Search Results

Changing weather patterns and wildfire smoke are changing the way medical professionals look at health. This week on Green Street, Patti and Doug talk about the EPA’s long delay in regulating perchlorate, a chemical now contaminating our food and water, how the air in New York subways far exceeds health standards, and the problem with using recycled plastic for food packaging. Then medical doctor and PhD researcher Mary Johnson of the TH Chan School of Public Health at Harvard University talks about climate change, and how new weather patterns are impacting our health.  Links from the Show Study: Association of Short-Term Increases in Ambient Fine Particulate Matter With Hospitalization for Asthma or COPD During Wildfire Season and Other Time Periods. Horne BD, Johnson MM, Blagev DP, Haddad F, Knowlton KU, Bride D, Bair TL, Joy EA, Nadeau KC. Mary Johnson Profile: https://connects.catalyst.harvard.edu/Profiles/display/Person/214922 Links from the News Rocket fuel chemical in your food? https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2024/08/15/consumer-reports-rocket-fuel-chemical-perchlorate-food-water/74783445007/ NYC Subway Riders See ‘Exceptionally High’ Air Pollution: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-07/new-york-city-subway-commuters-face-high-pm2-5-exposure Is recycled plastic safe for food contact? https://www.ehn.org/plastic-packaging-recycling-2668930675.html

Food companies aren't interested in your health. They're interested in your money. This week on Green Street, Patti and Doug talk about NY State banning neonic pesticides, lead in school drinking water, and how the Biden administration is interfering with regulations on baby formula in foreign countries. Then acclaimed author and NYU Professor Marion Nestle talks about how food companies market their foods and what it means for our health. Links from the Interview Marion Nestle's website: https://www.foodpolitics.com/ Links from the News NY State Bans Neonic Pesticides: https://www.nrdc.org/press-releases/governor-hochul-signs-first-nation-bill-limit-neonic-pesticides Biden Administration Interfering with Baby Formula Regulation: https://www.propublica.org/article/baby-formula-regulation-biden-administration-europe-taiwan

The manufacturers of PFAS, those "forever" chemicals, have known since the 1960s that their products were toxic to humans. Here's the whole story. This week on Green Street, Patti and Doug talk about why cell towers don’t belong on school property and the new US policy supporting a UN treaty to reduce plastic production. Then Dr. David Bond of Bennington College talks about the curse of PFAS - those “forever" chemicals that manufacturers have been producing for more than fifty years despite knowing that they are toxic to humans. Links from the interview: Dr. David Bond : https://www.bennington.edu/academics/faculty/david-bond Google Scholar link: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=EMA2hSoAAAAJ&hl=en Links from the news: School Board Committee Recommends Banning New Cell Phone Towers on School Grounds: https://www.loudountimes.com/0local-or-not/1local/school-board-committee-recommends-banning-new-cell-phone-towers-on-school-grounds/article_7a5cc64a-5446-11ef-9037-f7c1d76b435a.html The US says it now supports a more ambitious plastics treaty. Industry groups are furious: https://grist.org/regulation/us-supports-ambitious-plastics-treaty-production-limits-environmental-groups-industry-reactions/

Giant plastic fields of artificial turf are an environmental nightmare - toxic for humans and devastating for the environment. This week on Green Street Patti and Doug talk about why processed foods are so addictive, and how telecoms are getting rid of copper land lines. Then investigative reporters Barbara Laker and David Gambacorta talk about their series in the Philadelphia Inquirer about artificial turf and members of the Phillies baseball team who all developed brain cancer after years of playing on the field. Links from the interview: PFAS in Veterans Stadium turf: https://www.fox29.com/news/investigative-report-dangerous-chemicals-pfas-veterans-stadium-turf Barbara Laker: https://www.inquirer.com/author/laker_barbara/ David Gambacorta: https://www.inquirer.com/author/gambacorta_david/ Firefighters at risk of contact with forever chemicals: https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2024/01/wear-and-tear-may-cause-firefighter-gear-release-more-forever-chemicals PAH in car tires: https://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/03/pah-20q2.html Athletes are exposed to PFAS on artificial turf fields: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/15/athletes-higher-pfas-levels-artificial-turf Links from the news: Are ultra-processed foods as addictive as cigarettes?: https://lsa.umich.edu/psych/news-events/all-news/faculty-news/are-ultra-processed-foods-as-addictive-as-cigarettes-.html#:~:text=Highly%20processed%20foods%20are%20addictive,addiction%20to%20ultra%2Dprocessed%20foods . AT&T application to stop serving landline phones denied: https://apnews.com/us-news/california-at-t-inc-general-news-0696df6b89506bc0ed367866dbe00cca#:~:text=California's%20Public%20Utilities%20Commission%20rejected,California%20was%20“fatally%20flawed.”

Pesticides in popular lawn products are more dangerous than you may think. Among the daffodils, forsythia and flowering trees are the other harbingers of spring we have grown accustomed to – yellow pesticide warning flags dotting lawns across America.  Lawn service crews and do-it-yourselfers are performing the first chores of the season, including applications of a “weed and feed” product, a combination of fertilizer and weed killer. It is that time of year when homeowners are seeking to have the greenest, weed-free lawn in their neighborhood.  But long after the pesticide warning flags have been removed, there will still be residues of a highly toxic herbicide, and children and pets should stay off these lawns, not just for the 24 hours indicated on the warning flag, but at least until there has been a heavy rain.   Most consumers, and even some landscapers, are unaware that "weed" part of those innocuous looking bags of “lawn food” contains 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2, 4-D), one of two substances that were combined to create Agent Orange, a herbicide and defoliant chemical used extensively by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War.   The health effects from exposure to Agent Orange are numerous and still impacting Vietnamese families as well as U.S. service men and women.  On the Veterans Affairs website they list seven specific cancers or groups of cancers and seven other diseases associated with exposure to Agent Orange for which one can claim disability compensation.  They don’t list all the well documented birth defects that are found in the offspring of those exposed.    Manufacturers of pesticides would like us to believe that their products are safe, but common sense tells us that any product designed to kill living things is inherently dangerous. Unintended exposures in the form of run-off or drift, as well as granular pesticides being mistaken for food, impact many non-target species.  There are documented reports of wild bird deaths, pollinator die-offs, mutations in frogs, fish kills, poisoning and cancer in dogs and higher-than-normal cancer incidence in human populations near sites with high pesticide use.    Probably most disturbing are studies linking childhood diseases with pesticide exposures.  Children are uniquely vulnerable to toxins in their environment due to a variety of physiological and behavioral factors.  Due to their small size, children take in proportionally more air, water and anything else in the environment than adults.  They also have immature immune, detoxification and elimination systems which put them at greater risk. A child’s normal hand to mouth behavior increases their exposure, along with their natural tendency to play inside on floors or outside on the grass. Studies have shown that households with small children and pets have more pesticide residues in carpets and upholstered furniture, simply because pesticides are tracked indoors regularly on shoes and paws. So how can homeowners or their landscapers maintain lush, resilient lawns without any risk?  Not surprisingly, it turns out that nature has already figured this out. The answer lies in the fastest growing segment of the lawn care industry… natural lawn care.   Natural lawn care begins with a simple, inexpensive soil test. Just as a doctor wouldn't usually write a prescription without a blood test, a soil test is required to understand the condition of your soil biology, and tells you exactly what your lawn needs. The pH of your soil might be too high or too low. You might need more calcium or potassium. If your soil chemistry is out of whack, you won't be able to grow healthy grass without a steady diet of chemical inputs.   "Feed the soil" is the mantra of natural lawn managers, so you want to feed your soil microbes with the food they need to do their job. Applications of good compost or compost tea can stimulate those microbes to get busy providing nutrients to grass plants.   Apply a low-nitrogen fertilizer (12% or less) that contains water insoluble  nitrogen. This kind of fertilizer relies on your soil microbes to release nutrients, so it works over time, unlike fertilizers with mostly water soluble  nitrogen, which pollute both our ground and surface waters. Finally, mow high - anywhere from 2.5 to 3.5 inches. This gives grass plants more surface area for photosynthesis and shades the soil, discouraging weed seeds from germinating. Always leave grass clippings on the lawn; doing so can contribute up to a full pound of nitrogen per season.  And be sure to over-seed with a good quality blend of grass seed varieties in the fall and early spring.  Aeration is optional, but probably needed if you have high foot traffic.   Maintaining your lawn using natural methods can produce green, healthy plants with deep roots that resist drought and disease, and create a lawn surface perfect for children, pests and wildlife, all while protecting our health and our environment.

What do our clothes say about our environmental awareness? There are lots of things to consider when shopping for clothing.  Whether it’s a dress, suit, winter jacket, sweater, active wear or bathing suit, most people typically look for style and brand, but other considerations include color, fabric, buttons vs. zippers, fitted vs. comfortable, seams or no seams… and the list goes on.   But what do our clothes say about our environmental awareness? It’s probably unlikely that any of the following considerations ever cross the minds of most consumers:   Are cotton t-shirts organically grown or produced conventionally using prodigious amounts of pesticides and water? Are ski outfits treated with chemicals to make them waterproof?  Are baby socks impregnated with BPA? Do synthetic or silk blouses contain anti-static chemicals? Do wrinkle-free shirts contain formaldehyde?  Are sneakers treated with odor-and-bacteria-resistant antimicrobial chemicals?  Do bathing suits have chemical sunscreens embedded in their fabric?  Are synthetic fabrics really made from plastic?  For almost all of history, clothing has been made from agricultural or forestry products.  These natural fibers, including wool, cotton, linen, silk and hemp, come from continuous, regenerative natural cycles. But in the 1930’s, the world saw a sea change in the textile industry. In 1931 Dupont created nylon, a “miracle” fiber that was totally synthetic. DuPont claimed their new fabric had the “strength of steel and the sheerness of a cobweb” when it introduced the first nylon stocking at the World’s Fair in 1939. It was an immediate hit. Women flocked to department stores by the thousands, and four million pairs sold out in four days. Chemical engineers and fabric manufacturers in partnership have been creating new kinds of synthetic fibers with desirable characteristics ever since. Using oil and natural gas as basic building blocks, the industry has created fibers that are spun into the fabrics we know today as polyester, acrylic, spandex, acetate, olefin, neoprene, polyester fleece and microfiber. Essentially, they are all types of plastic, and their manufacture, use and disposal are having a giant impact on our environment.  More than 60% of our clothing today is made from synthetics. So, how does this impact our planet? Around 5% of global emissions come from the fashion industry, and according to a McKinsey report, the manufacture of clothing was responsible for 2.1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2018. This is more than the emissions from international airlines or maritime shipping.  In addition, most clothing is made in China and India, where both countries rely heavily on coal fired power plants. Textile manufacturers also add chemicals to their plastic fabrics to give them desirable features, but they do not have to disclose this information to the consumer. Like many human endeavors that purport to improve on nature, this addition of chemicals to plastic fabrics has turned out to have a heavy price tag.  During their manufacture, use or disposal, many of these chemicals are released from their clothing hosts and make their way into the world, where they contaminate our air, our water, our food chains and even our bodies, with serious consequences.  Some of the most commonly added chemicals, like dyes, PFAS, formaldehyde, phthalates and triclosan, are known or suspected carcinogens, reproductive toxicants,  neurotoxins, skin irritants and allergens. Even the process of washing and drying our plastic clothing is filled with environmental dilemmas. For instance, washing a single fleece jacket or hat releases billions of tiny plastic fibers, or microfibers, into the wastewater, along with their attendant chemicals. MIcrofibers are a common group of microplastics - pieces less than 5mm in length. Recent studies have found  microfibers from petroleum-based synthetic fabrics like nylon, acrylic and polyester in 83% of the world’s drinking water .  Throwing the washed clothing into the dryer adds yet another environmental burden, as plastic fibers are released from the tumble dryer into the surrounding air. Microfibers are a common group of microplastics – plastic pieces less than 5mm in length.  They have  been found in the most remote regions of the planet, from the Arctic to the Earth’s troposphere.  The average clothes dryer releases between 90 million and 120 million microfibers every year.  Slow, but positive steps are being taken to address plastic pollution worldwide. New laws on the use of single-use plastic bags or the sale of polystyrene packing peanuts are finally being implemented. Take-out food establishments are actually asking customers if they need plastic knives and forks, instead of just throwing them in the bag. But what about our clothing? The easiest and best solution is to avoid buying new synthetic clothing, especially “fast fashion,” which is inexpensive and not designed to be durable. The choice of natural fibers for our clothing is about health, comfort, sustainability and a positive impact on our planet.

Recent studies show that 99% of Americans have PFAS in their blood When it comes to chemicals that contaminate the environment, one group stands out: persistent organic pollutants, or "POPS." These are sometimes known as “forever chemicals" – compounds that are resistant to environmental degradation through normal pathways and processes. They are highly toxic chemicals that move easily through the environment, contaminating air, water, ecosystems and food supplies, and harming wildlife as well as humans.   Famous among these pollutants that travel the globe through our oceans and atmosphere are DDT, chlordane and PCBs.  The damage and potential harm to life on our planet from these chemicals created an international outcry resulting in a global treaty (the Stockholm Convention) to protect human health and the environment from POPS.  The treaty, created on the premise that no single government acting alone can protect its citizens or its environment from POPS, was adopted in Stockholm in 2001 and as of December 2021, 152 countries had ratified the treaty, with the notable exception of the United States and just a few other countries. As time goes on, more and more chemicals are being added to the original list of twelve POPS covered by the treaty. A fairly recent addition to these “forever chemicals” are a group of chemicals called PFAS.  PFAS (pronounced P-fass) stands for per-and-poly-fluoroalkyl substances, of which there are as many as 12,000 currently in use. At a molecular level, PFAS form an incredibly strong chemical bond, which makes them difficult to break apart or degrade. PFAS are used in products to make them water, grease and stain resistant and in plastics production to make it easier for the materials going through extruders, molds and other manufacturing processes. These chemicals are found in your dental floss and eye makeup, shampoo and shaving cream, in the lining of microwave popcorn bags and pizza boxes, in water-resistant clothing, carpets and upholstery.    The most publicized and well-known use of PFAS is for Teflon or non-stick cookware, but when we begin to look, it is everywhere! It's in plastic food packaging, artificial turf’s green plastic grass blades, candy wrappers and fertilizers. PFAS in firefighting foam and firefighter’s gear have made headlines across the country, as members of this mostly volunteer community are suffering from a variety of illnesses linked to PFAS exposure.   The public is not generally aware of the magnitude of the problem, but as the founder and executive director of a national environmental health non-profit, I am concerned about chemicals that are ubiquitous in our environment and that find their way easily and inadvertently into our bodies.  When researchers started to look for PFAS in humans, they found them in blood, tissue and even in breast milk. In fact, recent studies show that 99% of Americans have PFAS in their blood. So, what do we know so far about the health implications?   The primary concern when it comes to PFAS is that they accumulate in your body. As these toxic chemicals build up, they can cause a wide range of health problems, such as:   •  An increased risk of cancer – particularly testicular, prostate, and kidney cancers •  Decreased fertility in both males and females and an increased risk of elevated blood pressure or preeclampsia in pregnant women •  Developmental problems in babies and children – such as low birth weight, variations in bone development, and early puberty (a risk factor for breast cancer) •   Depression of the immune system – resulting in increased susceptibility to infections and a reduced response to vaccines (several recent studies have shown a link between COVID-19 and PFAS, suggesting that PFAS exposure could increase the risk of being infected and reduce the effectiveness of vaccines) •  Endocrine or hormone disruption •  Changes in the production and secretion of liver enzymes •  Increased cholesterol levels and an increased risk of obesity   So, how can you protect yourself and your family from PFAS?  The best thing is to find ways to minimize exposure. First, it is very important to eliminate PFAS in your drinking water. While some municipalities are taking steps to remove PFAS, there are filters you can use at home that significantly reduce these contaminants. Look for filtration systems that have lab tests backing up their claims and proving their systems actually remove toxic pollutants like PFAS.    Second, look for PFAS-free brands of products that you use most frequently. As more and more consumers seek to avoid these chemicals, manufacturers will be looking for safer alternatives.   Discard all non-stick or Teflon cookware, unless the surfaces are ceramic.  Choose stainless steel, cast iron, enamel-over-cast iron and glass for safe cooking. Avoid purchasing clothing and other outdoor items that are advertised as water and stain-resistant.   Of course, you shouldn’t have to do all the work to avoid PFAS. This should be the government’s job. Ask your federal representatives why the United States has chosen not to join the Stockholm Convention on POPS, and why the burden is on the public to avoid exposures to chemicals with known toxicity and not on industry to prove their safety.

Some food choices take a much heavier toll on the environment than others. You probably don't think about your choice of food as an environmental statement or a way to address climate change, but it is.  According to climate scientists, growing crops, raising livestock, processing, transporting and distributing food accounts for about one- quarter to one-third of all manmade greenhouse gas emissions. And some food choices take a much heavier toll on the environment than others.   Eating for the sake of the planet is catching on with a large and growing segment of our society and has inspired a new name: climatarianism. A climatarian diet is one that is both good for the planet, and good for your health. It focuses on the environmental impact of foods, preferring those that are locally grown or more sustainably produced, and eschewing foods like beef and lamb that have the highest (or worst) environmental impact. If you must eat beef, the experts say, at least eat beef that is pasture raised (or grass fed) and comes from American farms and not from factory farms located halfway around the world. The environmental cost of transporting meat produced overseas to your local supermarket is staggering.   That's not to say that a climatarian diet is necessarily a vegetarian diet. Eating small amounts of local, sustainably produced meat will not spell disaster for the climate, but as my climatarian  friend says, "Use meat as a condiment, not the main course." Eating locally sourced, in-season fruits and vegetables also plays a huge role in determining the carbon footprint of the food on your plate. Fill your bowl with strawberries in June when they grow plentifully around here, instead of in the winter when they have to be transported from far away. Enjoy peaches, tomatoes and peppers mostly in late summer and fall, not in March when they are ripening on a distant farm on the other side of the country.  Our grandparents filled their freezers and pantry shelves with the plentiful seasonal foods that they then consumed all year long.   Another important recommendation is to eat primarily organic fruits and vegetables grown without the use of chemical pesticides. Pesticides are largely responsible for upsetting the natural biological balance that has existed for millennia, wreaking havoc on all living things and resulting in the need for ever-more and stronger pesticides as chemical engineers try, inevitably in vain, to outsmart nature.     Pesticides impact climate change through their manufacture, transportation and application.  They emit the three most potent greenhouse gases during their production: carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. And finally, fossil fuels, especially petroleum, are the typical feedstock of pesticides.    Despite these facts, scientists and marketing executives at the Monsanto company (now owned by Bayer) thought it would be a great idea to genetically engineer the food industry's staple crops, like soybeans and corn, to be resistant to their miracle pesticide RoundUp, which they claimed was relatively harmless to humans. For decades, RoundUp-resistant GMO soybeans and corn have been the backbone of the food industry, especially for the highly processed "foods" like Doritos and other similar snack foods that many kids live on, where pesticide residues can be quite high. Well, it turned out the people at Monsanto didn't fully appreciate how nature works, or the implications of spraying our most important crops with pesticides. Now we know that RoundUp can cause cancer in humans, and new research shows it may also be responsible for an increase in Alzheimer’s disease, as well as contributing to the increased incidence of ADHD and autism. But that's not all. Over time, weeds that were supposed to be killed by RoundUp have developed resistance, and the product is no longer very effective. The chemical industry has responded to this development in typical fashion: they are now spraying these crops with a much more toxic pesticide, a chemical known as 2,4-D, one of the chemicals used to make the infamous defoliant Agent Orange that caused cancer in both American troops and the Vietnamese population, as well as birth defects in their children.  A tragedy of enormous proportions.   Obviously, this is a disaster not only for humans but also for the planet, as pesticide residues from all this spraying find their way into the environment and reverberate among all living things. Other pesticides used by the food industry have decimated beneficial insect populations, ironically putting many crops at risk as bees are crucial for pollination.  Nevertheless, the chemical and food industry continues with their relentless efforts to control nature.   Well, you might ask, isn't our government doing something about this ? The answer, sadly, is no. Budgets have been cut, legislation has been thwarted, and the revolving door of Washington ensures that the folks who regulate our food business come from the food industry itself. Their reward for "good service" is often another lucrative private industry job that pays  more than their government salary. So, prospective climatarians, I implore you to take some steps to push back against the reckless actions and billion-dollar advertising budgets of the food industry and think for yourself. Do you really need to buy that multi-pack of hamburger meat from Argentina? Is it a good idea to order a Big Mac at lunchtime? Should you be feeding bags of GMO corn-based snack foods to your kids? Are there pesticide residues in the corn syrup that makes your soda sweet?   If these questions cause you to think about your diet, good! Join the growing number of people around the world who are using their food purchases to make a statement about climate change, their health and protection of the environment.