reliance on organic professionals.
Ontario’s organic lawn care providers are booming. Barriebased Turf Logic Inc. will be doubling its business by next spring. Oshawa-based Environmental Factor has grown its business 10- fold over the last eight years.
It’s also the case that many organic lawn products (such as corn gluten meal, horticultural vinegar, compost, and beneficial nematodes) are produced right here in Ontario -which means more business for our manufacturers. (By contrast, many of the toxic lawn chemicals are made in the U. S. or Europe.)
Two questions often raised during discussions of market change are, “Will the transition happen smoothly and will the new services be affordable?” In this case, the answer to both is yes.
More than five million Ontarians live in municipalities which already require non-toxic lawn care, Peterborough among them. So the industry already has the know-how and products to provide pesticide-free services province-wide. As well, major retailers are now committed to the non-toxic approach, meaning do-it-yourselfers have everything they require.
What about costs to the consumer? A recent survey of Ontario lawn companies showed the price of pesticide-free services is competitive with traditional services and is sometimes exactly the same. (One company charges $159.88 to treat a 2,500 square foot property - whichever service the customer picks.) And as more firms go organic, prices will drop. Non-toxic lawn care not only produces beautiful properties -just look at the Stratford Festival lawns, the campus of Trent University, or the grounds of the Ontario legislature -but is also very cost-effective.
Scientists have long told us that pesticides are associated with cancer (such as non-Hodgkins lymphoma), neurological illness (such as Parkinson’s disease), and birth defects. Health authorities - including the Canadian Cancer Society, the Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario, and the Ontario College of Family Physicians - have long supported cosmetic pesticide bans.
But now we know that, in addition to its health benefits, going pesticide-free also makes good economic sense.
GIDEON FORMAN Executive Director, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
Photo by sissi de kroon
Green hospitals are better for everyone
December 22, 2008 by Susie Collins · 12 Comments
As a follow-up to yesterday’s post on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in a Hospital Setting, here’s a report in Time on Making Hospitals Greener and Patients Healthier. It would be so smart if all hospitals adopted these practices, not just so those of us with MCS don’t have to weigh out the consequences of exposure before seeking medical treatment for any ailment, but for everyone especially hospital staff.
In the typical hospital, “while we are trying to treat or cure illness and disease…we expose our staff and patients to irritants and carcinogens, and our treatments often contribute to the development of other diseases,” says Dr. Kristin Bradford, a family physician in Willits, Calif.
Enter “green medicine” — the effort to detoxify the healing environment and enhance patients’ and employees’ health, while reducing costs all around. The international advocacy group Health Care Without Harm (HCWH) — whose 2006 study of 1,200 nurses suggested a link between the hospital environmental and health problems among the staff — has been a pioneer in the movement, recently initiating collaborative research among major U.S. health systems to document how removing toxins from the environment impacts worker safety and lost time due to employee illness.
We have a hospital here on our island, the North Hawaii Community Hospital, that integrates native Hawaiian cultural practices and other healing traditions such as Feng Shui into the environment. Note the difference in the corridor at left to a more common hospital corridor above. North Hawaii Community Hospital uses HEPA air filters, water filters, low VOC paints, and other nontoxic measures. Here’s a description of The Healing Environment in Blended Medicine at North Hawaii Community Hospital. And here’s a description of the Holistic Care they offer in addition to the traditional allopathic medical care and surgery.
I haven’t been to North Hawaii hospital for awhile for care, but when I was there some years ago for some tests, I did not have a bad reaction to the air quality. Unlike the hospital in California I visited this past summer when I was with my dad for his nutrition consultation– whoa, that was bad from the first breath I took once inside the front doors. But I’d have no hesitation going to North Hawaii hospital again for care if I needed it.
Photo at top by Julie
Thanks, Linda, for sending the Time article my way!
One of our flock weathers the storm
December 20, 2008 by Susie Collins · 7 Comments
Linda– yes, the Linda that has shared so much information and wisdom with us here on The Canary Report– has a snow storm going on in her neck of the woods. She sent me the photo at left, which she took in her neighborhood at about 2:30 Friday afternoon. She says some newscasters in Toronto are calling it “Snowmageddon” and that there’s more to come on Sunday.
So she’s hunkered down, bundled up, watching the snow pile up in the driveway. She generated some body heat with oatmeal in the morning and barley soup for dinner.
As we’ve talked about on previous posts, she’s still searching for safe warm clothing as well as non-toxic heaters and generators for power failures. And of course, wishing the air was cleaner in her city so she can catch a break with her Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. She’d love to go outside and shovel snow in her driveway, but will wait for some help. She emailed me, “Shoveling when weak and subject to breathing bad air doesn’t work.”
“Finding a safe community and support is very difficult,” she wrote, referring to the complications MCS brings to what should be simple everyday chores. “If one is housebound and perceived as negative when refusing all kinds of inappropriate advice and ideas, people think you are impossible and stay away.”
And that isolation is hard for a canary. But she also counts her blessings.
I don’t want it to sound like I’m complaining about it now, because I am not. I am still living in a city with power and services, and not out in the bush thigh high in snow. I am very blessed that my father has been going or driving me to the market every week since I got too sick to do so myself last year, so as long as he is healthy, I don’t need to get my car out in any hurry. (And I am very lucky to have a year round organic farmers market to get safe healthy food from which I have been able to prepare my own simple meals all this time.)
I know many people with no help for any of it, no-one to help shovel out, no one to pick up some groceries, no-one who will or can help in any way. People do not understand what it’s like to be a canary and have your body wipe out from underneath you just from a few breaths of bad air, air made bad from everyday “consumer” items. Not items that we need for survival, but items that have been altered to be more poisonous and marketable (who does this make sense to???).
I dream of a safe world for all of us, one where we can help each other, share our talents and gifts, take care of the sick and vulnerable, and look after this precious planet we all call home.
Thanks for allowing me to share your story, Linda. Take care of yourself and stay warm, cozy and safe!