This study is a little bit dated but has some important points that we should all be aware of:
July 27 2005
New Study Finds Pesticide Poisoning at Nation’s Schools
(Beyond Pesticides, July 27, 2005)
A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association today finds that students and school employees are being poisoned by pesticide use at schools and from drift off of neighboring farmlands. The study, “Acute Illnesses Associated With Pesticide Exposure at Schools” (Vol. 294, No. 4, pp455-465), by Walter A. Alarcon, M.D. (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) et al, analyzed 2593 poisonings from 1998 to 2002 from three surveillance systems. While the analysis finds incident rates overall of 7.4 cases per million children and 27.3 cases per million employees, the authors conclude, “[T]hese results should be considered low estimates of the magnitude of the problem because many cases of pesticide poisoning are likely not reported to surveillance systems or poisoning control centers.” The authors recommend that strategies be adopted to reduce the use of pesticides at school and reduce drift.
The authors of the study work for a range of federal and state agencies, including theNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and state health and environmental agencies in California, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, New York, Oregon, Texas, and Washington. The surveillance data comes from three sources: California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) and the Sentinel Event Notification System for Occupational Risks (SENSOR), and Toxic Exposure Surveillance System (TESS).
The study finds that the incidence rates among children increased significantly from 1998 to 2002. Illness of high severity is found in three cases, moderate severity in 275 cases, and low severity in 2315 cases. Most illness is associated with insecticides (35%), disinfectants (32%), repellents (13%), and herbicides (11%). Among 406 cases with detailed information on the source of pesticide exposure, 281 (69%) are associated with pesticides used at schools and 125 (31%) are associated with pesticide drift exposure from farmland.
The authors cite that the study misses incidents for which medical attention is not sought or reported to a surveillance system or a poison control center. “Even when individuals seek medical care, their illness may not be recognized as pesticide-related, because of the nonpathogomonic nature of the signs and symptoms and because clinicians receive little training on these illnesses.”
Overall, insecticides are associated with 895 illnesses and most often involve the following: pyrethrins (13%), chlorpyrifos (13%), malathion (9%), and pyrethroids (5%); Disinfectants are associated with 830 cases and most often involve the following: sodium hypochlorite (21%), phenol compounds (21%), pine oil (13%), and quaternary ammonium compounds (10%). Repellents are associated with 335 illnesses and most often involve the following: naphthalene (41%), and diethyl toluamide (DEET) (19%). Herbicides are associated with 279 illnesses and most often involve: glyphosate (36%), 2,4-D (19%), and pendimethalin (14%).
The analysis can be further refined by looking at specific surveillance data sources. For example, when combining the data from the CDPR and SENSOR, which predominantly report incidents involving adults, the most common active ingredients associated with poisonings from school pesticide use include diazinon (insecticide, 23%), sodium hypochlorite (disinfectant, 17%), chlorpyrifos (now withdraw for use by schools, 14%), quaternary ammonium compound (disinfectant, 14%), and malathion (insecticide, 5%). The most common active ingredients associated with poisoning from pesticide drift include insecticides, fungicides and herbicides: chlorpyrifos (22%), methamidophos combined with chlorothalonil and propargite (20%), mancozeb combined with glyphosate (16%), cyfluthrin combined with dicofol (13%), and malathion (10%).
While the study looks at acute, or short-term, effects, the study authors note that, “Repeated pesticide applications on school grounds raise concerns about persistent low level exposures to pesticides at schools.” Continuing, the authors state, “The chronic long-term impacts of pesticide exposures have not been comprehensively evaluated; therefore, the potential for chronic health effects from pesticide exposures at schools should not be dismissed. Unfortunately, the surveillance methods used in our report are inadequate for assessing chronic effects.” In addition, the authors note that pesticides on school grounds can be tracked inside school buildings.
The authors note the lack of protection for school children and employees under federal law. Citing Beyond Pesticides studies, The Schooling of State Pesticide Laws and Are Schools Making the Grade?, the authors point out that state laws provide some protection but are varied, leaving large gaps.
TAKE ACTION: Join the School Pesticide Reform Coalition, sign on to the School Pesticide Reform Protocol, and ask your U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators to support the School Environmental Protection Act. For more information, contact Michele Roberts at Beyond Pesticides, 202-543-5450. The corresponding author of the report can be contacted: Walter A. Alarcon, MD, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Pkway, Mail Stop R-17, Cincinnatie, OH 45226.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
New Risks Linked to Asthma Rise
Many, Many thanks to Heidi Hart-Gorman for sharing this with us
February 12, 2009, 1:44 pm
New Risks Linked to Asthma Rise - New York Times - Tanya Parker
A decline in aspirin use, exposure to household sprays and cleaners and lack of vitamin D may all help explain surging asthma rates in the past few decades.
For years the hygiene hypothesis has been used to explain stark differences in asthma rates around the world. In Western countries, asthma rates are about 50 times higher than in rural Africa, for instance. The hygiene hypothesis suggests that Westerners have less exposure to bacteria, viruses and parasites, altering the immune response and increasing risk for allergic diseases.
But Dr. Harold S. Nelson, professor of medicine at the asthma and allergy specialty hospital National Jewish Health in Denver, says the hygiene hypothesis doesn’t fully explain rising asthma rates in the United States and industrialized countries. The incidence of asthma has doubled in the United States since the 1980s.
In a recent talk at National Jewish Health’s annual Pulmonary and Allergy Update conference, Dr. Nelson noted that lower levels of vitamin D, exposure to spray cleaning compounds, and a wider use of acetaminophen in place of aspirin have contributed to the asthma epidemic.
The concern with household cleaners is that the spray mist can be inhaled and irritate the lungs, increasing risk for asthma. The biggest culprits appear to be glass cleaners and air fresheners. A major European study of cleaning product use in 10 countries found that people who used the cleaners four days a week faced double the risk of adult asthma. Weekly use increased risk by 50 percent. Australian researchers have also found a link with household cleaning sprays and asthma in children.
In a November 2007 article in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, researchers from Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston reviewed the evidence showing a link between low vitamin D levels in mothers and childhood asthma. The authors wrote:
We hypothesize that as populations grow more prosperous, more time is spent indoors, and there is less exposure to sunlight, leading to decreased cutaneous vitamin D production. Coupled with inadequate intake from foods and supplements, this then leads to vitamin D deficiency, particularly in pregnant women, resulting in more asthma and allergy in their offspring.
Declining aspirin use may also help explain rising asthma rates. Young children should not be given aspirin because it increases risk for Reye’s syndrome. But a common alternative, acetaminophen, the ingredient in Tylenol, may increase a child’s risk for asthma when used in very young children or in high doses. The drug lowers levels of the antioxidant glutathione, which can help protect against lung damage caused by oxidants. In a study of more than 200,000 6- and 7-year-olds, use of acetaminophen in the first year of life was associated with a 46 percent increase in prevalence of asthma symptoms. Children using higher doses of acetaminophen had three times the risk of asthma.
Dr. Nelson notes that the research isn’t conclusive, but that people can take simple measures to lower their exposure to these new risk factors. Use liquid cleaners or pump sprays that don’t generate a fine mist. Eliminate use of spray air fresheners. Pregnant women and mothers should talk to their obstetricians and pediatricians about whether they should consider vitamin D supplements. And parents should discuss pain relievers with the pediatrician. Every pain reliever carries risks, and alternatives to Tylenol like ibuprofen can increase risk for gastrointestinal complaints. However, doctors may recommend switching between pain relievers or limiting exposure to acetaminophen in certain cases.
“There is a lot of supporting evidence for all three of these new risk factors,” Dr. Nelson said.
February 12, 2009, 1:44 pm
New Risks Linked to Asthma Rise - New York Times - Tanya Parker
A decline in aspirin use, exposure to household sprays and cleaners and lack of vitamin D may all help explain surging asthma rates in the past few decades.
For years the hygiene hypothesis has been used to explain stark differences in asthma rates around the world. In Western countries, asthma rates are about 50 times higher than in rural Africa, for instance. The hygiene hypothesis suggests that Westerners have less exposure to bacteria, viruses and parasites, altering the immune response and increasing risk for allergic diseases.
But Dr. Harold S. Nelson, professor of medicine at the asthma and allergy specialty hospital National Jewish Health in Denver, says the hygiene hypothesis doesn’t fully explain rising asthma rates in the United States and industrialized countries. The incidence of asthma has doubled in the United States since the 1980s.
In a recent talk at National Jewish Health’s annual Pulmonary and Allergy Update conference, Dr. Nelson noted that lower levels of vitamin D, exposure to spray cleaning compounds, and a wider use of acetaminophen in place of aspirin have contributed to the asthma epidemic.
The concern with household cleaners is that the spray mist can be inhaled and irritate the lungs, increasing risk for asthma. The biggest culprits appear to be glass cleaners and air fresheners. A major European study of cleaning product use in 10 countries found that people who used the cleaners four days a week faced double the risk of adult asthma. Weekly use increased risk by 50 percent. Australian researchers have also found a link with household cleaning sprays and asthma in children.
In a November 2007 article in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, researchers from Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston reviewed the evidence showing a link between low vitamin D levels in mothers and childhood asthma. The authors wrote:
We hypothesize that as populations grow more prosperous, more time is spent indoors, and there is less exposure to sunlight, leading to decreased cutaneous vitamin D production. Coupled with inadequate intake from foods and supplements, this then leads to vitamin D deficiency, particularly in pregnant women, resulting in more asthma and allergy in their offspring.
Declining aspirin use may also help explain rising asthma rates. Young children should not be given aspirin because it increases risk for Reye’s syndrome. But a common alternative, acetaminophen, the ingredient in Tylenol, may increase a child’s risk for asthma when used in very young children or in high doses. The drug lowers levels of the antioxidant glutathione, which can help protect against lung damage caused by oxidants. In a study of more than 200,000 6- and 7-year-olds, use of acetaminophen in the first year of life was associated with a 46 percent increase in prevalence of asthma symptoms. Children using higher doses of acetaminophen had three times the risk of asthma.
Dr. Nelson notes that the research isn’t conclusive, but that people can take simple measures to lower their exposure to these new risk factors. Use liquid cleaners or pump sprays that don’t generate a fine mist. Eliminate use of spray air fresheners. Pregnant women and mothers should talk to their obstetricians and pediatricians about whether they should consider vitamin D supplements. And parents should discuss pain relievers with the pediatrician. Every pain reliever carries risks, and alternatives to Tylenol like ibuprofen can increase risk for gastrointestinal complaints. However, doctors may recommend switching between pain relievers or limiting exposure to acetaminophen in certain cases.
“There is a lot of supporting evidence for all three of these new risk factors,” Dr. Nelson said.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Why We Need The Kid-Safe Chemicals Act
"Please don't tell me a pre-polluted baby is just fine."
--Julie Deardorf, Chicago Tribune, 2005
Why We Need The Kid-Safe Chemicals Act
The nation's toxic chemical regulatory law, the Toxic Substances Control Act, is in drastic need of reform. Passed in 1976 and never amended since, TSCA is widely regarded as the weakest of all major environmental laws on the books today.
When passed, the Act declared safe some 62,000 chemicals already on the market, even though there were little or no data to support this policy. Since that time another 20,000 chemicals have been put into commerce in the United States, also with little or no data to support their safety.
The human race is now polluted with hundreds of industrial chemicals with little or no understanding of the consequences. Babies are born pre-polluted with as many as 300 industrial chemicals in their bodies when they enter the world. Testing by Environmental Working Group has identified 455 chemicals in people, and again, no one has any idea if these exposures are safe.
We are at a tipping point, where the pollution in people is increasingly associated with a range of serious diseases and conditions from childhood cancer, to autism, ADHD, learning deficits, infertility, and birth defects. Yet even as our knowledge about the link between chemical exposure and human disease grows, the government has almost no authority to protect people from even the most hazardous chemicals on the market.
The Campaign: Pass the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act
This pollution in people is the direct result of a statute that does not require chemicals to be proven safe to get on the market, or stay on the market. Under federal law EPA does not have the authority to demand the information it needs to evaluate a chemical's risk, and neither manufacturers nor the EPA are required to prove a chemical's safety as a condition of use.
The Kid-Safe Chemical Act will change all this through a fundamental overhaul of our nation's chemical regulatory law. Specifically, the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act:
* requires that industrial chemicals be safe for infants, kids and other vulnerable groups;
* requires that new chemicals be safety tested before they are sold;
* requires chemical manufacturers to test and prove that the 62,000 chemicals already on the market that have never been tested are safe in order for them to remain in commerce;
* requires EPA to review "priority" chemicals, those which are found in people, on an expedited schedule;
* requires regular biomonitoring to determine what chemicals are in people and in what amounts;
* requires regular updates of health and safety data and provides EPA with clear authority to request additional information and tests;
* provides incentives for manufacturers to further reduce health hazards;
* requires EPA to promote safer alternatives and alternatives to animal testing;
* protects state and local rights; and
* requires that this information be publicly available.
Through the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act we can give our children a safer and healthier future
http://www.ewg.org/kidsafe.
--Julie Deardorf, Chicago Tribune, 2005
Why We Need The Kid-Safe Chemicals Act
The nation's toxic chemical regulatory law, the Toxic Substances Control Act, is in drastic need of reform. Passed in 1976 and never amended since, TSCA is widely regarded as the weakest of all major environmental laws on the books today.
When passed, the Act declared safe some 62,000 chemicals already on the market, even though there were little or no data to support this policy. Since that time another 20,000 chemicals have been put into commerce in the United States, also with little or no data to support their safety.
The human race is now polluted with hundreds of industrial chemicals with little or no understanding of the consequences. Babies are born pre-polluted with as many as 300 industrial chemicals in their bodies when they enter the world. Testing by Environmental Working Group has identified 455 chemicals in people, and again, no one has any idea if these exposures are safe.
We are at a tipping point, where the pollution in people is increasingly associated with a range of serious diseases and conditions from childhood cancer, to autism, ADHD, learning deficits, infertility, and birth defects. Yet even as our knowledge about the link between chemical exposure and human disease grows, the government has almost no authority to protect people from even the most hazardous chemicals on the market.
The Campaign: Pass the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act
This pollution in people is the direct result of a statute that does not require chemicals to be proven safe to get on the market, or stay on the market. Under federal law EPA does not have the authority to demand the information it needs to evaluate a chemical's risk, and neither manufacturers nor the EPA are required to prove a chemical's safety as a condition of use.
The Kid-Safe Chemical Act will change all this through a fundamental overhaul of our nation's chemical regulatory law. Specifically, the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act:
* requires that industrial chemicals be safe for infants, kids and other vulnerable groups;
* requires that new chemicals be safety tested before they are sold;
* requires chemical manufacturers to test and prove that the 62,000 chemicals already on the market that have never been tested are safe in order for them to remain in commerce;
* requires EPA to review "priority" chemicals, those which are found in people, on an expedited schedule;
* requires regular biomonitoring to determine what chemicals are in people and in what amounts;
* requires regular updates of health and safety data and provides EPA with clear authority to request additional information and tests;
* provides incentives for manufacturers to further reduce health hazards;
* requires EPA to promote safer alternatives and alternatives to animal testing;
* protects state and local rights; and
* requires that this information be publicly available.
Through the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act we can give our children a safer and healthier future
http://www.ewg.org/kidsafe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
