May 22, 2010

Step 1: How to create a Non-toxic consumer revolution

Larry D. Rickman
May 21st, 2010

Do you believe that toxic chemicals in our products are killing us?  If so read on.  If you are a non-believer please read, do some research, ask some questions and then lets discuss your opinions.  I love a healthy debate.  One statistic; 40% rise in breast cancer from 1973 to 1998.  What could be causing that?  Are we just that much more unhealthy today?  

We have been talking about Toxic Chemicals, cleaning products, and various other home issues for several months now.  Most of the time I'm getting questions about how to start, what's the first step to going green, or how do I get rid of toxic chemicals in my home. 

The truth of the matter is you will have difficulty eliminating toxins from the home if you try to do it all at once.  The primary reason is you don't know what you are looking for, how to read it, what's dangerous and what's not.  So the first step really is awareness; what should you be aware of:
  • Become aware of the chemicals that you are using to clean your home and the harm these cause
  • Become aware of the toxins in and on your food
  • Become aware of the toxins in your personal care products
  • Lastly become aware of the toxins you come into contact with everyday outside your home.
The first step is to really understand what the scope of the problem is.  Its pervasive; its everywhere in your home, in your food, in your shower, in your washing machine.  The sheer number of chemicals we come into contact with daily is mind blowing and the first step is understanding the scope of the problem.

When is the last time you read a label on a personal care item, food label, or cleaning product and understood what you were reading?  Must you become an expert in label reading?  No...the solution is rather simple.  If its not natural, if its unintelligible, if you read it and go "Huh?" then you probably shouldn't be consuming it.  We have written and posted numerous items that can begin your education; here are a few -

If interested and live here in Reno I can get you a pamphlet on toxins, current legislative efforts, and the impact on our health.  Its a 20 page or so read on what impact toxins are having on the health of the American public.  If not and you are interested:  Click here.  Join the folks at Safer Chemicals Healthy Families on Facebook, Twitter, online, and others. 

Getting started with awareness is step number 1 in cleaning your house and your body of toxic chemicals.

Step 2 we will focus on looking at an easy thing to get rid of in your home; toxic cleaners.   

May 20, 2010

The Health Case for Reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act: Executive Summary

Published by Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families

There is growing agreement across the political spectrum that the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 does not adequately protect Americans from toxic chemicals. In the 34 years since TSCA was enacted, the EPA has been able to require testing on just 200 of the more than 80,000 chemicals produced and used in the U.S., and just five chemicals have been regulated under this law. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson has asked Congress to provide her agency with better chemical management tools for safeguarding our nation’s health.[1]

Much has changed since TSCA became law more than 30 years ago. Scientists have developed a more refined understanding of how some chemicals can cause and contribute to serious illness, including cancer, reproductive and developmental disorders, neurologic diseases, and asthma.

The Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition believes that, by reforming TSCA, we can reduce our exposure to toxic chemicals, improve our nation’s health, and lower the cost of health care. This report documents some of the scientific findings and economic analysis underlying our position.


Chronic disease is on the rise

More than 30 years of environmental health studies have led to a growing consensus that chemicals are playing a role in the incidence and prevalence of many diseases and disorders in our country, including:
  • Leukemia, brain cancer, and other childhood cancers, which have increased by more than 20% since 1975.[2]
  • Breast cancer, which went up by 40% between 1973 and 1998.[3] While breast cancer rates have declined since 2003, a woman’s lifetime risk of breast cancer is now one in eight, up from one in ten in 1973.[4]
  • Asthma, which approximately doubled in prevalence between 1980 and 1995 and has stayed at the elevated rate.[5][6]
  • Difficulty in conceiving and maintaining a pregnancy affected 40% more women in 2002 than in 1982. The incidence of reported difficulty has almost doubled in younger women, ages 18–25.[7][8][9]
  • The birth defect resulting in undescended testes, which has increased 200% between 1970 and 1993.[10]
  • Autism, the diagnosis of which has increased more than 10 times in the last 15 years.[11]

The health and economic benefits of reforming TSCA

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 133 million people in the U.S.—almost half of all Americans—are now living with these and other chronic diseases and conditions, which now account for 70% of deaths and 75% of U.S. health care costs.[12]

Estimates of the proportion of the disease burden that can be attributed to chemicals vary widely, ranging from 1% of all disease[13] to 5% of childhood cancer[14] to 10% of diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, and neurodevelopmental deficits[15] to 30% of childhood asthma.[14] Whatever the actual contribution, effective chemical policy reform will incorporate the last 30 years of science to reduce the chemical exposures that contribute to the rising incidence of chronic disease. And any decline in the incidence of chronic diseases can also be expected to bring health care cost savings. Even if chemical policy reform leads to reductions in toxic chemical exposures that translate into just a tenth of one percent reduction of health care costs, it would save the U.S. health care system an estimated $5 billion every year.

The U.S. now spends over $7,000 per person per year directly on health care.[12] This sum does not include the many other kinds of costs, such as the costs of raising a child with a severe learning disability or coping with a young mother’s breast cancer diagnosis. Chemical policy reform holds the promise of reducing the economic, social and personal costs of chronic disease by creating a more healthy future for all Americans.

Read more:

May 19, 2010

Some Bisphenol A (BPA) With Your Green Beans?

By Erika Schreder, Staff Scientist, Washington Toxics Coalition

Nine out of ten. According to a study released today, those are your chances of having some bisphenol A (BPA) with tonight’s dinner, if canned food is on your menu. New testing for BPA sampled 50 cans of food and drinks, and found that the hormone-disrupting chemical is a near ubiquitous presence in canned food.

The study, titled No Silver Lining and published by the National Work Group for Safe Markets, found what appears to be the highest level of BPA ever detected in canned food. A can of Del Monte green beans from a Wisconsin pantry clocked in at 1140 parts per billion BPA, several times greater than the highest levels reported by other recent studies.

Dr. Laura Vandenberg, a leading BPA researcher at Tufts University, reviewed the results.


Read more:

Some Bisphenol A With Your Green Beans?

May 17, 2010

Immune system and toxic chemicals; Why sick all the time

Such a good article had to repost here for my readers.  If you don't think chemicals are affecting your life please rethink that.  
 
Kathryn Alexander D.Th.D


To most of us immunity means the ability to resist infection and the implementation of vaccination programs to reduce the incidence of epidemics. But while we boast that we no longer have to deal with the plague or the measles, we ignore the magnitude of other health problems related to immune dysfunction such as the rise in incidence in allergies, cancers of the immune system (lymphomas, myelomas) and auto-immune disease. In fact some immunologists suggest that the “decrease in immune functions is most likely the same (50% or less) as the decrease in reproductive capacity” and correlate this with the millions of tons of toxic chemicals that have been dumped into the environment. 1 If these chemicals do cause immune suppression, and there is plenty of evidence to indicate that they do, it would certainly explain the emergence of Immune Deficiency Syndromes and the sudden appearance of strange “new” virally triggered diseases such as CFIDS (chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome), CJD (Mad Cow Disease),  ICL (idiopathic CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia – a profound immune suppression without evidence of HIV infection), and the increase in allergies such as asthma which has increased world-wide at the rate of about 50% per decade - not to mention the pandemic occurrence of auto-immune diseases. 

Evidence supporting a cause-effect relationship between toxic chemicals and immune dysfunction is hard to amass, and once again we look to correlative evidence in animal and human populations. During the mid 1980s to early 1990s we witnessed disease epidemics in our marine life where colonies of dying seals, dolphins and porpoises were washed ashore. In 1987, 20,000 North Sea harbour seals were beached, and a similar fate occurred in the 1990s to dolphins in the Mediterranean.  In the case of the dolphins, mortality was blamed on a relatively weak distemper virus which had never harmed the dolphins before. On autopsy, these animals were found to have up to 400 times the normal levels of organic toxic chemicals (PCBs and dioxins) in their fat and brain tissue. These findings echoed the results of previous investigations where the magnitude of the immune suppressive effect of these chemicals (up to a 50% reduction in immune competence) was discovered. Without a functional immune system these animals were unable to resist even harmless bacteria and viruses.
 
The Arctic Ocean is heavily contaminated with these chemicals, and populations such as the Inuits who depend upon marine life for food, have the highest levels of PCBs found in any population. Their children have pronounced immune system deficiencies; meningitis and inner ear infections occur at rates 30 times that of American children, and they cannot be vaccinated since they do not produce any antibody response. 2

These disasters may seem remote from our experience, but other forms of immune dysfunction plague the West such as the rise in incidence in auto-immune disease. There are around 80 auto-immune diseases which include Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus, Crohn’s, Ulcerative Colitis, Grave’s and Hashimoto’s thyroiditis and Lupus. In the US 14-22 million citizens (5-8% of the population) are affected, and although genetic susceptibility does play a role, the genetic pool does not change that radically to account for this increase, therefore we look to the involvement of environmental factors.  3

In auto-immune disease, the immune system starts to attack its own tissues. The programming of the immune system to recognise “self” occurs during the foetal phase in the thymus gland. We have two main branches of immune cells, the B cells which have the capacity to form antibodies to foreign tissue or bacteria and the T cells which then authorize the destructive phase. If your B cells form antibodies to your own tissues and the T helper cells authorize the go ahead – then we see the onset of auto-immune disease. However, a properly programmed immune system allows for such a possibility, and has a colony of T suppressor cells which can inhibit any self-attack. It is suggested that toxins may directly affect the programming of the immune system during the foetal stage leading to an imbalance in activity between the T helper and T suppressor cells. That toxins do affect the development of the immune systems has been confirmed, but no correlation as yet has been made with auto-immune disease.

However, what has been identified is that persistent viral infection can be a triggering mechanism. 4 Links have been made between the Coxsackie virus (aseptic meningitis) and IDDM; the Epstein Barr virus and the Human Herpes virus 6 with MS; Helicobacter pylori with gastric autoimmunity and Listeria and mycobacterium with Crohn’s disease. In genetically predisposed individuals, the antibody that is produced to arrest the specific pathogen may also cross-react with normal tissue. Normally, the T suppressor cells would not authorize any cross reactivity (and indeed patients may often carry these auto-antibodies for years before the disease expresses itself), but increasingly we are finding this not to be the case.

If we take the global increase in the incidence of IDDM in children. In the UK we see an annual increase of 12% and in NZ, 10%. In the US 13,000 new cases of childhood IDDM are diagnosed annually – which is greater than the annual incidence of childhood cancer. There is little information on the disease but spikes, or dramatic rises in mid 1980s in the US coincided with an outbreak of aseptic meningitis. 5 This points to cross-reactivity of the immune complex with the islet cells of the pancreas. Perhaps this may explain why vaccinations may be implicated in the onset of auto-immune disease. Essentially, immune dysfunction means an inappropriate response to antigens (whether they be bacteria or viruses, pollens, foods or chemicals) which is harmful to the host.

Interestingly 80% of people with autoimmune disease are female, so attention is beginning to focus on the role of oestrogen. Declining oestrogen levels at the menopause are associated with the onset of auto-immune disease in predisposed women. In younger women presenting with an autoimmune disease, symptoms are alleviated during pregnancy. This indicates a protective role for oestrogen. 6  Although it is almost impossible to prove a cause-effect relationship between the endocrine disruptive chemicals and immune dysfunction, we do know that the reproductive hormones modulate the immune system (they can turn it on, or tone it down) and that environmental oestrogens have deleterious effects on natural oestrogen production, its activity and its metabolism (see previous articles on chemicals and fertility and hormone sensitive cancers -issues?). Perhaps we are not so far off proving the scientific link between chemicals and immune dysfunction. 

I have only covered in brief some of the major trends in immune dysfunction.  Dr. Robert Repetto, in his report “Pesticides and the Immune System” indicates that greatest risk from pesticides may well lie in the impairment of human and animal immune systems. His report gives a comprehensive overview on pesticides and immune dysfunction referencing many epidemiological studies. 7 

What can we do? Again my message is the same – we need to limit our exposure to these chemicals and communities nee to start to tackle these problems locally. Pollution spreads, it is not containable, therefore the more concerted our effort, the greater our protection.


1. “The immune incompetence theory of disease.” http://www.gvi.com/gviWeb/IAAM/immune.html
2. “Pesticides and the Immune system: Overview”  http://www.ghchealth.com/pesticides-and-the-immune-system-overview.html
3. “When the Immune system goes on the attack” http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v5/n8/pdf/7400217.pdf    
4 ibid
5 “Prevalence and incidence of Insulin-Dependent Diabetes.” http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/america/pdf/chapter3.pdf
6. “The gender gap in autoimmune disease” http://rubella.net/Autoimmunity/GenderGap.htm
7. “Pesticides and the Immune system: Overview”  http://www.ghchealth.com/pesticides-and-the-immune-system-overview.html