Arsenic Discovered in Baby Food

I was rather disturbed to learn about the lack of US regulations of arsenic in food, especially as a recent study conducted by researchers at Dartmouth University has indicated that some brands of baby food, specifically baby formula where 'organic brown rice syrup' (OBRS) is one of the main ingredients, may contain arsenic. As rice is a plant cultivated in soil, and furthermore, a plant that is efficient in taking arsenic form the soil, researchers are concerned about foods containing OBRS, which is often used as a sweetener in organic foods as an alternative to high fructose corn syrup. During the study, one of the organic toddler milk formulas tested was found to contain As concentrations up to six times the EPA safe drinking water limit. While there are currently regulations denoted by the EPA in regards to a "safe drinking water limit," there are no regulatory limits on As in food. I find it sad to think that parents who are feeding their children what they perceive to be wholesome, organic baby food, could possibly be doing quite a bit of harm. This is especially concerning as babies are especially vulnerable to arsenic's toxic effects.

Can Bottled Water be Trusted Everywhere in the World?

With global population growth increasing at an alarming rate, scarcity of the world's resources has become a growing issue with local, regional, and global implications.  The availability of safe drinking water is the most important issue to humans in the majority of this world.  In most developing and third world countries, freshwater contamination is ever present.  Fresh drinking water has become privatized and bottled water boasts the reputation of the safest drinking water in most countries.  However, this article reports that recent tests have shown unsafe levels of arsenic, which is a carcinogen, have been found in many of Pakistan's bottled water.  If bottled water is not always the safest bet, what is? 

Chinese Officials Falsifying Lead Poisoning Level Results

According to this article, some government officials in China are abusing human rights when it comes to lead poisoning, especially in children.  Children are particularly susceptible to lead poisoning because a child's rapidly developing brain is particularly sensitive.  The following is just a short list of the possible damaging effects of lead toxicity: intellectual and developmental disabilities, behavioral problems, hearing loss, attention problems, and decreased visual and motor functioning.  A watchdog organization called Human Rights Watch published a news release last summer that claims China is restricting access to testing, falsifying test results, and denying treatment to those who have been found with traceable levels of lead in their bodies.  Recently, officials from the Chinese Environmental Protection Ministry have begun to crackdown on those who violate environmental restrictions; however, the Chinese government has yet to address the health consequences of the possibly millions of children who are affected.  This reminds me of something Rachel Carson said in Silent Spring about insecticides: "Although [it] is a matter of concern in agriculture and forestry, it is in the field of public health that the most serious apprehensions have been felt" (Chapter 16).  I feel like this is a matter of international concern, the offenders need to be brought to justice, and this blatant abuse of human rights needs to be stopped.  What do you think?


Full article here: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/228647.php           

Lead in Lipstick: FDA Not Concerned

The FDA recently tested lipsticks for lead content and found that all 400 lipsticks tested (all of which are sold in the US) contained lead. The FDA assured that the levels of lead present were safe if used as intended, but people are angry, claiming that there is no safe level.
The levels found in the lipsticks were much higher than the limit for lead in candy. While people don't eat lipstick like they eat candy, it certainly adds up over a lifetime of lipstick applications. And although the 4 pounds of lipstick consumed throughout a lifetime seems to be a myth, I imagine that number is not far from the truth.

Fungi May Aid in Reducing Lead Pollution

Recent research had found that some species of fungi are able to transform the molecular structure of lead to its most stable form, which could have big implications for how lead-polluted sites are treated in the future. Specifically, the lead-containing mineral that forms is called pyromorphite, which can sequester lead contaminants in soil. Researches found this to be quite unexpected due to the fact that lead is usually regarded as a pretty stable substance. However, in the this study, lead in the presence of fungi began to show evidence of pyromorphite formation after a month, with mineral formation increasing in abundance with time. This is truly an amazing of nature. I find the ability of fungi to treat toxic lead in this manner to be truly amazing and am delighted that it has finally been discovered. 

Why Do People Still Use Soft Water Even Though it Contains More Lead?

Based off of the reading for this week we learned that soft water contains more lead in it than hard water, and that got me thinking why do people spend more money to soften their water when it could be harming them? This article weighs the pros and cons of both hard water and soft water. Soft water is desired over hard water for certain things like washing clothes, dishes, and taking showers, but should not be used for drinking. The reason that soft water is preferred over hard water for washing clothes and appliances is because of the calcium and magnesium found in hard water, limescale buildup occurs when you wash these things with hard water and can cause appliances to not be as energy efficient or issues with the pipes to arise. The lead found in soft water cannot cause as much harm to humans if it is only being used to wash items, so that is why soft water is used to wash items. Hard water is used for drinking water because it does not contain as much lead in it as soft water and contains minerals in it that have health benefits. The diagram shows how water is softened by exchanging hard calcium and magnesium ions for soft sodium ions.

The Increasing Dead-Zone in the Gulf of Mexico

As the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico continues to expand, environmental groups are suing the EPA to curb pollution of the Mississippi River from pollution such as fertilizers and pesticides, which are blamed to be the ultimate source of the dead zone that is presently the size of Massachusetts. While Mississippi states monitor the water quality standards of the river, the Mississippi River extends from the Rocky Mountains to the state of New York, and sources of runoff such as nitrogen and phosphate, two of the largest contributors to "dead zones," are neither being regulated nor monitored to the extent that they need to be. While the EPA has stated in the past that the monitoring of the wastewater treatment standards in regards to the Mississippi River would not be the most effective way to "address the significant water problems facing our nation," they have yet to respond to the current petition to update wastewater standards. If standards are not modified, then the extent of the pollution which enters the Mississippi River will only continue to worsen, thereby increasing the size and intensity of the dead zone in the south.

Watch and learn more about the dead zone associated with the Mississippi River at minute 1:30 here!