Eco Friendly Home

Fri, 03 Jun 2011 13:44:32 +0100

It is happening every where. Our cultural consciousness has awakened enough that many people feel that having an eco friendly home is important. Regrettably, many of us have been exposed to environments that were toxic to our health.

Being aware of the eco friendly home movement may be the way for you to make informed decisions on your next home purchase, renovations, or materials you bring into your home.

Many features of an eco friendly home are improvements in the look, feel, and comfort to our current homes, as well as being able to use all natural materials.

Summer Solstice and Magic Garden

Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:10:45 +0100

The Magic Garden

When I asked the Plant Spirits about the Solstice, they said,

“It is either the height of our greatest growth or our greatest decline, depending on what hemisphere you live in. Either way it is a joyous time for us. We would like to share that joy with you. All you have to do in tune into the energy around June 21st and you will see what we mean. Many of you do rituals around the beauty and bounty of Nature and that is a good way to align with the frequencies of heath, wealth and abundance of all kinds.

Let Nature nurture you. Go out and sit under a tree or in your favorite spot and call forth the Plant Spirits to assist you in your own heath and well being. The more you can align your rhythms with that of Nature the more harmony you will find in your day to day existence.

Do you ever wonder why you feel such peace when surrounded by the beauty of Nature? It is because it is one of our tasks in being here; that is to create beauty, harmony and peace to all those who admire our physicality. And, in return some of you are impulsed to grow us, plant us and nurture us. Then we flower and fruit and give back to you. We like to think it is an equal energy exchange.

And, if you want to take it a step further and expand your awareness you will see that there is an even greater symbiosis between us. We take in the Sun’s energy and give off oxygen which you need to breathe and in turn you breathe out carbon dioxide which we ingest. So you see there really is a wonderful relationship between the two species. Together we create a balanced atmosphere for each other and many other life forms as well. Let us indeed celebrate the Sun’s path across the heaven which gives life to us all.

Around this same time the Sun moves into sidereal Gemini, the constellation that is nearest to the galactic equator. In fact, the feet of the Twins rest securely on the Milky Way. The Milky Way is a massive cluster of stars in which our solar system resides. This position is sometimes referred to as the Gate of Man. During this time it is believed that communication between the greater galaxies and our solar system/earth is enhanced. This is why one of the qualities of Gemini, and this time of year, is thought to be about ease of communication both mundane and ethereal.

This is a good time to make all those calls you’ve been putting off for one reason or another. Knowing the celestial Beings are with you can really make a difference.

So, do not be reticent about asking the unseen helpers to assist you in bringing harmony and balance into your life. This includes all things physical, mental and spiritual. Be specific, but be open; thus allowing the Universe to bring you the essences of your desires in ways far greater than you ever could have imagined.”

Blessings,
Marissa
for more information or to obtain a chaneliing from the Plant Spirits,
contact: theplantspirits@gmail.com

About Me

marissa henderson: Marissa was a landscape designer in the San Francisco Bay Area, when she started receiving telepathic messages from the Plant Spirits. The information received was regarding how to gather the healing properties of flowers. She was then called to Mt Shasta where she created the Mt. Shasta Essences of Light, made from the wildflowers that cover the mountain. Later she made the Archangel Essences. After an extended time in India where she did personal consultations and taught organic gardening, she returned to Kauai to create the Kauai Orchid Essences and Kauai Esoteric Essenes. Marissa is a Reiki Master and an ordained interfaith minister. She has also studied with Ram Tsu, an enlightened Master of Advaita/Taoism. She recently wrote the Flower Essence Practitioners' Manual, an on-line certification course. Her passion is to help others to experience a deeper connection to their inner selves by learning to communicate with the Plant Spirits. Through the Attunements Process these wise spirits have brought great joy, love, laughter, and compassion into her life. She has also written a children's book "Ask Althea", about a little girl's journey into the world of the plant spirits.

View my complete profile

Environmental Working Group Updates

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:47:44 +0100

EWG is updating their National Drinking Water Database, to let you know the latest about which sunscreens are safe and effective and they keep expanding Skin Deep with more products and the latest ingredient information. They are continuing their research on bottled water, cell phones, and other products you use every day.

Natural Cleaning Kit

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:07:37 +0100

7 Agents to Keep You Home Naturally Clean

By Marc Lallanilla, About.com

Have you ever wondered why you use chemicals you can’t pronounce to make your home sparkle and shine? Really, when was the last time you took a look at the label on your favorite blue solution?

You probably grew up helping your mother clean the house with Windex and Pine Sol, so of course you never questioned why. But what if I told you there was a different way? A better way?

Ultimately it’s up to you, but if you’re looking for a more natural way of cleaning that’s equally effective, consider equipping your cleaning kit with the following agents:

1. Lemons or Lemon Juice

What Can it Clean?

Lemon juice is an all around natural cleaning wonder. With it, you can remove lime scale, make windows and mirrors shine, polish copper or brass, clean kitchen and bathroom surfaces, and remove sweat stains.

Why Does it Work?

Lemon Juice is one of the strongest food acids, marked by its sour taste. Because the pH is so low, lemon juice can kill most household bacteria, while also leaving your home smelling fresh.

2. Baking Soda

What Can it Clean?

Baking soda is unrivaled in its wide variety of uses. It not only cleans, it also polishes, deodorizes and softens water.

For these reasons you can use baking soda as an agent when cleaning multiple surfaces, jewelry, carpet, ink stains, fish tanks, windows, and window screens. Baking soda also works well as an air freshener, and in your personal care routine.

Why Does it Work?

Baking soda is a naturally occurring, but often artificially produced, substance that is slightly alkaline.

Because of its basic nature, baking soda works well as a water softener and can easily break down proteins. Baking soda also works well as a deodorizer because as a basic compound, it easily neutralizes acidic scent molecules.

3. Castile Soap

What Can it Clean?

Castile soap might sound fancy, but it’s really not. Liquid, powder, or bars of soap that are unscented are biodegradable and can clean just about anything.

Castile soap, however, can be made with just oils, lye, and water, so you can be sure it will get your home clean without leaving any buildup.

Why Does it Work?

Any surface you want to clean probably has a build up of both dirt and oils. Dirt can simply be wiped away with plain water, but oil is another story. Thanks to some basic chemistry, soap is what makes these oils stick to your damp cloth so they can be easily wiped away.

4. Borax or Boric Acid

What Does it Clean?

Borax is best known as an alternative to bleach. However, this natural cleaning product also cleans, deodorizes, disinfects, softens water, and effectively renews painted and wallpapered walls.

Note: While borax has a wide array of uses, and is naturally occurring, it can irritate the skin, and is toxic if ingested. Please keep borax out of reach of children and pets, and make sure to rinse clothes and surfaces before use.

Why Does it Work?

Borax has many defining properties that make it an excellent cleaning agent. When mixed with water, borax reacts to make a hydrogen peroxide / water solution. It also can act as a chemical buffer when cleaning, so the pH is what it needs to be to make something effectively clean.

5. White Vinegar

What Does it Clean?

While you actually have the option of using typical yellow vinegar as well, white vinegar cleans without the possibility of staining. White vinegar’s is best used to cut grease, clean wood floors and multiple other surfaces, remove mildew, deodorize, and clean certain stains and wax build-up.

Why Does it Work?

Vinegar is actually weakly acidic, making it a powerful cleaning agent. The acid in vinegar cuts through grease and germs found on counter tops while also inhibiting bacteria and mold.

6. Washing Soda

What Does it Clean?

Washing soda is scientifically known as sodium carbonate decahydrate, a naturally occurring mineral. Washing soda cuts grease, removes stains, softens water, cleans walls, tiles, sinks and tubs.

How Does it Clean?

When it comes to chemical properties, washing soda is a close relative to baking soda, with a slightly lower pH level. As a stronger base, washing soda easily breaks down proteins and neutralizes odors.

7. Cornstarch

What Does it Clean?

Cornstarch is one of the lesser known natural cleaning agents though it is a very effective ingredient in home solutions. Cornstarch can be used to clean windows, polish furniture, be used when ironing, and shampoo carpets and rugs.

However, one of it’s most amazing cleaning qualities is its ability to remove grease stains. Not many products can claim to do that!

How Does it Clean?

Corn starch is actually derived from corn and is known its fine, silky texture. Since it is a great deodorizer and can get into very small spaces, corn starch is great for cleaning carpets and shining smooth surfaces. Also, as a starch it can be added to water to make a liquid starch solution perfect for ironing.

{loadposition fjrelatedhormonal

How to Identify Indoor Air Quality Problems

Mon, 30 Mar 2009 02:10:43 +0100

Once they are identified, you can do something about them.

By Josh Peterson

Los Angeles, CA, USA | Fri Mar 27 08:30:00 EDT 2009

People complain when smog lies thick over a city. They complain when a factory or plant pumps curling, black smoke into our air. It is ironic then that the air quality of our homes often gets overlooked. The majority of our breathing is done inside. And our inside air can be just as polluted. How can you tell if your air is quality air? According to the EPA, there are three basic methods.

Canary in a Coal Mine

Are you feeling ill? Do you have unexplained health problems after:
1. Moving
2. Remodeling
3. Refurnishing
4. Pesticide Application
It may be more than just coincidence. Talk to your family doctor. He or she may need to recommend you to an allergist or occupational medicine specialist in order to get to the bottom of these health concerns.

Know Your Air Quality Enemies

Go through your home and look for sources of potential indoor air pollution.

From EPA
Although the presence of such sources does not necessarily mean that you have an indoor air quality problem, being aware of the type and number of potential sources is an important step toward assessing the air quality in your home.

Some of those sources may include:
1. Pressed wood products, like particle board
2. Dirty filters
3. Paints and varnishes
4. Mold/Areas of water damage
5. Dust
6. Cleaning products

Inadequate Ventilation

We often talk about sealing up that old thermal envelope in order to increase energy efficiency. And yes, you should try and tighten your envelope. At the same time, you need to find a way to ventilate your air and replace it with fresh air. Here are some signs of a poorly ventilated home.
1. Moisture condensation on windows/walls
2. Smell and/or stuffy air
3. Dirty central heating and cooling equipment
4. Mold growth on books or shoes or other items

Hopefully, your home has very few indoor air quality problems. An ounce of prevention is all it takes to keep it that way.

More on Green Air Quality
How Indoor Air Quality Affects Your Health
What You Need to Know About Caulking and Health
How to Use a Radon Test Kit

Greening Your Office in a Recession

Sun, 15 Feb 2009 19:36:00 +0100

Janet Ritz

Posted February 13, 2009 | 01:13 PM (EST)Huffington Post

When my consulting clients ask me why they should green their office in a recession when monetary pressures are only expected to increase, I remind them that the Chinese use two separate brush strokes to write the word 'crisis':

危機

One character stands for danger; the other for opportunity.

In a crisis, be aware of the danger-but recognize the opportunity.

Never has that been more accurate than now, for with the green approach business can not only help the planet to forestall long term danger (for which they themselves will have to pay in increased costs as resources become scarce and as business becomes impacted by inclement weather), but they also reduce their bottom line while improving morale and productivity of their workforce.

How is this done?

The first place the office can look is to technology that uses or relies upon electricity. This can range from the simple coffeemaker left on all night to the replacement of servers to a thin client resulting, in some cases, in a significant reduction of a company's annual expense.

But other efforts can pay dividends, as well, in ways that are not quantifiable, such as organizing the workforce to come together as a green team to unplug adapters when not in use or to compete with one another for prizes or dividends by recycling ink cartridges and other expensive items.

These efforts can become rallying points for the office or cooperation which then leads to increased productivity.

Another area is with computers and monitors that use less energy and that will, eventually (hopefully) be made without the intense greenhouse gasses that are now part of the LCD and Plasma manufacture process. There are companies (note: this is not an endorsement), that are introducing a line of energy efficient models likely to drop in price over time (some are low cost now).

These products are rated to pull less electricity to run. Put that together with any sized office and one can see significant savings on their bill over time.

The paperless office is another area that has been talked about but how realistic has it become? Most work situations do require the use of paper and that is another potential for savings.

I am reminded of a scene in Robert Graves' I Claudius, where Antonia, the daughter of Marc Antony, complains that her family has thrown away perfectly good paper that had barely been written upon.

(There's that other part of the story where she finds a plot against Tiberius Caesar on one of those discarded scraps... while intrigue and politics can be an inevitable part of the office, I doubt we have to worry about it to the extent of the trials and tribulations of Ancient Rome).

But Antonia had a good idea that still holds true. While many companies buy 95 brightness or above virgin paper and spend a great deal to see most of it discarded, recycled paper of a lesser or equal brightness can work perfectly well for the day to day activities in an office and, again, the effort to then recycle afterward can be an opportunity to build community within the office.

Then there is telecommuting as not every community needs to be in the same physical location and here's where significant savings can be achieved. There's been resistance to this option in offices as managers struggle to keep their workforce motivated and in communication with one another. However, the combination of technology and incentives can help to cut the wheat from the chaff and allow an office to then reduce its energy footprint and the need to buy equipment (as many home office workers provide their own).

How is this done? Start slowly and use incentives to allow workers to take one day or half day a week at home so that you can evaluate their performance. Use meeting software (such as virtual e-rooms) that allow real time interaction and set up video to video (most computers can provide this now) for meetings. This can then be part of a reward for the recycling efforts that help to reduce the bottom line (a new ink cartridge can cost many times more than a refilled version).

When a worker does not show the discipline to turn in their work effectively or requires more communication than had been indicated by their onsite performance, offsite work can also be a valuable tool for assessing strengths and weaknesses. Such a worker can then be mentored by another who does not have performance issues with offsite effort. If that does not work, you've identified who you can rely upon for offsite (and reduced cost work) and who will be the worker you will assign to the office to be the anchor you will need onsite.

As for the thin client concept, this requires onsite evaluation as it is one of the most significant financial commitments a company can make to their infrastructure. The advantages are that thin client server configurations can also reduce a company's power consumption by such a significant percentage, while upgrading the company's systems to a more modern technology, the company will see a direct return on investment within a very short period of time while enjoying -- again -- increased productivity by their workforce through better systems.

Thin client technology can also eliminate the need for controlled environments, such as specialized air conditioning; quite often a company's most significant power outlay.

It is important, however, not to rush to the thin client model in isolation. It requires, in my opinion, an experienced consultant to perform a requirements and business reengineering analysis or it could cost a company more than it saves.

One of the most rewarding areas for greening your office has to do with green space and sustainability for those who have that control over their environment. Planting trees for shade on a building's western exposure can cut significant consumption costs in a hot climate while reducing the need to water lawns - or better yet - the drought resistant plants (known as xeriscaping) you've put in place instead of your lawn.

Finally, there are the easiest and most socially responsible options for greening your office. Using soy ink in your toners is an example. Furniture produced from sustainable forestry is another (this is a very important consideration as the EU has just reported that the cost of forest loss exceeds the current financial crisis). LED or compact florescent light bulbs, of course (I prefer LED; longer life, less consumption, easier on the eyes and not full of harmful chemicals). There are many cleansers and solvents that don't pollute the earth and break room supplies that are recycled (or better yet, mugs for employees instead of paper cups!).

The list is endless as are the supplies that are now available. It only requires only the decision to order one thing over another by incentivizing your procurement personnel to choose the green option over the alternative. None of it has to cost more than you already spend and, in many cases, it will be less and that is opportunity in a recession to receive dividends for the earth.

The timing for the green office has never been better.

Cross-posted from The Green Office Blog.

CatalogChoice

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:04:36 +0100

"Give us the power to decide what gets in our mailbox."

We work hard every day to achieve this goal. But we know that when you receive an unwanted catalog in the mail, you may wonder: Is Catalog Choice working? We confidently report that yes, Catalog Choice is working. Our approach is showing results, for you, merchants and the environment.

Here are some important updates and thoughts we want to share with you:

* Nearly 200 catalog mailers are participating in Catalog Choice, and this number grows every day. Check out our new "Bravo Merchants"page, which gives you a convenient way to shop online by catalog
brand. In the months ahead you'll see more mailers post their electronic catalogs.

* We are engaged with the catalog industry at the executive level, working with key decision-makers, the US Postal Service, and industry associations to ensure that merchants honor your mail preferences.

* Please use Catalog Choice for those unwanted catalogs you receive in the mail. We established our service to be title-specific. To decrease the chances of your name being rented, sold, or exchanged
by catalog companies, consider the Direct Marketing Association's Mail Preference Service at www.DMAChoice.org. This service will remove you from DMA member prospect lists. In response to Catalog Choice, DMA recently dropped the credit card verification and fee requirements. Please avoid using Catalog Choice for catalogs you've never received.

These are challenging financial times for merchants. There is no legal imperative for merchants to honor your opt-out requests; we depend on the merchant's good faith to respect consumers' mail preferences. Some mailers are reluctant to remove valuable customer names from their mailing lists without a confirmation directly from the customer. If you are a catalog customer, some mailers may reach out to you with a phone call, an email, or a post card. Others may send you a catalog to see how you respond. If you buy from that catalog, it is unlikely that the mailer will remove you from their mailing list.

We stand by our mission to reduce the mailing of unwanted catalogs. Our approach is to continue working collaboratively with the catalog industry to embrace voluntary measures to reduce unwanted mail by honoring your mail preferences. This requires a relationship of trust between Catalog Choice and mailers - and this takes time. We ask for your continued patience and support. So stick with us and tell a friend. The larger our voice, the more progress we can make together.

Going Green: Plant-Filled Workplace a Healthy Move

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 08:05:28 +0100

Native Americans have appreciated the healing power of plants for many years.
Though smudging, which is the burning of certain plants during Native American healing ceremonies, is most likely against your office fire code, you can easily reap the benefits of plants by adding a few to your office area.

Much to our advantage, plants in the workplace do a great deal more than
just look pretty. In fact, a recent study conducted by Tove Fjeld, a professor at the Agricultural University in Oslo, Norway, found that office greenery has been proven to reduce fatigue by 20 percent, headaches by 45 percent and coughs by 40 percent.

"Many of our modern buildings are constructed with an emphasis on operational efficiency," explains MJ Gilhooley, spokesperson for Plants At Work, a national information campaign to promote usage of plants in the office.

"Unfortunately, this focus on efficiency can lead to a disregard for the health and overall
comfort of a building's occupants. Now, they are slowly realizing that
plants actually act as the lungs of a workplace while simultaneously contributing
to the efficiency, moral and creative problem solving of today's green building designs."

Experts advise keeping at least one plant on your desk within six to eight
cubic feet of your workspace. This allows you to take full advantage of the
plants' natural toxin-reducing capabilities.
What plants are good for the office?

Office life can be hard on certain plants. Limited sun exposure and lack of
water are common reasons plants don't make it. Gilhooley suggests keeping
these leafy colleagues in your workspace:

Corn plant: This striking tree can easily reach six feet in height and
doesn't need much water or light.

Palms: The dwarf date palm removes 1385 micrograms of formaldehyde per hour
- a toxin commonly found in office foam insulation, particleboard in desks and
bookshelves, and carpeting.

Janet Craig: This popular shrub thrives in even minimal natural light and is known for its air purification abilities (it removes 1328 micrograms of formaldehyde per hour).

Peace lily: This leafy plant eats 939 micrograms of formaldehyde an hour.

This advertising section did not involve the editorial staff of the Los Angeles Times.

Nurture Nature, Nurture Health: How to Survive In a Toxic Environment

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 08:01:45 +0100

by Carol Bedrosian
from the Spirit of Change magazine: http://www.spiritofchange.org

Mitch Gaynor, MD, is founder and president of Gaynor Integrative Oncology, and Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at Weill College, affiliated with Cornell University and New York Hospital. Dr. Gaynor has been listed consecutively in The Best Doctors in New York since 1997 and is a frequent speaker and lecturer at hospitals, conferences, and universities throughout America and abroad. He has appeared widely on television including CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, ABC Good Morning America, Discovery Health, Fox News Channel and CBS 48 Hours among many other appearances.

In his latest book Nurture Nature, Nurture Health (Nurture Nature Press, New York, 2005), Dr. Gaynor outlines the scientific evidence and research on the escalating health crisis facing this country and what every individual can do about it. “People are shocked to learn that your internal and your external environments are one,” says Dr. Gaynor. “We are now living in a country where one in three Americans will hear the words, ‘You have cancer.’”

Although the specter of disease and doom may seem inescapable as the evidence of poisons lurking in our environment, our homes and our bodies mounts, Nurture Nature, Nature Health provides empowering, informative solutions to help preserve our world, our health and the health of our families and loved ones. We can reduce and curtail toxic exposure and we can strengthen our body’s natural defenses to exposures we can’t control. The book includes over 40 pages of tips to protect and boost your health, 30 pages of contacts and resources for how you can learn more and get involved to protect our society and world, and over 70 pages of scientific notes and references.

Spirit of Change publisher and editor Carol Bedrosian recently conducted this phone interview with Dr. Gaynor from his New York office after reading a copy of this groundbreaking new book.

Carol Bedrosian: Your new book is fascinating and a startling wake up call. Near the end, you quote Abraham Lincoln who says, “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.” What are the most critical facts that we need to know at this time about our health and the environment?

Dr. Mitchell Gaynor: That is a good question. I’d say that the most critical fact is that nothing occurs in a vacuum. This is very important. I am a cancer specialist and very often — especially with new patients — the first question that they want to know is, “Doctor Gaynor, why did I get cancer?” They want to know one reason. And I tell them that it is never just one reason. It is not just environmental toxins, it’s not just your diet, it’s not just your genetics. It has a lot to do with all of those and other things like how well you detoxify carcinogens and how strong your immune system is.

We are living in a country now, according to the National Cancer Institute, where one in three Americans are going to hear the words “you have cancer” at some point in their lifetime. We have had about a 132% increase in melanoma in the last 35 years. One in seven American women will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. Brain cancer in children has increased 40% in the last 30 years. One fourth of our rivers and a third of our lakes are so polluted that there are advisories against eating the fish in them. In 1979 they took satellite photos and showed that there was a complete covering of the Arctic ocean with ice. Since that time there has been a 9% decrease in arctic ice per decade.

So what I contend in the book is that all those seemingly unrelated frightening facts and more are weighed into the equation. Is cancer solely caused by those things? No. Are these things major contributing factors that are correctable? Absolutely. You don’t have to look very far to see that we wasted 50 years debating whether cigarette smoking caused lung cancer. The tobacco industry successfully argued in court and with regulators for 50 years that smoking did not cause lung cancer, even though we know from Pulitzer prize winning journalism, from The Wall Street Journal and other publications that they knew decades before that it caused lung cancer.

Now we are still basing a lot of our public health history on an equally fallacious assumption — as fallacious as smoking doesn’t cause lung cancer — and that assumption is that “dilution is the solution to pollution.” What they are saying is — and this is what all of the EPA’s laws are pretty much based on now — if you put arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, zinc, dioxins, furans, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide high enough up in the smoke stack, that the ambient levels in the air spread out so much that they will be too low to hurt anybody. This is completely fallacious, as I outline in detail in the book, because of a process called bio-accumulation. Bio-accumulation means that as these toxins work up from the food chain they become more and more toxic. The earthworm may have a certain amount of toxicity, and when the robin eats the earthworm that level goes up exponentially.

All these pollutants that go up also come back down. They come down into the water, they come down into the soil, they’re breathed in through the air in the form of particulates. Many of these carcinogens, like dioxin, will bio-accumulate so that when the calves eat the grass and drink the water, pollutants get into their fatty tissue, the cow’s milk, and ultimately the beef we eat. That is why 70% of the dioxin that humans ingest (dioxin, by the way, is one of the most carcinogenic substances known to man) comes from beef and dairy that humans are ingesting. So this “dilution is the solution to pollution” is dreadful.

When President Clinton left office, it was mandated by EPA regulation that coal burning power plants in the United States would have to reduce mercury emissions by 90% by 2008. I find now that about 50% of patients that I test in my own practice are walking around with toxic levels of mercury. The CDC [Center for Disease Control] estimates that 1 in 12 American women are walking around with enough mercury in their blood to cause real harm to a developing fetus should they become pregnant, because mercury is a potent neurotoxin, especially in children. The technology has existed for over 10 years to reduce mercury emissions. In the last year, the regulation was rolled back to give the power plants an extra 10 years. It just takes microgram amounts of mercury to cause poisoning, and power plants are the largest producer of mercury in the environment, which filters down to the water, and then contaminates our fish. There are a lot of things like this that make absolutely no sense. More mercury is going to mean more suffering for more children. There is no question about that and yet these things happen.

One of the reasons I wrote Nurture Nature, Nurture Health is because these issues have to become part of the general awareness of people. This has to become a dinner table topic for people to be talking about. People are going to look at the fact that maybe they have a kid at home with ADD or ADHD — which 3-5% of children in this country have now — and they are going to say, “You know what? We don’t need more neurotoxins and we’re not going to allow that.” The CDC has estimated 6.5% of children under the age of 18 in America have one or more learning disabilities. 6.5% of children in this country have emotional or behavioral problems. 4% of children in this country have developmental delays. All of these things are not happening in a vacuum and we are going to see more and more of them. It is affecting people, but people have not really put it together which is why I felt this book needed to be written.

Carol Bedrosian: You mention a concept in the book called “body burden” of synthetic chemicals. What is this about?

Dr. Gaynor: The body burden is the same as the toxic load. It is the amount of chemicals that we have in our body. It is the herbicide and pesticide residues. It is the phthalates that are found in many shampoos and cosmetics. It is the PBDE’s, which are flame retardants, found in everything from children’s pajamas to foam mattresses. It is the volatile organic compounds [VOC] which in the home can come from synthetic carpeting to particle board which can emit formaldehyde to many of the hazardous waste burning plants and cement kilns that burn tires and those types of things. It is the arsenic that can come off many of the children’s play sets that have pressed wood products in them as opposed to natural whole wood products. All of these things bio-accumulate in the body for decades.

Back in 1976, the EPA started doing a study where they looked at fatty tissue samples from both elective surgery specimens and autopsies in the United States. Back in 1976 they found 20 toxic compounds, many of them known probable human carcinogens in the body. The most recent number is between 80 and 120 of these compounds. They have recently looked at blood samples in infants and found about 100 toxic compounds. Infants are more sensitive to these than adults. If you look at human breast milk studies you find that PCBs [polychlorinated biphenyls, highly toxic chemicals officially banned in the US in 1976] are in 99% of samples today. PCBs are known to cause developmental defects in children. You still find them today because they stay in the body for decades.

So people are walking around with this huge toxic load. You need to put things in your body to help detox. You need to minimize the toxic load that you are getting into your body today and you need to do things to help mitigate the effects like inflammation and immune suppression of many of these toxic compounds which are already present in your body.

Carol Bedrosian: I recently came across information suggesting that because of this toxic load in our bodies, breast cancer could be triggered by wearing a bra — especially underwires — because of the continuous pressure around the lymphatic area holding these toxins in the breast tissue and lymph nodes.

Dr. Gaynor: Right now that is speculation, however it is something that we should look at. The bigger problem than wearing a bra is the fact that these chemicals should not be going into our bodies in the first place. It is absolutely outrageous, especially when you look at the fact that the way these things are tested are not at all the way they are found in nature.

Consider the analogy of the canary and the coal mine. Miners used to bring a canary into the mine because when the carbon dioxide and monoxide levels got too high in the mine, the canary would die first and the miners knew they better get out of the mine. All the cancer statistics, all the developmental disability in children, the arctic ice melting, the emerging pandemics…all these things are the canaries in the coal mine. In answer to the question about the bras and all the accumulated toxins in breast tissue, in light of what we know today, the fact that more studies have not been done on this connection is absolutely outrageous! With 1 and 7 women in this country developing breast cancer, that you should even have to ask that question is outrageous. That question should have been looked at and answered decades ago.

We know that many of the pesticides, herbicides and dioxins that are found in breast milk and in breast tissue can mimic estrogen in the breasts, and that estrogen stimulates breast cell proliferation and is a contributor to breast cancer. DDT was first found in human breast milk in 1951, but it wasn’t banned until 1972 despite all this data that was accumulating on its ability to induce miscarriages and to act as an estrogen. Eventually DDT was replaced with a variety of different pesticides, with each one subsequently being banned just a few years later because it was found to do many of the same things that DDT did. Although they were removed from the shelves and replaced with other things, the fact is that they weren’t tested appropriately before millions of people were exposed to them and they are still present in the human body today.

In addition, they were tested only minimally, one at a time, which is not they way they are found in our bodies and in nature which is in groups, called synergy. Synergy has to do with chemicals that cause cancer. The best example of that is with asbestos and smoking. We know that a smoker has an eleven times greater risk of developing lung cancer than a non-smoker. We know that somebody that has been exposed to asbestos has a five times greater risk of developing lung cancer than someone who hasn’t been exposed. If someone smokes and they have been exposed to asbestos, they don’t have a 16 times greater risk; it is a 55 times greater risk of developing lung cancer than someone who hasn’t been exposed to either. We are finding that many of these chemicals found in breast tissue also act synergistically to induce breast cell proliferation. That is quite frightening because none of these chemicals are tested the way that they end up in the human body, which is in multiples.

The fact of the matter is we have not asked the really difficult questions. We have all these negative things happening as a society and everybody is so shocked all of the sudden. We have had three hurricanes in the last year that are amongst the strongest since they have been measuring hurricanes. We have the avian flu spreading around the world, which has already developed 5 of the necessary 10 genetic changes that you need for human to human transmission. Those 10 changes are what resulted in the 1918 pandemic that killed 50 million people worldwide and 500,000 in the United States. When you look at all these things again, they are not happening in a vacuum and people really have to wake up and see what is happening here. We must demand of our elected officials that we be protected from this and that we be told the truth about the causes of this.

Carol Bedrosian: So now that we have this toxic load in our bodies, what are some of the things we can do to increase our health and immunity?

Dr. Gaynor: Fortunately, there are a lot of things individuals can do, starting with diet. We know that there are many nutrients that increase detoxified enzymes. The most important of these come from cruciferous vegetables — broccoli, Brussel sprouts, cauliflower and cabbage — which have an added benefit for women and men because they contain another substance called indole-3-carbinol [I3C]. I3C can literally shift the type of estrogen in a women’s body from the type that predisposes breast cancer to the type that actually protects against it. Soy also has this same property. Green tea can detoxify, as well as garlic and rosemary too. Omega-3 fatty acids found in ground flax seeds and cold deep water fish like salmon, haddock and cod can also induce detoxifying enzymes. A whole host of COX-2 inhibitors are foods the body needs for producing chemical signals crucial for immune response, clotting and inflammation, which is sometimes necessary for overcoming infection. Some of these have already been mentioned: rosemary, cold water fish, turmeric or curry, green tea, red grapes, omega-3 fatty acids. Those are some of the best foods that you can put in your body.

It is important to keep your immune system healthy. Vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E are important for protecting from everything like flu or even cancer and also have been found to increase the levels of detoxifying enzymes. You want to minimize your toxic load so I advise people to eat as much organic as possible and to use green products, including organic lawn and garden care. It is a myth that pesticides and herbicides stay where they are applied. They don’t. Remember, children live closer to the ground, so they are far more likely to ingest toxins, whether from cleaning residues on floors, toxic ingredients in carpets, pesticides from lawn care, or arsenic that has been used to treat wood in play sets or decks. Use bio-degradable laundry, dish washing and cleaning products that are not going to break down into volatile, organic compounds which are toxic to the body and environment.

Carol Bedrosian: Is any difference between taking pill supplements versus teas?

Dr. Gaynor: I think that it really depends on your life style. I recommend 6-8 servings daily of the various fruits and vegetables. I have some patients that say, “Dr. Gaynor I have so many after school activities with the kids I can’t cook all these things.” Somebody will tell me that they have to travel with their job for 2 weeks a month and they are in airports most of the time can’t do it. So for them I recommend supplements. I recommend to everybody if you can do it to buy a juicer. There are a lot of mixed vegetable juices people can make and that is an easy way to get a lot of the servings of fruits and vegetables, especially ones that they wouldn’t normally have, just by juicing. So that is a critical thing.

Carol Bedrosian: There are so many recommended things to do and foods to eat that are out of our normal lifestyle routines. If you had to select three of the most critical changes that we can make to protect our health and boost our immunity, what would those be?

Dr. Gaynor: The first thing is to educate yourself. Read my book, for starters. And get involved. One thing that I have been involved in recently is a proposal from a foreign cement plant to burn 5 million tires in their cement kiln 2 hours north of New York. Now it just so happens that many of the reservoirs that supply drinking water to New York City already have mercury advisories on them and yet they are proposing to burn tires which can result in increased heavy metal concentrations like zinc, mercury, cadmium, chromium and volatile organic compounds just a few miles from all the reservoirs where a lot of people are getting their drinking water.

People need to understand and become activists for their own health. This isn’t about being an environmental activist. This is about being your own health advocate and your children’s health advocate. The first thing that you need to do is become environmentally aware, and then become aware of the fact that your internal environment inside your body and your external environment around you are one in the same. That is why I say that it needs to become dinner table conversation so when these things are happening in your community, you can be out there speaking up and protecting your health. That is really why I put 73 pages of references in the book. This really levels the playing field so people don’t have to feel intimidated by what their concerns are when they are poo-pooed by the industrial polluters. People can show them the book and say, “Here is all the literature and research on this.” These concerns are valid. These health effects do happen and unfortunately most of the time they are considered victimless crimes because people may not become ill for decades after it happens. So the number one important change you can make in your life is becoming aware and getting the right information.

Number two is minimizing the toxic load in your body. With your health products and cosmetics, with cleaning solutions in your home, with home herbicides and pesticides in your food, you want to minimize those as much as possible. Three, you want to put as many nutrients into your body to bolster your immune system and detoxification system as possible.

Carol Bedrosian: Is there anything in particular that we should do to prepare and boost our immune systems for the much talked about avian flu?

Dr. Gaynor: It is pretty much the same things that we had talked about for upkeeping your immune system. One, you want to make sure that you have good hand hygiene if there is an avian flu epidemic, which means frequent hand washing. You want to make sure you cook anything from poultry well done, to a minimum of 180 degrees throughout the meat, because it is very sensitive to heat. I would make sure that you get the seasonal flu shot. Even though that won’t protect you from pandemic avian flu, it does offer protection against the seasonal flu and that will probably be somewhat protective in general for your immune system. You want to make sure that you are getting enough things in your diet. For detox you want to be sure you are getting enough selenium and zinc in your diet, and also enough glutamine which is an amino acid. You want to make sure that you are getting enough vitamin A, vitamin B6, vitamin C, vitamin E and folic acid.

On a larger scale, we really need an international program to start looking at how all these things are happening. We can’t just be chasing things as they happen, like trying to rebuild New Orleans after the hurricane destroyed large parts of the city, or trying to have a crash program for anti-virals to treat an avian flu epidemic. Basically when you look at the melting of the glaciers and the arctic ice; when you look at global warming which is definitely happening and definitely caused by increased green house gases and deforestation; when you look at one and three people developing cancer, which is supposed to go up to one and two people over the next 25-30 years, those things are the wake up calls. They are the canary in the coal mine. It is only going to happen if individuals start to become aware of things. That is the only way these things are going to happen, because the industrial polluters that are creating this are telling everybody not to worry and to be happy. Only individual awareness is going to make a change in that. Nothing else will.

Tips to Nurture Health
Eliminate or decrease microwave cooking. Never microwave with plastic. Use paper towel or waxed paper instead of plastic wrap.

Always look for the less toxic option when purchasing anything for your home.

Use non-bleached paper products whenever possible. Bleach contains highly toxic chlorinated chemicals.

Use http://www.thegreenguide.com to better inform yourself about environmental issues and safe products for your home.

Skip air fresheners. Use natural scented oils and candles. Indoor plants are natural air purifiers.

Choose natural fabrics for clothing when possible. Wash permanent press clothing before wearing.

Limit your use of electric blankets and hair dryers.

Purchase organic food whenever possible, including meat and dairy.

The twelve fruits and vegetables most likely to have pesticide residues are: apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported grapes, pears, potatoes, strawberries, nectarines, peaches, red raspberries and spinach. Buy organic for these foods whenever possible.

Drink at least two cups of green tea daily. Avoid milk in tea. Milk decreases the antioxidant activity of tea.

Learn more about Dr. Mitchell Gaynor and his book Nurture Nature, Nurture Health at http://www.gaynoroncology.com.

This article can be found at: http://www.spiritofchange.org/articles.php?id=174

The Journey To a Healing Home Environment

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 08:00:43 +0100

THE JOURNEY TO A HEALING HOME ENVIRONMENT
By Alexandra Rebecca Hubbell

I thought I had a “dream career”… since I was a small child I’ve been in love with “beautiful homes”! And I was so fortunate, I actually got to work for a developer for many years as a Sales Director in the new home housing market. It was a wonderful job providing a wonderful life until I became extremely ill.

My symptoms were really quite frightening. I suddenly found myself with fatigue/severe exhaustion so it was almost impossible to get through each day. I had memory loss, nerve dysfunction, redness around my eyes, constant muscle and joint pain and sever loss of muscle strength. As you can imagine this made working, well it made just living day to day nightmarish.

For four years practitioners were baffled. Then I was finally referred to Dr Louisa Williams, a holistic naturopathic physician who connected my illness to petrochemicals and heavy metals that off gas from building materials (carpets, paints, adhesives, insulation, stains, vinyl’s, cabinets, window coverings and new furniture)…what a sobering discovery! My dream career had poisoned me!

After nearly four years of painful physical dysfunction I finally began my journey, a step by step process to detoxify and regain my health. This journey to wellness took almost five years and although I am doing really well I am still not 100%.

The first step in this process was to create the safest, non-toxic environment in my own home that I possibly could. So, you may ask, what did that look like?

I started with my sanctuary, my bedroom, since we spend an average of eight hours a day in our bedroom, this should be the healthiest place in our homes. My first action was to rid the room of all possible toxic items from polyester fabrics, pillows, plastic boxes, furniture made out of plywood and particle board, and new purchases that most likely contained formaldehyde and then use non toxic cleaning products to thoroughly clean it!

My second action was to purchase organic sheets. Since the skin is the body’s largest organ, with more absorption surface area than the gastrointestinal tract, and it spends eight hours every night surrounded by bedding saturated with residue from pesticides, benzidine, chlorides, naphthalene sulfonates, heavy-metal compounds and toxic dyes, that can’t be helpful to your health!

Manufacturers use 1.25 pounds of pesticides, defoliants and other chemicals to grow the cotton in every set of queen size sheets. The EPA lists seven of the most common pesticides used in cotton fields as “known human carcinogens”. Cotton ranks only behind corn in the US in pesticide use. Organic sheets were a must!!

Then it was getting a healthy bed. After much research I chose an all wool bed, pillows and comforter with organic cotton coverings, and are they heavenly! I love my bed! I feel this was a critical piece to regaining my health.

Next was the Kitchen…my next favorite room in my home! I began with my food and food preparation utensils. I committed to eating 100% organic as much as possible…no pesticides, herbicides, fungicides etc and the food is so much more delicious! I now belong to a CSA…Community Shared Agriculture… Laguna Farm where every week I receive a box of organic seasonal vegetables and fruit…it’s fabulous!

I cleaned house in my kitchen and removed all plastics, aluminum, Teflon and non-stick cooking pans. I use glass to store food. I transfer as much as I can into glass containers when I get home from shopping. I cook with glass pans, ceramic (Corning Ware) and cast iron.

Then it was time to rid the house of all toxic cleaning products, beginning in the kitchen. I removed the products from the house, and replaced the cleaners I needed with healthy cleaning products.

The bathroom was next. First, ridding it of toxic cleaning products. Second, was reading the ingredient labels on every product from shampoo to face cleansers to makeup and eliminating all products with these toxic solvents Listed below: “propyl”…example propylparaben; methyl”…example methylparaben; “butyl”…example butylene glycol; “ethyl”…example ethanol; “benzene, toluene, styrene, xylene etc. These petroleum solvents injure our cell and nerve membranes. I replaced all toxic products with healthy ones…which was a big undertaking!

Next was Air…indoor air pollution can be 10 times worse than LA on a bad day, no matter where you live. Thanks to the wonders of modern chemistry, you’re being poisoned right now as you read this. Your walls could be out gassing formaldehyde and 1,1,1 trichloroethane; your carpet could be releasing an alphabet soup of unpronounceable compounds, most of which affect your immune system; your cabinets, wood finishes, paints, stains, varnishes, cleaning supplies or anything made of plastic or vinyl give off VOC’s (volatile organic compounds)…these are pollutants that are chemically unstable, turn into gas or combine with other chemicals and then you breath them…and they are everywhere! Ventilation is important to create cleaner indoor air quality and getting rid of the toxic products. I purchased an air ionizer to have healthier air and experienced a big improvement. I take my ionizer whenever I travel now…what a difference it makes in hotel rooms!

Now it was time for water. I purchased a water filtration system so I would have the best quality water possible and I added a shower filter to reduce chlorine poisoning. I stopped drinking water from plastic bottles…better for my health and for the planet.

As I said I am not 100% but the difference in my health and ability to function is dramatic and I am improving all the time.

How to Have a Safe Clean House

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:55:09 +0100

What's Behind the Shine?
Worldwatch Institute
http://www.worldwatch.org/

Everyone likes a clean home, but few of us like the chore of cleaning. Even worse, we often rely on a cocktail of hazardous substances to make our bathrooms sparkle or our floors shine. Dishwashing detergents often contain phosphates that pollute the groundwater; wood polish generally contains flammable toxins like nitrobenzene; and laundry detergent may contain bleach and other corrosives. We lock these compounds away in closets or under the sink to keep them from our children—but we often don't consider what they may be doing to our own bodies.

Even as they help us pick up dirt and dust, many modern cleaners irritate our skin, eyes, and lungs. They can also leave toxic residues or pollute the water when we rinse them down the drain. But keeping our homes clean and avoiding toxic cleaners don't have to be mutually exclusive. Several companies now produce “green” cleaners that avoid ingredients that are toxic or don't biodegrade. Green cleaners can also be made from a range of safer substances we might already have around the house.

Cleaning products were responsible for nearly 10 percent of all toxic exposures reported to U.S. Poison Control Centers in 2000, accounting for 206,636 calls. Of these, nearly two-thirds involved children under six, who can swallow or spill cleaners stored or left open inside the home.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the air inside the typical home is on average 2-5 times more polluted than the air just outside—and in extreme cases 100 times more contaminated—largely because of household cleaners and pesticides.

The Janitorial Products Pollution Prevention Project reports that 6 out of every 100 janitors in Washington state have lost time from their jobs as a result of injuries linked to toxic cleaning products, particularly glass and toilet cleaners and degreasers.

In a 2002 U.S. Geological Survey study of contaminants in U.S. stream water, 69 percent of streams sampled contained persistent detergent metabolites, and 66 percent contained disinfectants.

At least eleven U.S. states have banned phosphate from detergents sold within their borders, though the ingredient is still permitted in most of the country. Other states, cities, and counties have gone a step further by not just banning certain products, but also requiring the use of nonpolluting cleaners.

In 1994, the city of Santa Monica, California, was able to replace traditional cleaners with less-toxic options in 15 of 17 product categories, saving 5 percent on annual costs and avoiding the purchase of 1.5 tons of hazardous materials per year.

The U.S. market for natural household cleaning products has grown to $100 million annually, according to natural goods retailer Seventh Generation. This represents just one percent of the total household cleaners market, but it's been growing by 18-25 percent each year for the last five years.

SOME IDEAS
Stock up on a few safe, simple ingredients that can be used in most cleaning situations. Soap, water, baking soda, vinegar, lemon juice, borax, and a coarse scrubbing sponge can take care of most household cleaning needs.

Instead of using a standard drain cleaner, which likely contains lye, hydrochloric acid, and sulfuric acid, try pouring a quarter cup of baking soda down the clogged drain, followed by a half cup of vinegar. Close the drain tightly until fizzing stops, then flush with boiling water.

For an effective glass cleaner, use a mixture of half white vinegar and half water.

Baking soda and cornstarch are both good carpet deodorizers.

To clean up mildew and mold, use a mixture of lemon juice or white vinegar and salt.

A paste of baking soda, salt, and hot water makes a great oven cleaner.

In the rare instance you need to use a hazardous product, use as little as possible and dispose of it in a way that will cause minimum harm—for example, by bringing it to a hazardous waste recycling or treatment center.

Get friends together for an Earth-friendly spring cleaning day. As part of this, replace your conventional cleaning products with items that are biodegradable and safe for children and pets. These products are available at natural foods stores, online, or through catalogues.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

The Green Guide (www.thegreenguide.com) provides consumers with practical, everyday household- and market-level actions that can yield system-wide environmental, health, and social change.

The Green Consumer, by John Elkington, Julia Hailes, and Joel Makower (Penguin Books: 1988), contains useful advice on reducing the environmental impact of all aspects of home life and purchasing.

On Eco-Friendly Car Washing

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:54:08 +0100

Wash and Learn
On washing your car (edited)
By Umbra Fisk
21 Aug 2006

Are you are one of those fastidious people I see busily washing their cars on Saturdays? I always wonder why some people are driven to go to such lengths, while others consider washing their cars somewhere below replacing their toothbrush on life's long list of things to conveniently forget about. One of the little mysteries.

Washing the car at home might be cheaper and handier, but I'm afraid you have to suck it up. It's nearly always better to go to the commercial car wash. They use less water, and in the U.S. they are required to send their used water off for treatment, or to take other measures that lessen the impacts of their discharge. Some of them even reuse their water. Home washes, on the other hand, usually drain directly to storm sewers that eventually empty into streams, lakes, rivers, or bays, affecting our fish friends and the health of the water.

A survey a few years ago by the International Carwash Association (really!) found that a little under half of Americans prefer to suds up in the driveway, though. So if you do decide to keep washing the car at home, here are a few tips. Try not to do it very often. When you do it, park the car on your lawn, which acts as a natural filter for the soap, dirt, oil, and other gunk that would otherwise run down your driveway and straight into the drains. (Of course, you might not want that stuff on your lawn, either, if you stop to think about it.)

Next, consider the biggest problem with washing at home: water usage. One estimate says the average home wash uses 116 gallons of water. You don't want to be a water-waster, do you? Use less by buying a nozzle that controls the flow from your hose, or by using a bucket -- this will help you keep an eye on how much you're using. You might even collect rainwater or gray water from your house and wash with that. Guess what commercial car washes do? Mix air and water half and half, so they get pressure without volume. Smart. And as a result, most commercial washes use 60 percent less water in the entire process than you use just rinsing off your car.

When it comes to soap, you might try an eco-friendly soap like Dr. Bronner's, or no soap at all. The detergents in regular car cleaners hurt our fish friends by destroying a mucus layer that protects them from bacteria and parasites. They can also cause trouble by reducing the surface tension of water, which makes it easier for fish to absorb organic chemicals such as pesticides. Even the smallest amount of soap can make our fish friends unhappy -- including those labeled biodegradable and low-phosphate.

Here's a final idea: you could park your car and never drive again. After all, a parked car is a clean car, right? Just a thought.

Aspartame Gets Rid of Ants

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:52:53 +0100

http://www.mercola.com/index.htm
September 5, 2006

For all the dire health problems associated with aspartame -- the worst of them being cancer -- the original "anything-but-sugar" substitute may have an ideal purpose to exist, not as a food additive, but as an ant poison
Already aware of aspartame's origins as a toxic chemical, a health-conscious consumer with an ant problem emptied one packet of aspartame in the corner of each of her bathrooms two years ago. The "sweet" solution worked brilliantly, as she's seen no signs of carpenter ants crawling around for the past year.

Aspartame may be just the thing for getting rid of fire ants (impervious to many poisons) too, although this solution takes a bit more effort. Initially, fire ants ignored their aspartame treat until a light rain moistened it. After the rain, however, the fire ants came back with a vengeance, taking the aspartame back to the mound by the hundreds. Within two days, any evidence that fire ants existed at all, save for an empty mound, vanished.

No mystery aspartame works like a pesticide, as the asparctic acid contained in this toxic product is a well-documented excitotoxin that causes specific brain cells to become excessively excited to the point they quickly die, just as both kinds of ants did.

Makes you wonder if aspartame is a far safer, better alternative to getting rid of lawn and home pests than the average toxic pesticides found at your neighborhood hardware store ...

If you ever wanted a painless way to find out all the dangers of aspartame you will certainly want to view Sweet Misery. If you are a natural health care practitioner you might want to consider showing this in your reception area.

Dizzying Fumes At Nail Salons

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:52:15 +0100

BY ABBY VOGEL
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER Jul 19, 2005

ANNANDALE -- One person's beautiful fingernails can be hazardous to another person's health.

Add a language barrier to the mix, and the possibilities for problems increase.

Reaching out to the large population of Vietnamese nail technicians, the Environmental Protection Agency hosted a pair of workshops yesterday with the instructions given in Vietnamese.

"I like that they came to our area and told us about the regulations and safety information in our native language," said Yen Phan, a nail technician from Silver Spring, Md. "I probably would not have come if not."

The EPA's nail-salon initiative began in 1999 with the Vietnamese community in Houston and has expanded nationwide to areas like Northern Virginia. Officials estimate that 35 percent to 40 percent of technicians at nail shops nationwide are Vietnamese and that most do not speak or read English.

And even though Virginia's nail-technician licensing requires passing examinations given in English, officials say there are still concerns about technicians being overexposed to hazardous substances.

Many Vietnamese become nail technicians because "it's easy to make money, there is little education required and they don't have to learn English," said Lisa Pham, the EPA engineer who conducted the workshops. "But they are not educated about the best practices around chemicals."

Nail shops use a dizzying and dangerous array of chemicals. Technicians breathe and touch such hazardous chemicals as toluene, butyl-methacrylate, titanium dioxide and di-n-butylphthalate. Overexposure can cause occupational asthma, eye and skin irritation, headaches, dizziness, nausea and reproductive disorders.

EPA experts give out safety sheets that explain the risks, precautions and actions related to exposure to chemicals from nail hardeners, artificial nails, polishes, drying agents and polish removers.

But "three things make the [safety] sheets useless," said Pham. "They are written only in English, there is not one standard format and they are written in a technical language." Another problem: Toll-free numbers given for more information are answered by English-speaking personnel.

Some in attendance were more aware of the dangers than others.

"I'm not really surprised by what I learned. I knew some of the chemicals caused health problems, but I didn't know what each caused," said Kristie Dang of Centreville.

Dang said she wished more shop owners would support the seminars.

"If the salon owner is cheap, then they do not pay money to support the environment. Some don't care until they come to this kind of class," Dang said.

Technicians were also told about the hazards of bringing children to the salons -- not only because of the chemicals but other risks including ultraviolet lights used to dry nails.

"I was surprised to hear people bring children to the salon. It's too dangerous to bring the baby where they are working," said Kim Nguyen, a Centreville nail technician.

More than half of the 80 or so people attending the two workshops learned about the programs from a letter mailed to local nail salons. Others read or heard advertisements in Vietnamese newspapers and radio stations.

"I got the brochure in the mail and wanted to come see what they were talking about," said Nguyen. "I'm glad I came."

In Virginia, nail technicians must speak enough English to graduate from a training program at a licensed school, which means about 150 hours of training, and pass State Board of Cosmetology theory and practical examinations.

The theory examination includes chemistry questions, with a section on hazardous chemicals in nail products. It also covers correct safety procedures for artificial and natural nail technology.

Even with those requirements, officials said, not all of Virginia's 8,870 licensed nail technicians know enough about the dangers that surround them.

"At the end of the workshop, 100 percent come up to me and say that the information was helpful, and I'm still surprised that most have never seen the safety sheets before," said Pham.

New-car Smell Is Going Away: It's No Good For You

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:50:23 +0100

By Hans Greimel, Associated Press TOKYO —

Anyone who's pulled away from the dealer's lot in a shiny, new car knows the seductive scent of fresh plastic, paint and upholstery that evokes a rush of pride and consumer satisfaction.
But that unmistakable new-car smell may soon be heading the way of the rumble seat: Recent research linking it to a toxic cocktail of harmful chemicals is spurring efforts by Japanese automakers to tone down the fumes.

Japanese manufacturers have become the first to set an industry wide goal of reducing cabin concentrations to within government guidelines. The push could spur similar action by U.S. and European rivals, making interior air quality an emerging auto safety issue.

"The industry in Japan as a whole has recognized the need for this and is coordinating efforts," Toyota spokesman Paul Nolasco said. "Cutting down on the things that lead to these smells is only something that can be better for you."

The new-car smell emanates largely from chemicals known as volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, that leach from glues, paints, vinyls and plastics in the passenger compartment. The fumes can trigger headaches, sore throats, nausea and drowsiness. Prolonged exposure to some of the chemicals can lead to cancer, though there's no evidence linking that to concentrations in cars.

Critics liken the problem to so-called sick-building syndrome, which traces some illnesses to similar agents seeping from walls, carpet and fixtures of new buildings.

Just sitting in a new car can subject riders to toxic emissions several times the limits deemed safe for homes or offices by some health authorities, though the problem tends to dissipate after about six months, according to a 2001 study by Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization.

"We find new car interiors have much higher VOC levels than any building we've researched," research leader Steve Brown said. "Ultimately, what we need are cars with interior materials that produce lower emissions."

Japanese automakers are now trying to do just that.

Earlier this year, they agreed to cut cabin levels of 13 of the compounds, including possible cancer-causing agents styrene and formaldehyde, by 2007 to match Japanese Health Ministry guidelines for air quality in homes.

The Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association initiated the drive after tests found some models made by three of the nation's top carmakers failed to meet government recommendations.

The industry group refused to identify which companies or models were evaluated.

Automakers worldwide have been trying to reduce volatile organic compounds for years. But the Japanese effort marks the first time the industry has adopted government guidelines, JAMA's Tatsuya Ota said.

Most of Japan's top five makers — Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mitsubishi and Mazda — are already rolling out cars in compliance and touting the lower volatile organic compound levels as a key selling point, a move that is likely to catch on globally.

"There is good potential for the Japanese to take the lead in this field," said Koji Endo, an auto analyst with Credit Suisse First Boston in Tokyo. "People are starting to feel that VOCs are an issue, and the new efforts are one advantage that they (Japanese manufacturers) can claim."

Brown says he does not know of any government with volatile organic compound guidelines for car interiors, but says matching building levels is a good start. Japan's recommendations were adopted in 2002 to combat sick-building syndrome.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sets no guidelines for volatile organic compounds in non-industrial settings, though formaldehyde is regulated as a carcinogen by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

The Washington-based Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents nine carmakers including General Motors, Ford and DaimlerChrysler, says it does not follow the issue of volatile organic compounds. DaimlerChrysler said it has no initiatives on the volatile organic compound-induced new-car fumes.

Toyota, Japan's largest automaker, currently has six models on the road that meet the new standards, while Nissan has four. Honda's new Civic, unveiled this month, is that company's first, while Mitsubishi will begin its lineup with the "i" next year.

All say they are on track to have all new models pass muster beginning in 2007.

While some customers complain about the new-car smell, others cherish it enough to have spawned a cottage industry in aerosol "new-car sprays" to keep their rides smelling fresh from the factory.

"Some people are annoyed by the smell and some people love it," Honda spokesman Takayuki Fuji said. "This is not just for Honda users, but for all users."

How Toxic Is Your Bathroom?

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:49:15 +0100

Be warned: your daily beauty regime could be taking years off your life.

Pat Thomas reports on the chemical timebomb in your cosmetics cabinet Published: 24 October 2005

Earlier this year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did something amazing. It issued an unprecedented warning to the cosmetics industry that it was time to inform consumers that most personal care products have not been safety tested. Where the US goes, the UK inevitably follows. If the FDA starts the ball rolling by flexing its muscles, it is possible that in the not too distant future 99 per cent of personal care products could be required to carry a caution on the label: "Warning: The safety of this product has not been determined."

What concerns scientists at the FDA and at environmental health organizations throughout the world is the "cocktail effect" - the daily mixing of many different types of toxins in and on the body - and how this might damage health over the longer term. On average, we each use nine personal care products a day containing 126 different ingredients.

Such "safety" testing as exists looks for reactions, such as skin redness, rashes or stinging, but does not investigate potential long-term problems for either humans or the environment. Yet the chemicals that go into products such as shampoos and hand creams are not trace contaminants. They are the basic ingredients. Absorbed into the body, they can be stored in fatty tissue or organs such as the liver, kidney, reproductive organs and brain.

Cosmetics companies complain of unfounded hysteria, but scientists are finding industrial plasticisers such as phthalates in urine, preservatives known as parabens in breast-tumour tissue, and antibacterials such as Triclosan and fragrance chemicals like the hormone-disrupting musk xylene in human breast milk. Medical research is proving that fragrances can trigger asthma; that the detergents in shampoos can damage eye tissue; and that hair-dye chemicals can cause bladder cancer and lymphoma.

An even greater number of substances in personal care products are suspected to present potential risks to human health from this known effect on animals. If these problems had been linked to pharmaceutical drugs, the products would have been taken off the market. At the very least, money would have been spent on safety studies. But because the cosmetics industry is largely self-governing, and because we all want to believe in the often hollow promises of better skin and whiter teeth, products containing potentially harmful substances remain in use and on sale.

Think it can't be that bad? Consider what goes into some of the UK's most popular toiletries.

OLAY REGENERIST What they claim: Instantly improves the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles. But watch out: To work, the product needs to be well absorbed, so Regenerist contains penetration enhancers like disodium EDTA. But these also drive toxins deeper into the skin. Watch out for hormone disrupters such as ethylparaben, methylparaben and propylparaben and potential carcinogens such as polyacrylamide, triethanolamine (which can form cancer-causing nitrosamines), and the artificial colours CI 16035, CI 19140 and PTFE (Teflon).

Regenerist contains the sunscreens butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane (B-MDM) and ethylhexyl salicylate; not enough for an SPF rating, but potentially enough to irritate skin. CLAIROL HERBAL ESSENCES SHAMPOO DRY/DAMAGED HAIR What they claim: A totally organic experience. But watch out: It looks and smells appealing because it is coloured using four potentially cancer-causing dyes (CI 17200, CI 15510, CI 42053, CI 60730) and perfumed with synthetic fragrances that are known neurotoxins and skin irritants.

Among its detergents, sodium lauryl sulphate can irritate skin and permanently damage eye tissue, and sodium laureth sulphate and cocamide MEA can be contaminated with 1,4-dioxane, a hormone disrupter associated with breast cancer. Cocamidopropyl betaine, another detergent, is a penetration enhancer, as is the solvent propyelel glycol and the preservative tetrasodium EDTA; all allow other chemicals to penetrate more deeply into skin and bloodstream.

JOHNSON'S BABY SOFTWASH What they claim: Best for baby, best for you. But watch out: Children's skin is thinner and more absorbent than adults', so is a less effective barrier to chemical toxins. The rates of eczema and allergies among children are on the rise and the early introduction of toiletries on to sensitive skin may be a factor.

When soap does the job, why expose your child to skin and eye irritants such as sorbitan laurate, cocamidopropyl betaine and acrylates/C10-30 alkyl acrylate crosspolymer, or PEG-150 distearate, PEG-80, PEG-14M and sodium laureth sulphate that can be contaminated with the carcinogens 1,4 dioxane and ethylene oxide, or hormone disrupters such as parabens? In addition, there's nothing here that naturally moisturises the skin - only synthetic polymers (plastic-like substances) like polyquaternium-7 and polypropylene terephthalate that coat it, merely giving the impression of smoothness.

CALVIN KLEIN'S ETERNITY What they claim: What the world needs now is love. But watch out: Perfumes are made from the same neurotoxic solvents found in glues and adhesives and volatile chemicals common in garages and factories, albeit in much smaller concentrations. Eternity contains a staggering 41 ingredients, about 80 per cent of which have never been tested for safety in humans. The rest are known neurotoxins, allergens, irritants and/or hormone disrupters. Still think perfume is sexy?

LYNX DRY What they claim: Spray more, get more. But watch out: Lynx Dry contains three types of neurotoxins: solvents such as PPG-14 butyl ether; the propellants butane, isobutane and propane; and synthetic fragrance chemicals. It contains a preservative BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene), which has been linked with cancer, and PEG-8 distearate, which can be contaminated with the hormone-disrupting carcinogens ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane as well as polycyclic aromatic compounds such as benzene and benz(a)pyrene. Aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex GLY and aluminium chlorohydrate work by clogging pores, but long exposure to aluminium-containing deodorants raises the risk of diseases such as Alzheimer's.

COLGATE TOTAL What they claim: 12-hour fresh breath and antibacterial protection. But watch out: Conventional toothpastes often contain irritating detergents like sodium lauryl sulphate, which can cause sore gums and mouth ulcers, and abrasives like hydrated silica, which can erode tooth enamel.

Total contains a glue-like substance, PVM/MA copolymer, that sticks the active ingredients to teeth. Saccharin, a known carcinogen in animals, is also found. The colouring CI 42090 (banned in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Norway, Switzerland and Sweden) causes cancer in animals. Total contains Triclosan, an antibacterial agent that can in certain circumstances combine with chlorine in tap water to produce chloroform gas, which is easily absorbed into the skin or inhaled and can cause depression, liver problems and cancer. GILLETTE MACH 3 SHAVING GEL What they claim: The best a man can get. But watch out: Helped by a global advertising campaign featuring David Beckham, Gillette shaving products have carved their way into the male psyche. If he thought about the ingredients, would the "epitome of the well groomed man" be so keen to promote the product? Mach 3 gel contains skin irritants such as triethanolamine, palmitic acid glyceryl oleate, three potential carcinogens (polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon), BHT, CI 42090) and three central nervous system toxins or pollutants (isopentane, parfum and isobutane).

CLAIROL NICE 'N EASY What they claim: Natural-looking colour with complete grey coverage. But watch out: All hair dye sold in the EU containing phenylenediamines, resorcinol and/or 1-naphthol must carry a warning: "Can cause an allergic reaction. Do not use to colour eyelashes or eyebrows." Other hair dye ingredients - including coal tar dyes, 4-chloro-m-phenylenediamine, 2,4-toluenediamine, 2-nitro-p-phenylenediamine and 4-amino-2-nitrophenol - have proven carcinogenic in at least one animal species. In humans, intensive longer-term use of permanent hair dye is associated with breast, ovarian and bladder cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, multiple meyeloma and rheumatoid arthritis.

RADOX BUBBLE BATH What they claim: Soothes emotions, cleanses the body. But watch out: Soaking in hot water increases skin permeability and helps vaporise chemicals in products, making them more easily inhaled. Radox Relax contains potential skin irritants (sodium laureth sulphate, cocamidopropyl betaine) potential carcinogens such as the preservative combo methylchloro-isothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone and synthetic dyes, and hormone-disrupting ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate. It contains perfume ingredients that are capable of irritating (coumarin, benzyl salicylate, limonene) and disrupting the central nervous system (butylphenyl methylpropional, alpha-isomethyl ionone, linalool).

NIVEA BODY What they claim: Feel the essential care. But watch out: Along with semi-synthetic fatty acids and waxes, Nivea Body contains denatured alcohol and glycerine, which can dry skin with repeated use. It also contains several estrogenic preservatives (methylparaben, butylparaben, ethylparaben, isobutylparaben, propylparaben), contact allergens (phenoxy-ethanol, linalool, citronellol, hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carcoxaldehyde) and a potential carcinogen (limonene). Film-formers like dimethicone keep undesirable ingredients next to the skin longer. About one-third of the listed ingredients are fragrances that are known irritants and sensitisers of human skin; chemicals that, with repeated exposure, can trigger allergic reactions.

CLEARASIL 3-IN-1 DEEP CLEANING WASH What they claim: Clinically proven to help fight spots. But watch out: A mix of strong detergents and surfactants (sodium lauryl sulfate, cetyl betaine, distearyl-dimonium chloride and steareth-21), chemical exfoliants (salicylic acid) and solvents (glycerin, alcohol, menthol) that are capable of removing the skin's natural oils, and synthetic skin conditioners for repairing some of the damage inflicted by the other ingredients. It contains two potential carcinogens (BHT and disodium EDTA) and fragrance ingredients among the most commonly reported contact allergens in the EU (behenyl alcohol, limonene benzyl salicylate, linalool and hexyl cinnamal). These so consistently lead to skin problems that they must now be listed separately on labels within the EU.

LISTERINE TEETH AND GUM DEFENCE What they claim: Kills the germs that cause plaque and bad breath. But watch out: This mouthwash is 21.6 per cent alcohol. Alcohol dries and changes the pH of the mouth and throat and long-term use of alcohol-containing mouthwashes increases the risk of mouth and throat cancers. Listerine also contains a mild detergent, poloxamer 407, that is soluble in liquids at low temperatures but turns to a gel at higher temperatures (ie, body temperature). That makes it a film-former, "glueing" other ingredients on to the surfaces of the mouth for longer.

Fluoride in quantity is poisonous if swallowed, and the sweetener saccharin causes bladder cancer in animals. Finally, synthetic colours, aromas and flavours are made from volatile solvents that can alter the basic flora of the mouth and may cause dermatitis.

Asbestos Contamination: A National Issue

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:47:51 +0100

Tim Walker, MS, RS, CIH, Division of Health Assessment and Consultation

In 1881, miners searching for gold unearthed a micalike material from an area outside of Libby, Montana. At the time, they did not know what they had uncovered. It was not until 1919 that Edward Alley, a local businessman from Libby, discovered the unique properties of this material. While he was walking through an abandoned mine, his torch contacted the surface of the mine, resulting in an expansion or "popping" of the ore into a material later known as vermiculite. This unique material was marketed for many uses, such as loose-fill insulation, a fertilizer carrier, a soil conditioner, and an aggregate in many products such as gypsum wall board and numerous construction products.

Vermiculite ore from Libby was mined beginning in the 1920s. In 1963, W.R. Grace purchased the mine and expanded operations. During the 1960s-1980s, millions of tons of vermiculite ore were shipped to 30 states and six foreign countries. The ore from Libby was contaminated with asbestos, and evidence of adverse health effects began to appear in workers employed at the mine, mill, and refining processes in Libby. Investigations in the 1980s found that those workers had increased rates of asbestosis, mesothelioma, and lung cancer. At a

Vermiculite Ore

fertilizer plant in Marysville, Ohio, that received ore from Libby, asbestos-related lung abnormalities were identified among workers. During early mining operations in Libby, airborne levels of asbestos were measured at levels >100 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc) of air. In downtown Libby, concentrations of airborne asbestos exceeded the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limit of 0.1 f/cc.

In 2000, as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiated clean-up actions in Libby, and as the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) began health screening of former workers and residents, an effort was under way throughout the United States to investigate facilities that received asbestos-contaminated ore from the W.R. Grace mine. Approximately 300 sites across the country were identified as possible recipients of the vermiculite ore. Working with EPA, ATSDR has begun to evaluate all of these sites to determine whether asbestos contamination is present at levels that pose a public health risk.

Of all types of vermiculite processing facilities, exfoliation plants are most likely to have resulted in the greatest amounts of environmental contamination and exposure. Exfoliation plants heated the vermiculite ore to approximately 2,000°F (1,093°C), creating the expanded vermiculite used for a variety of products, including loose-fill insulation in homes. Significant concentrations of asbestos fibers might have been released into communities near these plants through stack emissions. ATSDR is evaluating past exposure to airborne asbestos around these plants by looking at asbestos-related disease rates.

Current exposure to asbestos-contaminated vermiculite is also being assessed at the facilities that received Libby vermiculite ore. EPA and ATSDR are working together to gather information on these sites. Where appropriate, environmental sampling of the air and soil is being conducted to assess the current level of exposure around former vermiculite facilities. In addition, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is evaluating active vermiculite facilities that are receiving ore from mines other than Libby.

Collecting environmental data is only the first step in the identification process. Current exposure models used to assess risk to asbestos in air and soil do not incorporate much of the knowledge acquired during the last 15 years. Much has been learned regarding asbestos fiber types and biologic mechanisms. This information needs to be incorporated into any future exposure models to give meaningful information regarding risk. In addition, environmental sampling methodologies must be developed to best measure and collect the kind of information that will be useful to health professionals who are assessing the data. The ultimate goal of this effort is to identify sites where unacceptable exposures to asbestos might be occurring, so that exposure at these sites can be mitigated to a safe level. ATSDR will work with EPA and other federal agencies to serve affected populations by providing health education and meeting other needs as appropriate.

Health Alert - Safe Drinking Water

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:46:49 +0100

The Citizens for Health Action ( http://www.citizens.org/ ) with help from Citizens for Safe Drinking Water placed an action alert on their website that, when clicked, brings you to a pre-written letter to Congress to support the EPA's call for a fluoridation moratorium: All you do is fill in your name and address and off it goes to your representatives.

This is what it says (it can be changed and personalized if you want)

As your constituent, I join Citizens for Health, Citizens for Safe Drinking Water and a host of other health conscious groups in urging your sponsorship and active support for a two-step request from the coalition of 11 unions representing more than 7000 environmental and public health professionals of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

I urge that you:

1) Demand that EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson immediately issue a public warning in the form of an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking setting the health-based drinking water standard (MCLG) for fluoride at zero, as it is for all known or probable human carcinogens, pending a formal recommendation from a National Academy of Sciences’ National Research Council committee.

2) Sponsor and support a public Congressional hearing to determine the merits of a moratorium on the U.S. Public Health Services’ national program to fluoridate all of America’s public water supplies pending a review of the current science on the risks and benefits of fluoridation, including recent evidence of correlations to an elevated risk of fatal bone cancer in young boys, and a doubling of the incidence of dangerous levels of lead in children’s blood.

Your active support is essential, as the scientific process and the protections we expect from our government agencies have not been applied with the unbiased intention this issue deserves.

This request for your action includes links to documents detailing the scientist unions' request, specifics of a 1998-2000 Congressional investigation on fluoride, and a recently reported cover-up of essential scientific data by Harvard's Chairman of the Department of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology.

A brief summary, as prepared by Citizens for Safe Drinking Water:

Congressional investigation reveals that industry self-regulation has gone awry without appropriate oversight of the actual substances used for fluoridation

The beginning steps of a Congressional investigation of the actions by our various protective agencies concerning fluoridation took place from 1998-2000, with revelations that,

• U.S. EPA gave up all oversight responsibilities and safety standards for water additives in 1988;

• The resulting “industry self-regulation” standards allow fluoridation chemicals to contain arsenic in concentrations destined to cause lung/bladder cancers in 1 per 1000 consumers over a lifetime, and water suppliers to declare those concentrations “Not Detected”;

• Our protective agencies can not find even one single chronic toxicological study on the actual products that more than 90% of the population under fluoridation programs throughout the nation are consuming; and

• U.S. FDA states that they have never approved for safety or effectiveness any fluoride substance intended to be ingested for the purpose of reducing tooth decay, specifically approving only fluoride substances intended for topical application to the surface of the tooth.

Unfortunately the public hearing that these Agency responses deserve was sidelined along with other important issues during the political fray of the Presidential impeachment era.

The original assumption that the benefit of fluoride is derived by ingestion has been scientifically accepted as false. Any beneficial effect is attributed to topical application.

Putting the claims of effectiveness that typically drive fluoridation public policy into perspective, the July 2000 cover story of the Journal of American Dental Association clarified that ingestion of fluoride provides no significant reduction in tooth decay, and a fifty-page report of August 2001 by the Centers for Disease Control, while still touting fluoridation, declared that there is no correlation between fluoride concentrations in water and occurrences of tooth decay, as the benefits of fluoride to teeth is derived from application to the surface of the tooth, not from swallowing.

Harvard professor’s suppression of evidence under NIH contract illustrates the importance of your intervention

This is not an issue that can be left for the various agencies to “sort out” on their own.

The October 24th 2005 issue of Time Magazine and previous stories in newspapers including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal report that the Environmental Working Group is demanding an immediate investigation of Professor Chester Douglass, Chairman of the Department of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology at Harvard.

Douglass, working under a $1.3 million National Institute of Health grant to evaluate fluoride consumption and bone cancers, declared, unequivocally, that there is no evidence to show any correlation between fluoride ingestion and cancer. In fact, he approved a thesis for granting a doctorate degree to his student, Elise Bassin, who took the Professor’s own data and showed that there is a seven-fold increase in rare fatal bone cancers in young males during their rapid growth periods when consuming fluoridated water.

Professor Douglass referenced Bassin’s study as if in agreement with his report, and also failed to reveal that he is the editor of a newsletter for Colgate, which has the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The union of EPA scientists that professionally evaluates the scientific data for Agency use in setting public policy will not be silent in the face of this imminent harm

The coalition of unions of EPA scientists are prepared to provide comprehensive data, even beyond the Bassin correlation of fluoride consumption to fatal bone cancers, including studies of more than 400,000 children that correlate the presence of the most widely used fluoridation chemicals with a doubling of the incidence of danger levels of lead in children’s blood. This imminent danger warrants this country’s immediate attention.

Your action is imperative.

I ask that you take heed and act to assure the protection of our precious public water supplies by fulfilling the two-parted request of the union of EPA scientists.

***********

References:

Coalition of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Unions Request for EPA Advanced Notice for Rulemaking to set health-based point of safety for fluoride in water at zero
http://www.nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/flouride.unions.epa.a.2005.htm

Coalition of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Unions
Letter to Congress requesting moratorium on fluoridation
http://www.nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/fluroride%20.unions.congress.htm

Review and highlights of the House Committee on Science investigation on fluoride, 1998-2000
http://www.keepers-of-the-well.org/on_point.html

Agencies’ Responses to House Committee on Science investigation on fluoride, 1998-2000
http://www.keepers-of-the-well.org/hearings-investigations.html

Journal of the American Dental Association and Centers for Disease Control clarification that ingested fluoride provides no significant reduction in tooth decay, and other related documents
http://www.keepers-of-the-well.org/due_diligence.html

Environmental Working Group request for investigation of Harvard Professor cover-up of bone cancer data/Petition to National Toxicological Program to list fluoride in its Report of Carcinogens
http://www.ewg.org/issues/siteindex/issues.php?issueid=5031

***********

I look forward to your commitment, with a followup on your progress.

Please sign the petition supporting the EPA Unions' request for a nationwide moratorium on fluoridation, http://www.powalliance.org/petition/index.html

New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

Fluoridation News Releases
http://tinyurl.com/6kqtu

Fluoride News Tracker
http://www.fluoridenews.blogspot.com/

Fluoride Action Network
http://www.FluorideAction.Net

How Safe Are Microwaves?

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:44:10 +0100

June Russell's Health Facts

Microwaves:

Overview

Microwave ovens are in 90% of American homes. However, the micro-oven manufacturers, Washington City politics, and plain old human nature are suppressing the facts and evidence. Because of this, people are continuing to microwave their food without knowing the effects or dangers of doing so. One short-term study found significant and disturbing changes in the blood of individuals consuming microwaved milk and vegetables. All foods that were processed through the microwave ovens caused changes in the blood of the volunteers. Hemoglobin levels decreased and over all white cell levels and cholesterol levels increased. Lymphocytes decreased.

In Dr. Lita Lee’s book, “Health Effects of Microwave Radiation - Microwave Ovens,” and in the March and September 1991 issues of Earthletter, she stated that every microwave oven leaks electro-magnetic radiation, harms food and converts substances cooked in it to dangerous organ-toxic and carcinogenic products. Micro ovens are far more harmful than previously imagined. Listed are the many findings of the German and Russian investigators. Here are just a few:

Cancer Causing Effects — Creation of a ‘binding effect’ to radioactivity in the atmosphere, creation of cancer-causing agents within protein hydrolysate compounds, malfunctions within the lymphatic systems, higher percentage of cancerous cells within the blood serum, cancer-causing free radicals, stomach and intestinal cancerous growths, with a gradual breakdown of the function of the digestive and excretive systems.
Decrease In Food Value — Microwave exposure caused significant decreases in the nutritive value of all foods researched. There was a decrease in bioavailability of B-complex vitamins, vitamin C, vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropics in all foods, a loss of 60 to 90% of the vital energy field of all tested foods, and a marked acceleration of structural disintegration in all foods.
Biological Effects of Exposure — Breakdown of the human “life-energy field,” degeneration and circuit breakdowns within the front portion of the brain where thought and higher functions reside, loss of balance, long term cumulative loss of vital energy and long-lasting residual effects.
In America, neither universities nor the federal government have conducted any tests concerning the effects on our bodies from eating microwaved foods. Isn’t that odd?

Ten reasons to throw out your Microwave oven (taken from research):

1. Continually eating food processed from a microwave oven causes long term, permanent, brain damage by ‘shorting out” electrical impulses in the brain (de-polarizing or de-magnetizing the brain tissue).
2. The human body cannot metabolize (breakdown) the unknown by-products created in microwaved food.
3. Male and female hormone production is shut down and/or altered by continually eating microwaved foods.
4. The effects of microwaved food by-products are residual (long term, permanent) within the human body.
5. Minerals, vitamins, and nutrients of all microwaved food is reduced or altered so that the human body gets little or no benefit, or the human body absorbs altered compounds that cannot be broken down.
6. The minerals in vegetables are altered into cancerous free radicals when cooked in microwave ovens.
7. Microwaved foods cause stomach and intestinal cancerous growths (tumors). This may explain the rapid increased rate of colon cancer in America.
8. The prolonged eating of microwaved foods causes cancerous cells to increase in human blood.
9. Continual ingestion of microwaved food causes immune system deficiencies through lymph gland and serum alterations.
10. Eating microwaved food causes loss of memory, concentration, emotional instability, and a decrease of intelligence.
Editor's comment: The use of artificial microwave transmissions for subliminal psychological control, ‘brainwashing,’ has also been proven. Clinical experiments have been written up by Drs. Luria and Perov.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Microwave cooking is an important cause of ill health, and its effects are mostly ignored. The violent change that microwaving causes to the food molecules forms new life forms called radiolytic compounds, which are mutations that are unknown in the natural world. Ordinary cooking also causes the formation of some radiolytic compounds, but microwaving cooking causes a much greater number. This then causes deterioration in your blood and immune system. In addition, it was found that the number of leukocytes increases after eating microwaved food, something which hematologists take very seriously because this is often a sign of highly harmful effects, such as poisoning. Cholesterol levels increase after eating microwaved foods. In summary: Blanc and Hertel found that eating microwaved food: increases cholesterol, increases white blood cell numbers, decreases red blood cell numbers, and causes production of radiolytic compounds (compounds unknown in nature). Editor's comment: For those who are interested, there is a long list of effects from microwaves observed by Russian forensic teams.

I see clients for sessions of kinesiology (muscle testing), and correct the problems I find. I found that when ‘fixing’ or ‘correcting’ the electrical circuits of those who ate microwaved foods, they soon were out of balance again. However, this was not true of those who did not eat microwaved food. I gave this a higher priority than any of the things that are normally considered as health risks, such as alcohol or cigarettes. I began to tell my client on the first visit that under NO circumstance were they to ever do microwaved cooking again. David Bridgman, a kinesiologist with many years experience said, “Of all the people I test for allergies, so far 99.9% show severe sensitivity to any microwaved food.” Be aware that many restaurants use microwaved cooking, even ‘health food’ restaurants. Some of the information from this Web site on microwaved food is published in an eight volume lawyer's encyclopedia which is used by lawyers who sue in medical cases. Some of this can be seen this Web site for those who are interested. Also much of the information on this Web site is from the 1994 edition of Acres magazine, USA, by Tom Valentine. Information on irradiated foods and labeling laws may be found at Public Citizen - www.citizen.org. Irradiation is not the same as microwaving, but they are similar in that both use unnatural frequencies to alter food.

Our society runs pretty much on money, and there is no money in telling people to stop using microwave cooking. The multinational companies who make microwaves make a lot of money from the sale of microwave ovens. There is, however, the satisfaction and happiness from knowing that you are saving people’s lives by spreading the word to stop eating microwaved foods.

Various Studies on Microwave Cooking

There are very few studies on microwave cooking and food quality, and what studies exist are all bad news for microwaving: they universally describe some type of damage. One study showed a breakdown of vitamin B-12 to inactive degradation products in microwaved foods. The magazine, “Health and Healing Wisdom” reports that Russian research concerning neurological effects of altered magnetic states of microwaved foods caused the government to outlaw all microwave apparatus in 1976. Editor's comment: I don’t know if the ban still exists. Another study showed depletion of antibodies and breakdown of enzymes when breast milk is microwaved.

There is also a problem with release of potentially toxic molecules into the food from packaging designed to help brown food during microwaving. This includes items such as pizza, French fries, waffles, popcorn and breaded fish — and these findings were determined by the FDA!

The most controlled (and scary) research was almost suppressed from public knowledge before being published. Two Swiss researchers sequestered subjects under close scrutiny and blood tests were conducted after the subjects randomly ate food that was either microwaved or conventionally cooked. They found all sorts of potentially nasty stuff:

Blood hemoglobin levels decreased significantly after ingesting microwaved foods, both total levels and the amount contained in each red blood cell.
White blood cell levels tended to increase for no other reason than foods were microwaved.
Microwaves altered protein molecules.
LDL cholesterol (the ‘bad’ type) increased relative to HDL cholesterol (the ‘good’ type).
The researchers were immediately sued by the “Swiss Association of Dealers for Electroapparatuses for Households and Industry,” and one of the authors was convicted by the Swiss Federal Court of “interfering with commerce.” The fine was the equivalent of $65,000. Editor's comment: So, the message is that you think twice before stepping on too many big-money toes.

Also in this same e-Alert: HSI Panelist Ann Louise Gittleman, PhD, CNS, gave objections to microwaves because of their tendency to heat foods unevenly, indicating that some of the food is not sufficiently heated to kill all the bacteria or parasites that might be present. This uneven heating also creates hot spots in foods that release synthetic estrogens found in certain plastics. But even when only using glass (Pyrex) containers, Dr. Gittleman feels that low levels of radiation escaping from the ovens may be harmful, and cautions against standing in front of a microwave unit while in use. Since the consensus for microwave ovens is not very positive, it would seem the safest use of microwaves might be as a cooking aid (for defrosting, heating liquids, etc.) rather than as a method for primary cooking. Editor's comment: Many references are given in this report if wanted.

The anthroposophist A. Bohmert, reported the following discovery in one of her presentations. Water samples were heated, some in a microwave oven and others conventionally, and then left to cool before use. These water samples were used to bring grain to germination. The grain in contact with microwaved water was the only one that did not geminate. In 1973, two American scientists, P. Czerski and W.M. Leach, proved that microwaves caused cancer in animals. The American National Council for Radiation Protection (NCRP) announced at the end of the 80's, that children of mothers exposed to using microwave ovens were found to have an increased rate of malformations. In the early 1990's a hospital in Minneapolis, Minnesota, distributed pamphlets warning people against using microwave ovens to heat infant formulas because they altered the food. In 1991, a patient in a hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma, died of anaphylaxis after receiving a blood transfusion for which the blood had been warmed in a microwave oven. Apparently the microwave irradiation had altered the blood causing the patient’s death. In that very same year the New England Medical Center in Boston stated that the structural and functional integrity of erythrocytes (red blood cells) remained unaltered by microwaving. But then what killed the patient? A further study on milk, conducted in Vienna, showed microwave treatment induced high racemization rates in food proteins which were not observed after conventional cooking.

Significant and disturbing changes in the blood of the individuals consuming microwaved milk and vegetables were found by Raum and Zelt in 1992. One study doesn’t provide positive proof, but it certainly raises enough warning flags to support a recommendation of “don’t use until safety is proved.” A bit of common sense is also indicated. A ‘steady diet’ of microwaved food is more likely to cause health problems than very occasional consumption.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When anyone microwaves food, the oven exerts a power input of about 1,000 watts or more. This radiation results in destruction and deformation of molecules of food, and causes the formation of new compounds (called radiolytic compounds) unknown to man and nature. Microwaving produces more of these compounds than do broiled, baked or other conventional ways of cooking, and the increased leukocytes (white blood cells) with the microwaved foods was more pronounced than with all the other variants. From the Swiss study it is clear that something is amiss and larger studies should be funded.

In the journal Pediatrics, Apr. 1992, research appeared that warned that microwaving human milk, even at a low setting, can destroy some of its important disease-fighting capabilities. Pediatrician John A. Kerner, Jr. and his co-workers at Stanford University reported that breast milk that was microwaved lost lysozyme activity, antibodies, and fostered the growth of more potentially pathogenic bacteria. Adverse changes at such low temperatures suggest that microwaving itself may in fact cause some injury to the milk above and beyond the heating.

Unfortunately, further studies are not scheduled at this time. If there are so many indications that the effects of microwaves on foods can degrade the foods far above the known breakdowns of standard cooking, is it not reasonable to conduct exhaustive studies on living, breathing human beings to determine if it is possible that eating microwaved foods continually, as many people do can be significantly detrimental to individual health? If you wanted to introduce an herbal supplement into the American mainstream and make any health claims for it, you would be subjected to exhaustive documentation and costly research. Yet the microwave industry had only to prove that the dangerous microwaves could, indeed, be contained within the oven and not escape even in the best-made ovens. So far, not one thought has been given by the industry to the possibility that the nutrients could be so altered as to be deleterious to health. Are we going to continue to take it from established authority, without question, on the premise that they know best?

Radiolytic Compounds, Isomeric Changes, and Unnatural Compounds

A basic hypothesis of “natural medicine” states that the introduction into the human body of molecules and energies to which it is not accustomed is much more likely to cause harm than good. Microwaved food contains both molecules and energies not present in food cooked in the way humans have been cooking food for tens of thousands of generations. Microwave energy from the sun (and other stars) is “direct current” based. “Artificially” produced microwaves, including those in ovens, are produced from alternating current and force a billion or more polarity reversals per second in every food molecule they hit. Production of “unnatural molecules” is inevitable. Naturally occurring amino acids have been observed to undergo “isomeric” changes, as well as transformation into toxic forms, under the impact of microwaves produced in ovens.

Microwave ovens have become increasingly popular in the last decade, and clever advertising campaigns of industry and trade have made sure that consumers are well informed of the advantages of microwave ovens. Microwave cooking is timesaving, simple and more convenient as well as energy saving are the main sales arguments. In many medical practices patients are informed that microwaved food is practically free of microorganisms and is therefore recommendable. In a book about cancer and nutrition the Swiss Cancer League states that ‘gentle cooking’ in a microwave oven allows “only a little mutagen formation.” However, recent findings in research paint a different picture. Increasing numbers of consumers are beginning to suspect that microwaves are anything but harmless.

Microwave cooking creates unique molecules, never before found in nature, called ‘radiolytic byproducts’ that are likely to cause health problems if continuously consumed, especially over decades of time. They are likely to be harmful to growing children.

Reheating foods in a microwave oven probably doesn’t damage them, but if you cook protein-containing foods for more than 10 minutes, the microwave radiation might alter the chemistry of the proteins in unhealthy ways. The problem is not free radicals but deformed protein molecules, which have an unknown effect on health. Therefore, I recommend using the microwave only for defrosting or reheating foods rather than cooking.

Effect on Nutrients and Food Value

A nutrition book published in 2203 states that for most nutrients, microwave heating minimizes losses compared to traditional cooking methods. Such is not the case for vitamin B-12. Microwave heating inactivates vitamin B-12. To preserve this vitamin, use the oven or stovetop instead of the microwave to cook meats and milk products (major sources of vitamin B-12). Many elderly are at risk of B-12 deficiency and shouldn’t microwave meat, milk, eggs or B-12 fortified foods, unless they only occasionally microwave or are getting B-12 in a supplement or fortified cereal.

Few people realize that many of the vitamins in food are rapidly being destroyed by cooking. Even fewer know that microwaving destroys vitamins five times more quickly than does regular cooking. After just six minutes of microwaving, nearly half of the vitamin B-12 was destroyed when a Japanese dietitian measured the levels after microwaving. Vitamin B-12 was singled out for study since it is of vital importance in helping to prevent several major diseases that become more common as we grow older, including arteriosclerosis (cholesterol deposits in arteries), heart attacks and strokes. It is now also now understood that B-12 deficiency is one of several factors that together often cause dementia (such as Alzheimer’s disease) in older people. Since cooking destroys vitamin B-12, and since older people have trouble absorbing it anyway, experts now recommend that adults take a 1 mg (1,000 micrograms) tablet of vitamin B-12 daily. This greatly overcomes the difficulty older people have in absorbing it. Even at this dosage, vitamin B-12 is harmless, inexpensive, and obtainable without a prescription.

Microwaving causes the cells of the nutrients to become destructively polarized, and free radicals can be created, and all radicals have a strong tendency to cause reactions and may interact with enzymes causing a disruption of biological processes. At the end of the 1970's a forensic research document was released in the United States containing alarming findings on the destruction of the nutritive value of foods, development of cancer-causing agents, and direct biological effects of exposure by microwave emission on humans.

Microwaving is the biggest culprit in destroying cancer-fighting compounds in your vegetables, says a new study in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. Microwaved broccoli loses 97 percent, 74 percent, and 87 percent of the three major antioxidant compounds (flavonoids, sinapics and caffeoyl-quinic derivatives). By comparison, steamed broccoli loses only 11 percent, 0 percent and 8 percent of the very same antioxidants. To retain nutrients, veggies should be cooked in a minimum amount of water, as in steaming, since most bioactive compounds are water-soluble, says Dr. Cristina Garcia-Viguera, co-author of the study. The authors note that how food is prepared and cooked may be just as important as what is eaten.

Safe Exposure Levels

No one really knows what are safe levels of exposure to microwaves. Several American laboratories have found that low-level exposure to microwaves can cause cumulative effects to the eyes, resulting in cataracts. Research also reports a reduction in personnel efficiency, and even a possible link to cancer. In as much as the significance for humans of repeated exposure to low levels of microwave radiation is still unclear, there is enough evidence to warrant certain commonsense precautions:

Stay at least an arm's length away from an operating microwave oven.
Do not operate an oven when it is empty.
Do not operate an oven if the door will not close properly or is damaged in any way.
Never tamper with the safety interlock switches or the fuse.

In the western part of the world the detrimental effects of microwaves on biological systems have at least been known since their first application during the last world war. Russian scientists had already conducted research in the 1930's on the effects of microwaves on the nervous systems of humans and animals. Their findings led to very strict safety measures which, however, were not taken seriously by western scientists (who in 1960's still used threshold values a thousand times higher than those of the Russians). In the late 1980's a study on domestic microwave ovens was conducted in Washington, DC as well as two other states. It revealed that microwave emission during thawing, cooking, and grilling processes was one-quarter higher than the official threshold value of the 10 mW/cm standard established by the electrical industry. A product test revealed that 24 of the 30 tested microwave ovens were considered too dangerous and had to be withdrawn from the market. Microwave emission of these ovens reached values up to 20 mW/cm . The largest manufacturer of microwave appliances, the Raytheon Company (that also supplies industrial enterprises and canteens with cooking and drying appliances) assured the committee that all their devices were fitted with ample safety measures. Furthermore, they stated, that microwaves, unlike X-rays, don’t have a cumulative effect. However, a renowned university professor from Berlin wrote the following: “We have proven beyond doubt that microwaves hitting the eye have the following damaging effect: repeated short microwave radiation which itself is not painful and shows no ill effects in the beginning, leads in the case of frequently repeated exposure to lasting eye damage. Thus this non-ionizing radiation has a dangerous cumulative effect.”

The same also applies to domestic microwave ovens. A housewife unknowingly exposed day by day to microwave emission from an oven installed at eye level may acquire serious eye damage or even go blind. Those areas of the body with low circulation, respectively with a low cooling effect, generally react more sensitively to microwaves because the rise in temperature is greater than in areas with good blood circulation. The most sensitive part of the body is the lens. In 1990, during a microwave oven testing program conducted by the Berlin Foundation for Product Tests, it was found that all of the tested ovens emitted microwaves while in operation. According to some scientific research, proteins, fatty acids, vitamins, etc., are not changed. Nevertheless, histological studies with microwaved carrots and broccoli have revealed that the molecular structures of nutrients are deformed by high frequency reversal of polarity, even up to the point of destroying the cell walls, whereas in conventional cooking the cell structures remain intact.

The consumer is led to believe in the safety of these devices, which is based on threshold values and standards laid down by so-called experts. The research findings presented to support their issue do not withstand closer scrutiny and prove, more often than not, to be nothing but eyewash. In Germany, for example, the safety standards are laid down by the VDE Committee which is made up of 18 members, of which 15 are representatives of industry! They even stoop so low as to forge expert’s opinions in their favor as well as indulging in other forms of fraud.

One single meal heated in a microwave oven does not kill us, but after a prolonged intake such microwaved food will cause so many blockages in the body that it will start to rebel. One day the world will wake up to the fact that microwaves do cause cancer, and are even worse than cigarettes. Microwaved food causes a slow death.

Microwaving - Bottle/Breast Milk

The high temperatures can destroy the substances in human milk that help prevent infection and boost your baby’s immune system. Frozen breast milk can be thawed slowly in the refrigerator or quickly in a bowl of warm water; if refrigerated, hold the container under warm running water.

Microwave cooking uses an entirely different process than an external, non-electromagnetic heat source: the water molecules within food are vibrated in a field of intense electromagnetic energy. On theory alone we should be cautious about microwave cooking, but there haven’t been many scientific studies on the subject. One that I know of, researchers discovered that microwaving infant formula for 10 minutes altered the structure of its component amino acids in ways that could possibly result in functional, structural and immunological abnormalities in infants consuming it. One of these altered amino acids has been proven to be toxic to the kidneys, liver and nervous system.

Microwaving destroys some of the critical disease fighting capabilities in human milk, eliminating a key reason people choose breast milk over formula. As with food, microwaving creates unpredictable hot spots that can burn a baby’s mouth.

Consequences of Uneven Cooking

Microwaves do not cook evenly: For example, frozen hamburgers, fish, and warmed-up dishes all may have cool areas in them that could promote the growth of pathogens. Live unkilled microbes may remain to grow in an unrefrigerated dish.

Although the FDA says EMF levels from new microwave ovens are safe, all microwaves leak EMF radiation. If you drop or overheat your oven, it may leak more, and a damaged or aging oven should be checked and repaired. When the oven is in use, stay back six feet or more.

According to the American Journal of Epidemiology, CDC in Atlanta, nuking leftover food is not as good as reheating it in an oven or a frying pan. An outbreak of Salmonella typhimurium in Juneau, Alaska, was traced to food taken home in ‘doggie bags.’ While 30 people had taken home doggie bags only ten became sick. These ten had reheated their food in a microwave oven, while those who used a conventional oven or frying pan did not.

Micowave Cooking in Plastic Containers

Do not heat food containing fat in a microwave using plastic containers because the combination of fat, high heat and plastics releases dioxins and other toxins into the food and ultimately into your cells. Dioxins are carcinogens and highly toxic.

After researchers studied several commercial plastic containers, compounds such as methylbenzene, ethylbenzene, 1-octene, xylene, styrene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene were found in all of them. Also, the increased output power of modern microwave ovens can cause overheating.

Although cooking of raw foods in a microwave targets an acceptable end product for touch, taste and smell, the process does not address the microbiological safety of the cooked food. Microwave ovens from various commercial suppliers were used to cook naturally contaminated whole raw broiler and roaster chickens according to manufacturers’ instructions. Many of the roasters yielded visible Listeria bacteria after microwave cooking.

One of the ways to decrease exposure to harmful chemicals, and all the scientists agree, is don’t microwave in plastic.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don’t microwave food in plastic takeout cartons, as they may release chemicals into food when heated. Even plastic containers labeled “microwave safe” are best used only for reheating. For longer cooking, use a bowl or baking dish made of heatproof glass.

In Robert O. Becker’s book “The Body Electric,” he described Russian research on the health effects of microwave radiation, which they called, “microwave sickness.” Microwave ovens not only cook food, but also the intense heat may also cook food containers. Thus, analysis of microwaved food sometimes reveals the presence of toxic chemicals, and one of these substances can even cause cancer. To protect yourself from this danger, never cook food or heat liquids in any packaging or plastic dish unless you know that it is microwavable. When in doubt, microwave food in glass ovenware or Corning ware instead. It would be safer not to keep old microwaved dishes since they might be safe for only one-time use only.

Some experts think using a plastic container that wasn’t designed to be microwaved may hurt your health. Even if there is no perceptible change in the appearance of the container, certain molecules in the plastic may still gather enough energy during the heating process to migrate to the food inside. Among the migratory molecules at issue are plasticizers, chemicals added during the manufacturing process to make rigid plastic more pliable. Some scientists are concerned about plasticizers’ unknown effects inside the body.

Susan Brewster, PhD, Associate Professor of Food Chemistry at the University of Illinois, and others, worry about the possibility that certain plasticizers could act as endocrine disrupters, which means they can potentially mimic or compete with human hormones. If they do, then that could affect such things as fertility or someone’s risk of getting cancer. Here are some tips for safer microwaving:

Remove food from its packaging before defrosting or cooking in a microwave.
Plastic wrap, freezer cartons, and Styrofoam meat trays are not heat-stable. It is okay to microwave a container of food with a plastic wrap on top ™ just don’t let the wrap touch the food.
Don’t reheat leftovers in containers intended for cold foods like margarine, whipped topping, or soft cheese.
Trays or containers that come with microwavable convenience foods, like frozen dinners, are intended for one use only. Do not reuse them.
Glass, wax paper, parchment and oven cooking bags are generally safe to use in the microwave ™ check manufacturer’s directions.
If you prefer to use plastic containers, make sure they are labeled as safe for microwave use.

Superheating

Water can be “superheated” in a microwave without forming bubbles. However, when the cup is moved, then bubbles form and the liquid can “explode.” To prevent this, put a wooden spoon or stick in the cup when boiling it, or let the cup sit in the microwave for at least 30 seconds before removing it. Never put your face or hand directly above the cup.

In the August 13, 1998 New England Journal of Medicine, doctors described two patients who had chest pain that turned out to be caused by a burned esophagus from drinking microwave-heated beverages and soup. The pain stopped when they stopped drinking the microwaved liquids and let the burns heal. If no cause is found for chest pain, tell your doctor if you regularly drink hot liquids.

Air Fresheners May Harm Lung Function

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:43:10 +0100

EnviRN
August 26,2006

Study: Air Freshener May Harm Lungs
by Catherine Clabby, Raleigh-Durham News & Observer
July 28, 2006
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/465231.html

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK -- Those deodorant blocks hung in workplace bathrooms might do more than mask odors. They might harm people's lungs. Researchers at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, based in Research Triangle Park, found that people with elevated levels of 1,4-dichlorobenzene, once common in such air fresheners, were more likely to have impaired lung function.The research, using data collected years ago, doesn't make an airtight cause-and-effect case. But it could be reason enough for some people to avoid all products containing the chemical, said Dr. Stephanie London, the senior NIEHS scientist in the study. "These are optional things you may just choose to live without. It's not like they are essential to life," said London, a physician who studies the genetic and environmental roots of asthma and other lung ailments.

A trade group whose clients include air-freshener manufactures, however, said Thursday that this study could distort more than inform. Companies that produce so-called urinal blocks already are abandoning 1,4-dichlorobenzene, which easily vaporizes from a solid form, said Andy Hackman of the Consumer Specialty Products Association. Makers of home air fresheners stopped using the chemical about 10 years ago, he said. "To a large extent, it's irrelevant to today's products," Hackman said, with one exception being some air fresheners that drivers hang from rearview mirrors.

The NIEHS says the chemical also can be present in some mothball products.When London and colleagues, including NIEHS epidemiologist Leslie Elliott, dug into old data collected to evaluate risks from volatile organic compounds, they saw good reason to suspect harm from 1,4-dichlorobenzene. As blood concentrations of the chemical increased, lung function declined, according to blood and breathing tests conducted between 1988 and 1994.

The harm wouldn't disable healthy people, but it could have noticeable effects on people already living with lung deficiencies, much like consistent exposure indoors to secondhand cigarette smoke, London said.From London's point of view, the particulars merit more study. Elliott, whom London supervises, is applying for funding for experiments that would test the lung function of participants, expose them to low levels of 1,4-dichlorobenzene and then check to see whether breathing worsened. Insight into the action of this chemical might shed light on impacts of other volatile organic compounds, which are still found in many products in people's homes, London said. Those include some paints, cleaning supplies, building materials, even upholstered furniture. "I'm not saying people should run out and panic. But if you are the kind of person like me who likes to limit your exposure, this is something you should think about," London said.

Household Cleaning Products May Be Harmful

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:42:02 +0100

Sweet-smelling Rooms Come at a Price

by Suzanne Ma, Toronto Globe and Mail
July 27, 2006

Chemicals found in some household cleaning products may be harming your lungs. New research from that a chemical compound found in many air fresheners, toilet bowl cleaners, mothballs, and other deodorizing products may reduce lung function. According to the NIEHS, "even a small reduction in lung function may indicate some harm to the lungs." It's suggested the use of such products and materials are reduced, especially around children and those who have asthma or other respiratory illnesses.

"Consumers need to be aware of what they're introducing into their homes," said Sarah Winterton, program director for Environmental Defence, a non-profit environmental advocacy group in Canada. "You're in a more enclosed environment ... so there is a concern about having constant exposure to low levels of these chemicals from many different sources." Researchers tested a representative sample of 953 adults in the United States, paying close attention to the relationship between blood concentrations of 11 common volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and their lung function.

The compounds are found in thousands of commonly used products, including tobacco smoke, pesticides, paints, and cleansers, as well as vehicle exhaust. the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Services (NIEHS) suggests that a chemical compound found in many air fresheners, toilet bowl cleaners, mothballs, and other deodorizing products may reduce lung function. According to the NIEHS, "even a small reduction in lung function may indicate some harm to the lungs." It's suggested the use of such products and materials are reduced, especially around children and those who have asthma or other respiratory illnesses."Consumers need to be aware of what they're introducing into their homes," said Sarah Winterton, program director for Environmental Defence, a non-profit environmental advocacy group in Canada. "You're in a more enclosed environment ... so there is a concern about having constant exposure to low levels of these chemicals from many different sources." Researchers tested a representative sample of 953 adults in the United States, paying close attention to the relationship between blood concentrations of 11 common volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and their lung function.

The compounds are found in thousands of commonly used products, including tobacco smoke, pesticides, paints, and cleansers, as well as vehicle exhaust.One particular VOC (known as 1,4 DCB) was associated with reduced pulmonary function, even after careful adjustment for tobacco smoke. 1,4 DCB is a white solid compound with a distinctive aroma, similar to mothballs. It is typically used in products such as room deodorizers and urinal and toilet bowl blocks. 1,4 DCB blood concentration levels were detected in 96 per cent of those tested for the study.

Black Americans had the highest exposure levels and non-Hispanic whites the lowest. Even though only one VOC was found to affect our lungs, Ms. Winterton said it's the repeated exposure that makes this a cause for concern. "You've got exposure when you plug in your air freshener, and when you clean the toilet, and then [again] when you go to the closet to get some clothes that are protected in moth balls. It's never just one exposure," she said. Environmental Defence suggests that consumers look into buying alternative products found in health food stores. "I think it's important that the connection is made in people's minds that if you're using products with these chemicals in them, they're very likely going to end up in you," Ms. Winterton said.In May, Health Canada announced a national program that will track the levels of toxic substances in the bodies of Canadians. A representative sample of people will be tested on a regular basis to detect trends in the chemicals that show up in their bodies and in their health status. The study, long advocated by scientists, is set to begin in 2007. The research from the NIEHS study will be published in the August issue of Environmental Health Perspectives.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060727.w2fresh0727/BNStory/specialScienceandHealth/home

Common Pollutant Eyed In Cancer Study

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:41:08 +0100

by John Heilprin, Associated Press
July 27, 2006

Growing scientific evidence suggests the most widespread industrial contaminant in drinking water -- a solvent used in adhesives, paint and spot removers -- can cause cancer in people.

The National Academy of Sciences reported Thursday that a lot more is known about the cancer risks and other health hazards from exposure to trichloroethylene than there was five years ago when the Environmental Protection Agency took steps to regulate it more strictly. "Armed with the results from the NAS review, EPA will aggressively move forward" on a new risk assessment of TCE, spokeswoman Jennifer Wood said Thursday. "EPA will determine whether or not to address the drinking water standard once the risk assessment is complete."TCE, which is also widely used to remove grease from metal parts in airplanes and to clean fuel lines at missile sites, is known to cause cancer in some laboratory animals. EPA was blocked from elevating its assessment of the chemical's risks in people by the Defense Department, Energy Department and NASA, all of which have sites polluted with it. TCE is a colorless liquid that evaporates at room temperatures and has a somewhat sweet odor and taste. It is one of the most common pollutants found in the air, soil and water at U.S. military bases. Until the mid-1970s, it also was used as a surgical anesthetic. It also has been found at about 60 percent of the nation's worst contaminated sites in the Superfund cleanup program, the academy said.Its 379-page report recommends that EPA revise its assessment of TCE's risks using "currently available data" so no more time is wasted. That's a step that could lead to stricter regulations. EPA currently requires limiting TCE to no more than 5 parts per billion parts of drinking water.

A stricter regulation could, in turn, force the government to require more thorough cleanups at military and other sites.Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., said the report should prompt the government to move faster in cleaning up TCE contamination like that found in his home state and nationally. "It is no longer acceptable for the government and local polluters to claim that health risks associated with TCE are simply scientific theory when we know that they are compelling scientific fact," said Hinchey, who is on the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the environment.

A committee of academy experts said "a large body of epidemiologic data is available" on TCE showing the chemical is a possible cause of kidney cancer, reproductive and developmental damage, impaired neurological function and autoimmune disease. "The committee found that the evidence on carcinogenic risk and other health hazards from exposure to trichloroethylene has strengthened since 2001," the report said. "Hundreds of waste sites are contaminated with trichloroethylene, and it is well documented that individuals in many communities are exposed to the chemical, with associated health risks."In 2001, EPA issued a draft document saying the risks of TCE causing cancer in humans were higher than previously thought. But that pronouncement was dropped after other federal agencies accused EPA of inflating the risks. To mediate the issue, the Bush administration asked the academy to study the issue.The Institute for Children's Environmental Health is a nonprofit educational organization working to ensure a healthy, just and sustainable future for all children. ICEH's primary mission is to foster collaborative initiatives to reduce and ultimately eliminate environmental exposures that can undermine the health of current and future generations.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/07/27/national/w112745D80.DTL&type=politicsWASHINGTON (AP) --

Reduce Your Carbon Emissions and Offset the Rest

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:40:10 +0100

Did you know that a full ton of CO2 is emitted from every 6,000 miles in a hybrid, or from every 1,350 miles in a large SUV?
Roughly, that same amount is emitted when weFly 2,000 miles in a plane.

REFRIGERATORS: Keep in mind that refrigerators run 24-7, and account for about 25 percent of household energy use. To ensure your fridge is working efficiently, do the "dollar test." Close the fridge's door onto a dollar bill and check to see how much effort it takes for you to pull it out. If it comes out easily, the seal isn't tight enough: It's leaking cold air and needs to be fixed. Another step: Open the fridge door and let go. If it doesn't shut by itself, it needs to be re-stabilized. Shift the whole fridge until it's level and try it again. If your fridge is over 10 years old, consider replacing it with an Energy Star-graded one. These appliances are identified for being the most energy efficient in their category; you'll save around 9 percent off your electric bill each month with an Energy Star model. Plus, old refrigerators are easily recyclable; harmful gases and chemicals are safely taken out and all the metal parts are removed by magnets and recycled into new metal products. (Read More...)

DISHWASHERS: Believe it or not, using your dishwasher is a greener choice than washing by hand. The Bosch dishwasher is an example of a leaner, greener washing machine that not only uses the least amount of water to get your dishes clean, but has smart technology to dry everything as efficiently as possible. If you can't replace your dishwasher, here's a tip: Run full loads only (to save water) and let everything air dry after the final rinse. Just open the door and let the steam condense right off.

CLEANING: Germs be gone! When you need to disinfect a kitchen or bathroom countertop of germs and bacteria, don't reach for toxic, chlorine bleach. Instead, consider rubbing alcohol. It kills germs and evaporates quickly. Or, use one of many non-toxic biodegradable all-purpose cleaning products, along with micro-fiber towels. They're a hotel housekeeper's secret weapon; million of microscopic fibers grip onto dirt and bacteria. They're also machine-washable and can be used over and over.

MINIMIZING DIRT: Stop wearing shoes inside your house. It's estimated that up to 80 percent of all household dirt is brought inside by shoes and clothes. You can cut down on allergy-causing dirt by doing what many Asian households do: Leave your shoes at the door. When guests come over, offer them a cozy pair of cashmere socks to make the ritual less demanding, and more inviting.

Another important factor: According to the Environmental Protection Agency, shoes worn in homes are a leading source of harmful lead, brought into the house via contaminated soil. You can drastically reduce this by leaving shoes at the door. Place them on a stack of newspaper so they can absorb excess dirt and moisture.

HOME OFFICES: Your computer is a real energy hog, so be sure to remove the screen saver. When the flying toasters are running across the screen, your machine is still working at full power. Instead, put your PC on sleep mode. Just hit a key to "wake up" the computer. PS: Make sure your co-workers aren't leaving their computers on all night long. Make it a corporate policy to have all computers shut down at the end of the work day.

Also, in the average household, home office equipment such as printers, cell phones and Blackberries are using electricity if they're plugged into an outlet, even when they're turned off. This is called a phantom load. Instead of plugging and unplugging your appliances, plug them all into a surge protector and turn it off on the strip. That way, there'll be no more wasted electricity.

JUNK MAIL: Even after signing up to have your name taken off direct marketer lists, those catalogs and CDs for online services still show up. Simply circle the return address and write "RETURN TO SENDER" on the mailer and pop it in the mailbox. It'll get returned to the sender, at their expense, and they'll get the message loud and clear to take your name off the list.

ELECTRONIC WASTE: Start a collection of electronic waste in your office today. Collect diskettes, CDs, zip disks, printer cartridges, orphaned cords and cables, and broken small computer accessories (e.g. digital cameras, handheld scanners). Box them up and send them to Green Disk. For a small fee, they'll recycle all the electronic waste in the box. Learn more at www.greendisk.com.

Eco Friendly Home

Eco Friendly Home

Summer Solstice and Magic Garden

About Me

Environmental Working Group Updates

Natural Cleaning Kit

7 Agents to Keep You Home Naturally Clean

1. Lemons or Lemon Juice

2. Baking Soda

3. Castile Soap

4. Borax or Boric Acid

5. White Vinegar

6. Washing Soda

7. Cornstarch

How to Identify Indoor Air Quality Problems

Greening Your Office in a Recession

Janet Ritz

CatalogChoice

Going Green: Plant-Filled Workplace a Healthy Move

Nurture Nature, Nurture Health: How to Survive In a Toxic Environment

The Journey To a Healing Home Environment

How to Have a Safe Clean House

On Eco-Friendly Car Washing

Aspartame Gets Rid of Ants

Dizzying Fumes At Nail Salons

New-car Smell Is Going Away: It's No Good For You

How Toxic Is Your Bathroom?

Asbestos Contamination: A National Issue

Health Alert - Safe Drinking Water

How Safe Are Microwaves?

Air Fresheners May Harm Lung Function

Household Cleaning Products May Be Harmful

by Suzanne Ma, Toronto Globe and MailJuly 27, 2006

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060727.w2fresh0727/BNStory/specialScienceandHealth/home

Common Pollutant Eyed In Cancer Study

Reduce Your Carbon Emissions and Offset the Rest

by Suzanne Ma, Toronto Globe and Mail
July 27, 2006