9.4 Heavy Metals

So I found that paper regarding lead to be extremely interesting. I feel like we are currently in the same position that we were in when lead was first linked to negative health outcomes. It took decades and clinically symptomatic individuals for lead to be banned in the U.S. 

Once again, it took clinically symptomatic individuals for lead to be banned and we now know that there are effects at lower doses that cause no symptoms! No symptoms! This is why I think we are again in the same position. I think most of the chemicals used today have effects at low doses that show no symptoms, yet we are going to wait for years until we have clinically symptomatic individuals before we do anything about it. 

9.3 Green Chemistry

Green chemistry seems great! How have I never heard of it before? Since I first started reading about chemicals, I have wondered why we haven't developed new safer alternatives. It's awesome to know that there is a field dedicated to it and that I just wasn't aware. I think the 12 principles of Green Chemistry and great, but I'm wondering what products have they created already if any? How long is the process of creating a new product? More importantly, how expensive is it?

9.2 Six Chemical Classes

Highly fluorinated chemicals (PFAS)

PFAS is a chemical that is found in our everyday products. They don't breakdown and can continue to accumulate throughout the years. When incorrectly disposed, PFAS can seep its way into waterways and soil, and eventually into our food and water. PFAS is linked to a variety of negative health outcomes, however the most interesting to me is that PFAS can make certain vaccines less effective. How is it legal for a chemical to be so readily used when it is so toxic to people and the environment? 

Antimicrobials

Antimicrobials are found in many of our soaps, and other everyday items. At first, antimicrobials seem like a necessity. However, according to the video antimicrobials can contribute to antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic resistance is a real problem that more people need to fear. We haven't had a new antibiotic in years, yet resistance continues to grow. What does this mean for our future? 

Flame Retardants

In the video of flame retardants, there was an example of two chairs burning, even though one had flame retardant material, it was burning at the same rate as the one without flame retardant, but what's even more interesting is that the flame retardant chair was releasing more smoke. I also found it super interesting that flame retardants have been linked to hyperactivity and low IQs in children. This makes me think back to the Louisville Charter about waiting to act before banning a chemical. If there is a link why can't we just ban certain chemicals until we can prove that the chemical is not directly harmful to life? 

Bisphenols and Phlatates 

This group of chemicals is known as hormone disruptors and is commonly found in everyday products. I also learned how although a product can claim to be BPA free, it can contain a similar chemical known as bisphenol s or f. This video was a great reminder of how terrible plastics are, and how much I should avoid them, and especially how much babies should avoid them. 

Solvents

This video especially hit home for me because I love to clean, and I am a sucker for products that smell "clean". Every single spray/cleaning product I use has some type of fragrance, and sometimes I overdo it. Luckily, I recently considered signing up for a delivery service that specializes in clean, environmentally friendly products, and now that I know what to look for, I feel like I can make the right choice. 

Certain metals

I love sushi, so I'm glad that salmon is a class of fish with lower mercury rates. Also, I have used skin lightening products in the past and had no idea they could contain mercury. 

8.4 Chemical

I am blogging about Background Paper #4: Act on Early Warnings 

This paper provides the background argument for Reform #4 in the Louisville Charter. 

The Louisville Charter is comprised of 6 reforms: 

1. Require Safer Substitutes

2. Phase Out Persistent, Bioaccumulative, or Highly Toxic Chemicals.

3. Give the Public and Workers the Full Right-To-Know.

4. Act on Early Warnings

5. Require Comprehensive Safety Data

6. Take Immediate Action to Protect Communities and Workers.

In this paper, the authors argue how crucial it is that we take action when early warning signs appear regarding a chemical and its harmful side effects. We have failed to do this in the past, and as a result, many people are living with the consequences of harmful exposure from DDT, asbestos, and PCBs to name a few. 

One key element for a good chemical policy, the authors mention, is how "[a] chemical policy system must put the health of people and ecosystems above all other considerations." This is something that resonates with me, because I am constantly arguing that we disregard the damage we are doing to both the environment, and people, in the name of profit. 

The authors mention how this proactive approach can be difficult since at times it may require to act when science is uncertain, but through epidemiological surveillance, medical observation, and other means we can develop credible evidence for harm and justify the action. 

Ideal Chemical Policy

I believe that an ideal chemical policy should have the following key elements: 

1. Public knowledge and awareness regarding chemicals

2. Vigorous premarket testing of chemicals (similar to the way we test pharmaceutical drugs)

3. EPA approval

4. Replacement of currently used highly toxic chemicals 

5. Protection of communities and workers at higher risk of pesticide exposure

I think chemical policy should take on a similar route as clinical testing, where instead of needing FDA approval, the chemical manufacturers would need EPA approval. When people are buying a pharmaceutical drug they are aware of the side effects associated with it, and they are aware that this product went through significant testing before reaching the shelf. Ultimately, it is up to the consumer to outweigh the risk and benefits and decide to use the product. I believe it should be the same for chemicals. 

I'm not saying pesticides should be tested on humans, I know that is unethical. However, if researchers used mouse models and discovered the mice had extreme side effects then this is something the consumer should be aware of. 

Based on our history, I am arguing for a proactive chemical policy. We should adopt a system where we make sure products are safe before they are released, rather than the one we have now, where we let years go by without taking action. 

8.3 Pesticides

What did you find out about the pesticide residues that may be in or on your food? What do you think about this? What should we be doing about this in terms of public health, not just in terms of our personal choices?

For dinner last night, my girlfriend and I made tacos. We had beef, avocado, salsa, and paired it with a kale salad. As I began to type this blog post I assumed that the kale salad would have the highest level of pesticides. I figured the avocado wouldn't be that bad, and beef didn't even cross my mind. I'm aware this might sound dumb, but I wasn't expecting to find beef on the list of What's on my Food website. I'm aware that some cows are treated with rbGH hormones, but I wasn't expecting beef to have levels of pesticides in it. I was shocked to find that beef has a springy large amount of pesticides in it. To my surprise, beef can contain carcinogenic, and hormone-disrupting pesticides. It can also have pesticides that cause developmental, reproductive and bee toxicity.

The avocado had 0 pesticides.Kale, on the other hand, had 55 potential pesticides. 55!That is absolutely insane!

This is an issue public health must tackle. While public health may not have the resources to fight against large pesticide companies, awareness is a good place to start. If more people were aware of the consequences then maybe they would make more of an effort to buy organic. This leads me to a depressing thought: what about the people who can't afford to buy organic? I am especially concerned for women who are trying to become pregnant and are dedicating so much time to eating healthier. If they choose the wrong foods, they are potentially unknowingly increasing their intake of developmental and reproductive toxins. 

M7.8 Literature Review

What agencies at the local, state, federal, and/or international level provide information, regulatory oversight, or are otherwise implicated in addressing that topic?


There are two topics I am considering for my literature review. First, is the relationship between environmental exposures and autism spectrum disorder. Another option is the relationship between certain environmental exposures and obesity.

Some of the agencies that would provide oversight for these topics would be the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Also local and state-level public health departments. I have been interested in obesity since before I started graduate school, however the recent literature that has been released examing the correlation between air pollution and autism spectrum disorder has really peaked my interest.

M 7.4

http://www.acgov.org/aceh/index.htm


The Alameda Department of Public Health has an environmental health branch that specifically deals with environmental issues that affect the public. This includes issues such as water contamination, food recalls, housing complaints, waste, and other issues.

The website is an umbrella resource for people looking to get more information on specific issues, such as whom to contact for complaints and concerns. The homepage also features local environmental news.
A lot of the news on the Alameda Environmental Health website is news from the county or state department of public health. Currently, most of the news is related to norovirus outbreaks or food contamination.

The website also has a special section for a list of healthy nail salons. I found this to be super interesting. The most interesting part was that there are only ten nail salons on the list. I'm not exactly sure how many nail salons are within Alameda county but considering there are 19 cities within Alameda County I know for a fact it's way more than ten.

M7.7

I chose to examine the Bureau of Land Management which is under the direction of the U.S. Department of the Interior. 

The Bureau of Land Management manages millions of acres of public land in the U.S.They are responsible for the approval of commercial, recreational, and conservation use of public lands. This means they are effectively responsible for a great deal of environmental quality, especially for tribal groups living on public lands. 

In recent years the Bureau of Land Management has faced a lot of backlash for approving certain commercial leases on public lands. People allege that these leases have a direct and indirect impact on the surrounding environment. The impact includes the release of greenhouse emissions as a result of these gas and oil commercial leases. 

The Bureau of Land Management website boasts about being environmentally responsible; however, environmental groups allege that the BLM has a track record of ignoring climate impacts. 

I feel like this is directly correlated to our current administration. Under the current administration, there have been plenty of rollbacks on climate regulations. If the BLM has the power to prioritize commercial interests over the public, then the BLM has the power to directly affect the environmental quality for those who live among it.