In China, infant formulas contaminated with melamine killed four babies and made
thousands sick. (Photo courtesy of the CDC)
Earlier this year, when Chinese
infant formulas were found to be contaminated,
the US Food and Drug Administration banned
imports. The FDA said no amount of
industrial chemicals should be allowed in
infant formula. Now that the FDA has
found the same chemicals in US-made infant
formulas, the government says a little is
safe. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Earlier this year, when Chinese
infant formulas were found to be contaminated,
the US Food and Drug Administration banned
imports. The FDA said no amount of
industrial chemicals should be allowed in
infant formula. Now that the FDA has
found the same chemicals in US-made infant
formulas, the government says a little is
safe. Lester Graham reports:
In China, infant formulas contaminated with melamine killed four babies and made
thousands sick. The FDA said no amount was acceptable.
Then the FDA started secretly testing infant formulas made in the U.S. It found
melamine or a related chemical, cyanuric acid, in Nestle’s Good Start formula and
Mead Johnson’s Enfamil. ‘
Suddenly, the FDA decided a trace amount, one part per million is safe.
Lisa Madigan is the Attorney General for the State of Illinois. She says the FDA
should stop sales of those formulas.
“We have directly asked them to make sure these formulas are recalled as well as to
make sure that people across the country are aware of the problem.”
The FDA stresses levels of the chemicals in the U.S. infant formulas are more than
10,000 times lower than the levels reported in the Chinese formulas.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
BPA is found in things such as plastic water bottles, canned goods, and baby bottles
(Photo by Ken Hammond, courtesy of the USDA)
Canada has become the first country to
begin the process of banning plastic baby bottles
containing the chemical Bisphenol-A. Environmental
activists are praising the move, but want Ottawa
to go further. Dan Karpenchuk reports:
Transcript
Canada has become the first country to
begin the process of banning plastic baby bottles
containing the chemical Bisphenol-A. Environmental
activists are praising the move, but want Ottawa
to go further. Dan Karpenchuk reports:
Bisphenol-A, or BPA, is just about everywhere – one of most commonly manufactured
chemicals in the world. It’s main use is to make plastics hard and shatterproof.
It’s found in consumer products such as plastic baby bottles, water bottles, C-D cases,
eyeglasses and the lining of tin cans.
Rick Smith is with the group, Environmental Defense. Smith says particularly at risk are
infants.
“So there’s very good evidence that kids that are exposed to it earlier on in life are
more prone to breast cancer, prostate cancer later on in life.”
Research has also linked BPA to heart disease, diabetes, and liver problems. Smith says
BPA is in virtually every tin can in people’s cupboards, and evidence has shown that it
can leach into the food or beverage, even at room temperature.
Health Canada says the levels of BPA most adults are exposed to are not harmful.
But Smith and other environmentalists are calling for a complete ban in consumer
products.
Author Elizabeth Royte encourages people to buy reusable water bottles instead of disposable. Just make sure your water bottle doesn't have BPA in it like this one! (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
We buy a lot of bottled water.
Globally, sales are more than 60-billion
dollars a year. Elizabeth Royte just wrote
a new book about the whole bottled water
phenomenon. It’s called ‘Bottlemania’.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham
asked her how we got to where we’re carrying
a plastic bottle of water with us at all times:
Transcript
We buy a lot of bottled water.
Globally, sales are more than 60-billion
dollars a year. Elizabeth Royte just wrote
a new book about the whole bottled water
phenomenon. It’s called ‘Bottlemania’.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham
asked her how we got to where we’re carrying
a plastic bottle of water with us at all times:
Elizabeth Royte: “Because of hundreds of millions of dollars spent on advertising telling us that
bottled water is pure and natural, will make us look better, and make us more attractive to the
opposite sex. If you’re smart, you’ll drink bottled water.”
Lester Graham: (laughs) “Okay, so at $1.39 a pint, it sounds like I’m paying for a lot of advertising
and not much water.”
Royte: (laughs) “Yeah. You’re paying for advertising, you’re paying for lawyers, you’re paying for
PR flacks, you’re paying for the right to extract water from communities where many people might
not. So there’s a lot of legal battles going on over it, so some of your money may be going toward
that. You’ll be doing your pocketbook and the environment a big favor by just getting a good
refillable, reusable, washable bottle and filling it up with good old tap water.”
Graham: “A lot of bottled water comes from public water supplies. Dasani and Aquafina, from
Coke and Pepsi, come from public water supplies, and, as you say in ‘Bottlemania’, ‘they filter the
bejesus out of it’. Other water comes from natural springs, or glaciers, or pure mountain rivers –
doesn’t that make it better?”
Royte: “Well, you’ve hit on it, because that’s what they’re trading on and sometimes they charge a
bit more from that. They do say it is a natural product – it’s coming from the Earth. Those other
brands, Aquafina and Dasani, do start from municipal water supplies, they’re very filtered. And if
you don’t want to have minerals in your water, then you should aim for one of those. Or, get a
reverse-osmosis filter and install it under your sink and you’ll get the same thing, more or less.”
Graham: “Okay, so I’ve been buying bottled water by the case, let’s say. You want me to stop
buying bottled water because there’s fuel used in it, there’s petroleum used in the plastic, I’m
paying more than I should have to for water. What should I do?”
Royte: “You shouldn’t buy bottled water for bad reasons. You should educate yourself. You
should find out what’s going on upstream, what’s going on in your watershed, what sort of industry,
agriculture, development. Read your consumer confidence report. Know the utility is found in the
water, then go a step further, and order up some of your own tests so you can find out what’s in the
pipes in your house. Because the utility is responsible for the quality of the water only until it gets
to your service lines.”
Graham: “But that’s a lot of work. It’s easier to buy a bottle of water.”
Royte: (laughs) “It’s easier in the short run, but it’s going to hurt you financially in the long run, and
its contributing to climate change. That’s the carbon footprint of the transportation, the making the
bottles, the landfills, the incinerator, the litter – it goes on and on and on. It is a little bit of money
up front. But it’s only up front. You’ll get that reusable bottle, you might have to get a filter, but
again, you’re going to save money buying this filter and maintaining it over relying only on bottled
water.”
Graham: “So, let’s say you go to lunch or go to meet someone for coffee and your friend comes in
with a plastic bottle of water they bought at a local store. Do you resist the urge to say, ‘hey, do
you know?’ or do you go ahead and let them have it. Let me hear your elevator speech to your
friend.”
Royte: (laughs) “I don’t have friends like that.” (laughs) “All my friends have refillable, reusable
bottles.” (laughs) “No, yeah, I sometimes do resist the urge. I do see people in their cars with
these bottles and I don’t say anything because I want to keep them as friends. But I try to model
good behavior, and they see me filling up my bottle, and I hope some of that rubs off on them.”
Elizabeth Royte is the
author of ‘Bottlemania: How Water Went On Sale
And Why We Bought It’. She spoke with Lester Graham.
Two government agencies are issuing very different
messages about the safety of a plastic used to package food.
Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Two government agencies are issuing very different messages about the safety of a plastic used to package food. Lester Graham reports:
The Food and Drug Administration recently declared there’s “an adequate margin of safety” for a plastic called bisphenol A or BPA. But right after that the National Toxicology Program found BPA is of “some concern.”
Sarah Burkhalter is with the online environmental news service Grist-dot-org. She has found there are 115 studies on BPA… and the FDA is chiefly relying on plastic industry studies.
“104 of those were done by government scientists and university labs. 90 percent of them found BPA could harm human health. All eleven of the industry studies found that BPA was safe. So it makes sense that relying on those industry-funded studies that the FDA would find it to be safe.”
BPA is used in all sorts of things, including the linings of cans of food and baby bottles.
Lake Superior's South Shore, Wisconsin
(Photo by Dave Hansen, courtesy of the EPA)
There’s a new agreement that says the
Great Lakes water has to stay in the Great Lakes.
It’s been approved now by all eight of the states
and the two Canadian provinces that border the
Lakes. Rick Pluta reports the agreement is now
on its way to Congress:
Transcript
There’s a new agreement that says the
Great Lakes water has to stay in the Great Lakes.
It’s been approved now by all eight of the states
and the two Canadian provinces that border the
Lakes. Rick Pluta reports the agreement is now
on its way to Congress:
The Great Lakes region was worried that drier parts of the country and the world might
be eyeing the largest supply of freshwater on Earth.
Ten years ago, a Canadian company got permission from Ontario to send millions of
gallons of water to Asia via tanker ships. Fierce opposition from around the Great Lakes
region put an end to that project. But regions neighboring the Great Lakes basin still see
them as a possible cure for their water shortages.
Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm says the Great Lakes compact offers an answer to
anyone outside the region who wants to get their hands on that water.
“Can’t touch this. (laughs) That’s what we say. They need to look at their own way of
preserving and managing their resources.”
When Granholm signed new laws in a ceremony here on the Lake Michigan shoreline,
Michigan became the last of the eight Great Lakes states to formally join the compact.
The compact was put together by leaders of the US states and two Canadian provinces
that border the lakes. Granholm says, once it’s adopted by Congress and signed by the
president, it will give the Great Lakes states new authority to protect their water.
“This allows me as governor to veto any large diversion of water, so we can put a stop to
it ourselves. It really allows us the autonomy of protecting these Great Lakes overall.”
It took 10 years for the Great Lakes states to get the compact through their legislatures
and signed by their governors. Members of Congress from the region are hoping it won’t
take quite so long to get it to the president’s desk.
Chicago Congressman Rahm Emanuel is expected to lead the effort to get the compact
through the US House. He says congressional hearings will begin this year and the
compact should be approved in time for it to be sent to the new president in early 2009.
Emanuel says he’s not expecting any problems.
“Because people understand and know, this is our Yellowstone Park, this is our Grand
Canyon. This is a national treasure. There’s been a lot of work and years of effort to get
this done. The good news is a lot of the chairmen of the committees that are relevant, come
from the Midwest, know how important the Great Lakes are and will act with due speed
in getting it done.”
Both the Republican presidential candidate John McCain and Democratic candidate
Barak Obama have said they would sign the compact.
Environmental groups are among those backing the deal. But many of them say it
still comes up short because it does not stop bottled water from leaving the Great Lakes
region.
Cyndi Roper is with Clean Water Action.
“Water is water. You can’t fill a tanker with water and take it out of the Great Lakes, but
you can fill that same tanker with bottles of water and ship them to other parts of the
country and other parts of the world, and we believe as we move forward, that’s a very
dangerous precedent to set.”
She says that’s because many millions of gallons can still trickle out of the lakes – even if
it’s 12 ounces at a time.
Environmental activists are calling for
food packagers to stop using a toxic plastic to
line food and beverage cans. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Environmental activists are calling for
food packagers to stop using a toxic plastic to
line food and beverage cans. Lester Graham reports:
The thin plastic lining used in many canned foods and soft drinks contains a chemical
called bisphenol-A.
Canada is taking steps to restrict the use of the plastic in baby
bottles and formula can linings. In the U.S., some retailers have removed some
products using plastic with bisphenol-A.
Aaron Freeman is with the Environmental Defense Fund in Canada. He says this
chemical has been linked to too many health problems to ignore.
“Things like breast cancer, prostate cancer, early puberty in girls, attention deficit
disorder, and so on – those are all health effects we’re seeing sharp rises on.”
Freeman concedes cans lined with plastic containing bisphenol-A have not been proven
to cause the diseases. But he says since the canning industry has other plastics it can
use, it’s just a sensible precaution to stop using plastic with bisphenol-A.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Clear, colored plastic bottles - such as this one - are made of plastic number 7, which contains BPA (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
Recently there’s been a big concern about
bisphenol-A, or BPA, in some plastics.
Some plastic baby bottles and some water bottles have
been pulled from the shelf by retailers. Grist is an
online environmental news outlet. The journalists
at Grist have been looking at the BPA issue for a few
years. We got a chance to talk with Sarah Burkhalter
at Grist about BPA and why it’s suddenly
in the news:
Transcript
Recently there’s been a big concern about bisphenol-A, or BPA, in some plastics. Some plastic baby bottles
and some water bottles have been pulled from the shelf by retailers. Grist is an online environmental news
outlet. The journalists at Grist have been looking at the BPA issue for a few years. We got a chance to talk
with Sarah Burkhalter at Grist about BPA and why it’s suddenly in the news:
Sarah Burkhalter: “BPA has been in our bottles for a long time, and there have just been some
more high-profile studies in the last year. Back in February 2007, the National Institutes of Health
came out with a report saying that there was a link to BPA and health problems. Even at that point,
people were switching over to glass baby bottles and things like that. But just in the same week,
there was another National Institutes of Health high-profile report, just a few days separate from
when Health Canada – the Canadian Health Department – also expressed concern. So, I just think
it was in the news, and people are suddenly realizing that this is a problem.”
Lester Graham: “So, it was a one-two hit in the media, plus when you mention baby bottles, or
possibly the liners of formula cans, that gets people a little nervous, if there’s something toxic in
that stuff.”
Burkhalter: “Absolutely. And, the thing with BPA is that it’s an endocrine disrupter, it can mimic
estrogen. And so the plastics industry has been saying, ‘well, we use it in such small amounts, no,
it’s no problem’. Other studies have said that even in very, very small amounts, BPA can sneak in
and change cell structure, and really muck-up the reproductive system. And it’s been linked to
early puberty, and breast cancer, and behavioral disorders, and all kinds of things. So when they
hear about this being in, you know, things that we’re regularly eating and drinking from, they pay
attention.”
Graham: “Now, here’s the big question – we’ve seen retailers pull some bottles off of the shelves,
there’s been this controversy with Nalgene, and now even a lawsuit against Nalgene about their
plastic bottles – what plastic bottles are safe to use, what ones can’t I use, how do I tell the
difference?”
Burkhalter: “well, BPA is found in number 7 plastic – that’s also known as polycarbonate or lexan –
and that’s the clear, hard plastic. So Nalgene bottles – not the white ones – but the brightly
colored, clear ones. Those are number 7. There’s also, as you mentioned, plastic adhesive in
linings of cans, some of those, BPA is also in some dental sealants. But when it comes to bottles,
number 7 is the one you want to watch out for when we’re talking about BPA. Number 3 has its
own problems – that’s PVC or vinyl – that’s another one you want to watch out for. If you gotta use
plastic, you’re gonna want to look for numbers 2, 4, and 5.”
Graham: “So we look for those numbers on the bottom of the bottle?”
Burkhalter: “Yup. Those are, I mean, you know, they’re not on every plastic, but if there is a
number on them, its ‘2, 4, and 5 to stay alive’. It’s the rhyme I just made up.”
Most states don’t have bottle deposit laws. Some of those states that do have the laws are expanding them to include deposits on bottled water and other beverages. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Most states don’t have bottle deposit laws. Some of those states that do have the laws are expanding them to include deposits on bottled water and other beverages. Lester Graham reports:
When Ed Solomon drives up in his delivery truck, he’s not just taking
in cases of soda and other beverages:
“Most every stop we go to as we deliver products, we take the empties
out, and the crates also. But, WHOOO! Yes. Sometimes there’ll be a
lot of empties at various stops.”
Solomon delivers Faygo beverages in Michigan. That state has the
nation’s highest deposit on bottles and cans: ten cents each. And
whether it’s Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Budweiser or Miller, if distributors
drop off product, they have to pick up the empties that people bring
back for the deposit refund.
Of the ten states that have bottle deposit laws, some are adding the deposit requirement to new beverages such as bottled water.
Forty other states have no deposit law at all.
Johnny Georges operates the convenience store Stadium Party Shop in
Ann Arbor, where Ed Solomon is dropping off new product and picking up
the empties. If the law in Michigan is expanded, it would mean Georges
and his employees would have to take in a lot more kinds of empty
bottles and cans.
“I think it’s going to take a little space in my opinion because there
are so many waters out there, so many juices, so many other brands.
So, it’s going to take a little space. Hopefully we’re going to
organize it as usual. And… we’ll see.”
Not everyone is that receptive to the idea. Beverage distributors and
major grocery chains are lobbying hard against expanding the deposit
law. Distributors don’t want to hassle with picking up the empties.
Major grocery chains say they don’t like the mess of people bringing
empties into the stores. They don’t like losing floor space to make
room for bottle and can collection areas. The bigger stores also have
to invest in bar code scanners to automatically count and sort the huge
volume of empties being returned.
A lot of small stores like Johnny George’s don’t have the fancy
equipment. Here, Georges just set aside a neatly organized area where
it collects and sorts the bottles and cans. He says he knows that an
expanded bottle deposit law would mean a little more hassle, but he
doesn’t mind:
“I like the new law. I hope they pass it. That takes a lot of trash
out of the street. And it’s good for the environment in the meantime.”
And Georges isn’t the only one who thinks it would be good for the environment.
Polls show a large majority of people support the idea.
James Clift is with the environmental group Michigan Environmental
Council. He says it’s time to expand the law to other containers.
When the bottle law was written 30 years ago, beer and soda pop cans
and bottles were the biggest concerns.
“But since then, bottled water, tea, other beverages, energy drinks,
we’ve got a whole new set of drinks on the market. And they’re a
larger and larger segment of the market to the point they may become
the majority of the market in the next five to ten years.”
Clift says his state needs to catch up to the changing market, but the
majority of the states don’t require a deposit on cans and bottles at
all. And Clift argues, you can tell when you’re traveling in one of
those states:
“You know, because you see all the trash along the roadways, you see
trash cans filled with bottles and cans and it just seems so unnatural
for someone who grew up in Michigan, you know, to throw away a bottle
or a can. Luckily, we’ve been programmed to know that that has value
and has other uses.”
So people there bag or box up their empties, take them to the store, the
stores can sort them and guys like Ed Solomon can take them back to be
recycled:
“It’s hectic, yes, it really is, you know, to deal with these empties.
Yeah, but, that’s the law I guess.”
And if the can and bottle deposit law is expanded to, and other drinks, as it has been some states, more distributors
and grocers in Michigan will find the job a little more hectic… while
40 other states do little to nothing to reduce the number of cans and
bottles headed for the landfill.
For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Coffee hour at Knox United Church in Ottawa, Ontario. The church no longer serves bottled water. (Photo by Karen Kelly)
The latest census found the average American drank more than 23 gallons of bottled water a year. For a lot of people, bottled water is just a part of everyday life. But members of one church are arguing it shouldn’t be. Karen Kelly talked to a minister who’s helping to spread his church’s message:
Transcript
The latest census found the average American drank more than 23 gallons of bottled water a year.
For a lot of people, bottled water is just a part of everyday life.
But members of one church are arguing it shouldn’t be.
Karen Kelly talked to a minister who’s helping to spread his church’s message.
When he was growing up, Reverend Andrew Jensen lived just two blocks from a sandy beach on a
large river. But on a lot of hot days, the beach was closed because of pollution. And when it was
open, his parents were afraid to let him swim there. He says that early experience really made
him appreciate water.
“To have all of that there, to have your parents worry you can’t really touch it too much because
you might get sick… It was really disappointing. You know, you grow up on an island and you
can’t go in the water!”
Now, Reverend Jensen preaches about water. He’s the minister at Knox United Church, a
Protestant church in Ottawa, Canada.
(Fade in sounds of sermon)
“Again and again you have shown your grace to us through water… cleansing of the earth through
the flood… the exodus of the Red Sea, flowing from the rock of the wilderness…”
It’s Baptism Sunday, and Jensen is standing in front of the congregation. He’s extending his arms
over the baptismal font. The service is about the sacredness of water, the idea that it’s a gift from
God meant for everyone. Which is why the idea of bottling and selling water really bothers
Jensen.
“Water really is something we believe is a shared resource and we have to keep on sharing it. And
the more we chop it up into little bits and try to make a profit off of it, the farther we are getting
away from that basic human connectedness and from a religious perspective, that basic sense that
this is something that God has given us that’s for all of us and not just for people.”
A few months ago, the United Church of Canada officially called on its members to avoid drinking
bottled water. The campaign is part of a growing grassroots movement among churches to tackle
some of these issues on their own – in part because the federal government is backing away from
them.
For Jensen, preaching about water means talking about the dangers of it becoming a product.
The more people buy it in bottles, he says, the less attention might be paid to the public drinking
water system.
Plus, church leaders point out that the water in the bottles is often taken right from the tap – for
free – by the companies that sell it. And of course, there’s the issue of where all those bottles go
when we’re done with them.
Not surprisingly, the bottled water industry is not too happy about this campaign.
Elizabeth Griswold is executive director of the Canadian Bottled Water Association. She says the
United Church should focus its energies elsewhere.
“We don’t understand why any church would single out an industry that uses comparatively so
little water – our members use two-tenths of one percent of all groundwater taken in Canada, and
by focusing on the bottled water industry, we are missing a chance to develop long term
sustainable solutions.”
(Clinking cups)
(Congregant: “Coffee or tea, Ma’am?”)
Back at Knox United Church, members help themselves to coffee, tea and pastries. The church no
longer hands out bottled water at events. But it’s hard to tell how much of an effect the boycott is
really having.
The people who say they still drink bottled water refuse to go on tape.
But Sophia Doole and others say the church’s action has changed their behavior.
“Motivation-wise, I think it’s respect for the environment, respect for our own bodies and what
we’re putting into it and also respect for our own church and what they believe and to do to our
best to be guided by them.”
Reverend Andrew Jensen says he’s had calls from people, saying, ‘The church is against bottled
water? What kind of stupid stand is that?'”
That’s when Jensen explains that it’s really not about bottled water. It’s about clean water for
everyone – to drink, to share, and even to swim in.
A new study suggests exposure in the womb to chemicals that mimic estrogen could increase the risk of developing breast cancer as an adult. Rebecca Williams reports the study looked specifically at a chemical that’s found in many food containers and plastic bottles:
Transcript
A new study suggests exposure in the womb to chemicals that mimic estrogen could increase the risk of developing breast cancer as an adult. Rebecca Williams reports the study looked specifically at a chemical that’s found in many food containers and plastic bottles:
Bisphenol A has been shown to leach out of food and beverage containers. Scientists are concerned about human exposure to the chemical because it mimics the hormone estrogen.
The new study provides evidence that exposure to estrogen mimics as a fetus increases the risk of developing breast cancer as an adult.
The findings were based on animal studies in rats.
Dr. Ana Soto is an author of the study in the journal Reproductive Toxicology.
“We used to think that the womb was a pristine environment. And we know now that it is not a pristine environment anymore. And I think we should be terribly concerned about that.”
Soto says the rates of breast cancer in the US and Europe have increased over the past 50 years. She says fetal exposure to estrogen mimics could be the underlying cause of that increase.
In China, infant formulas contaminated with melamine killed four babies and made thousands sick. (Photo courtesy of the CDC)
