Hair Tests Find State Reps Are Contaminated

An environmental group wants to convince lawmakers that tougher mercury rules are needed. They tested legislators for mercury contamination. Amanda Vinicky reports:

Transcript

An environmental group wants to convince lawmakers that tougher mercury rules are needed. They tested legislators for mercury contamination. Amanda Vinicky reports:


Usually the main area under the Illinois State House dome is filled with lobbyists and lawmakers. But earlier this year a haircutter set up shop to take hair samples from several willing legislators.


Their hair was tested for mercury. Turns out, 9 out of 28 have more mercury in their systems than the federal government considers safe.


Jean Flemma is with the Mercury Free Illinois coalition. She explains why they tested politicians:


“We thought it would be an interesting representation of the public as a whole, because our representatives represent us.”


Another reason is because of their control over environmental policy. Flemma says once lawmakers see they can be affected, they’ll want to act to reduce mercury emissions from coal burning power plants and other sources.


For the Environment Report, I’m Amanda Vinicky.

Related Links

Barnyard Animal Extinctions

  • Milking Devon cattle are rare domestic breeds from an earlier day, some dating back to the 18th century. The animals hold genetic information that some people think is too valuable to lose. (Photo by Lester Graham)

When you think of endangered species, farm animals might not top the list. But some types of farm animals are in danger of going extinct.
Certain breeds of common barnyard creatures are no longer considered commercially viable, and are being allowed to die off. But as the GLRC’s Chris Lehman reports, there’s an effort to preserve some rare varieties of
livestock:

Transcript

When you think of endangered species, farm animals might not top the list. But some
types of farm animals are in danger of going extinct. Certain breeds of common barnyard
creatures are no longer considered commercially viable, and are being allowed to die off.
But as the GLRC’s Chris Lehman reports, there’s an effort to preserve some rare varieties
of livestock:


When you buy a pound of ground beef or a pack of chicken legs, you probably don’t
think about what kind of cow or chicken the meat came from. And in most stores,
you don’t have a choice. Beef is beef and chicken is chicken.


Of course, there’s many different kinds of cows and chickens, but most farmers stick with
just a handful of types. They prefer animals that are specially bred to produce more meat
in less time.


That’s all well and good if your motive is profit.


But some people think the move towards designer farm animals is risky.
Jerome Johnson is executive director of Garfield Farm Museum.


(Sound of turkeys gobbling)


Johnson says breeds like these Narragansett turkeys carry genetic traits that could be
desirable in the future. They don’t require as much food, for instance. That could be an
attractive feature as costs continue to rise:


“Some of the high-producing, high-yielding animals today, they may require a lot of
input. In other words, a lot of feed, more expense since so many things are derived from
petroleum, from the diesel fuel that powers the tractors to the production of fertilizer
and the like, and chemicals for herbicides and all… that as the cost of that goes up, it may
actually be cheaper to raise a different type of animal, that doesn’t require that much.”


Johnson also says some common poultry breeds get sick more easily. That’s part of the
risk farmers take when they choose meatier birds. Normally that might not be a problem,
but if Avian flu spreads to the US, some of the older breeds might carry genes that could
resist the disease. If those breeds disappear, that genetic information would be lost.


But some farmers choose rare livestock breeds for completely different reasons.


(Sound of baby chicks)


Scott Lehr and his family raise several varieties of pure-bred poultry, sheep, and goats on
their northern Illinois farm. These chicks are just a few weeks old…


(Sound of baby chicks)


“These are all pure-bred birds. These are birds that have been around a long time. Some
of the breeds that are in there, there’s Bantam Brown Leghorns, Bantam White Leghorns.”


Some of the poultry breeds are so rare and exotic they’re practically collector’s items.
Lehr’s son enters them in competitions. But the animals on their farm aren’t just for
showing off. Scott says they use the wool from their herd of Border Cheviot sheep for a
craft studio they opened in a nearby town:


“There’s quite a bit of demand growing for handspun wool and the rising interest in the
hand arts, if you will… knitting and spinning and weaving and those kinds of things… are
really beginning to come into, I guess, the consciousness of the American public in many
ways. It’s evolving beyond a cottage industry.”


And the wool of rare breeds like the Border Cheviot sheep is popular among people who want handspun wool.


(Sound of Johnson calling to giant pig, “Hey, buddy, how ya doin’?”)


Back at the Garfield Farm Museum, Jerome Johnson offers a handful of grass to a 700
pound Berkshire hog. This Berkshire is different from the variety of pig with the same
name that’s relatively common today. Johnson says these old-style Berkshires have a
different nose and more white hair than the modern Berkshire. They also tend to be fatter,
which used to be a more desirable trait.


The museum’s pair of old-style Berkshires are literally a dying breed. Johnson says the
boar isn’t fertile anymore:


“They were the last breeding pair that we knew of. These were once quite common but
now are quite rare. And we maybe have found a boar that is fertile that is up in
Wisconsin that was brought in from England here a couple years ago that we could try
crossing with our sow to see if we can preserve some of these genetics.”


(Sound of pigs)


Advocates of rare livestock breeds say the animals can be healthier and sometimes tastier
than the kinds raised on large commercial farms. And although you won’t find many
farm animals on the endangered species list, they could have important benefits for future
farmers.


For the GLRC, I’m Chris Lehman.

Related Links

Coalition Urges Fda to Regulate Nanotech

A coalition of environmental groups is urging the Food and Drug Administration to regulate nano-technology. The coalition wants to start with a recall of sunscreens that use nano-materials. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

A coalition of environmental groups is urging the Food and Drug
Administration to regulate nanotechnology. The coalition wants to start
with a recall of sunscreens that use nanomaterials. The GLRC’s Lester
Graham reports:


Nanotechnology uses materials as small as a protein molecule… about
one 80-thousandth of the width of a hair. The consumer advocates and
environmental groups say the use of nanomaterials has not been tested
for safety for human use or their impact on the environment.


George Kimbrell is the one of the groups, the Center for Technology
Assessment…


“We’re asking the agency to look into those effects as well, that is
environmental impacts as well as human health impacts of these products.”


Nanotechnology is being used in a variety of lotions and cosmetics and is
promoted as revolutionary technology. That’s because the particles can
get into the skin at the cellular level much more easily.


The environmental groups want the FDA to more strictly regulate
products containing nanomaterials until they are tested for safety.


For the GLRC, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Phthalate Concerns Cause Company Makeovers

  • Women marching on behalf of a campaign to remove phthalates and other chemicals from cosmetics. (Photo courtesy of the Breast Cancer Fund)

There are new concerns that products we use every day to keep us clean and make us beautiful may contain toxic chemicals. The targets are things like shampoos, deodorants, hair dyes and cosmetics. Some companies are taking these concerns seriously and giving themselves a makeover. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Halpert has this story:

Transcript

There are new concerns that products we use every day to keep us clean and make us beautiful may contain toxic chemicals. The targets are things like shampoos, deodorants, hair dyes and cosmetics. Some companies are taking these concerns seriously and giving themselves a makeover. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Halpert has this story:


(Sound of woman and child talking)


Teri Olle is playing dress-up with her two-year-old daughter, Natalie, in the family’s bathroom. Teri is applying lotions to her daughter’s chubby cheeks, while Natalie puts lipstick on her mother.


Little girls like Natalie have been playing dress-up for generations. But Natalie’s game is slightly different. She’s using nail polish, lipsticks and creams made without man-made chemicals.


That’s because her mother is an environmental activist who lobbies against toxic chemical use. With cosmetics, her biggest fear is a group of chemicals called phthalates. Phthalates increase the flexibility of plastic and keep nail polish from chipping.


“Phthalates are testosterone-suppressing synthetic hormones, essentially. And they’ve been linked with all sorts of developmental problems, including, most dramatically, a set of male genital defects that show themselves as birth defects in infant boys.”


Last month, scientists released the first study on male babies. They found a strong link between high levels of phthalates exposure in pregnant women and damage to their sons’ reproductive tract. Studies like this, and others on lab animals showing possible links to reproductive problems, prompted the European Union this past March to ban two types of phthalates from all products sold in Europe. The states of California, New York and Massachusetts are also considering similar plans.


Olle is five months pregnant with her second child. She doesn’t know if she’s carrying a boy, but she says chemicals in cosmetics could be risky for any fetus. So she’s not taking any chances.


“For me, as a person, if someone said to me, ‘You can either use this product that may cause a genital defect in your baby boy or not’, I would think most people would go, ‘Really, we probably shouldn’t be using these products.'”


And it’s not just phthalates that could be a problem. Environmentalists say that the ingredients in cosmetics haven’t been evaluated for health or safety effects. The Food and Drug Administration doesn’t do that kind of testing. And in 60 years, it’s banned only nine ingredients. So there are other chemicals, like coal tars used in hair dyes and formaldehyde used in nail polish, that might cause health problems as they’re absorbed by the skin into the bloodstream.


Because of these concerns, a group of environmentalists called the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has convinced 136 natural cosmetics companies to sign a pledge to check for potentially toxic chemicals and eliminate them.


One of those companies is Avalon Organics. Over the past year, Avalon’s spent two and a half million dollars to reformulate their products and switch to more natural alternatives. Gil Pritchard is the company’s President and CEO. He says the jury’s out on whether these chemicals definitely cause harm. Even so, he didn’t hesitate to make the investment.


“It’s convincing enough for me and our company to exercise what we call a precautionary principle – to adopt it and say look, we may not have direct scientific evidence, but there’s enough evidence here to say whoa, I can feel the heat from the stove. I don’t need to put my finger on and burn myself to know that that’s one of the likely outcomes.”


But not all companies feel this way. Procter & Gamble, in Cincinnati, Ohio, has not signed the pledge. Nor have any other major cosmetic companies. Tim Long is a company spokesman. He says environmentalists are blowing this issue way out of proportion.


“The amounts of most of these ingredients that the activists have concerns about are, in fact, extremely small and at the doses used in our products, there’s no scientific evidence to support that they’re resulting in any harm to consumers.”


Long says Procter & Gamble complied with the EU directive and took the banned phthalates out of all of its products both in Europe and the U.S. But he says that wasn’t necessary, since phthalates, along with all other cosmetic ingredients, simply aren’t dangerous. He says his company wouldn’t be using them if they were. And the FDA says that these cosmetics are safe.


Environmentalists say that more research needs to be done to better understand the effect of chemicals used in cosmetics on the body. But Teri Olle says that with so many natural alternatives available, it makes sense to be careful.


“When I became pregnant, I definitely became more conscious of what I was putting on my body. I mean, if you’re supposed to avoid soft cheeses and cake batter, it certainly can’t be good for you to be spraying petrochemicals on your body. That definitely can’t be good for the baby.”


So when the baby’s born this September, instead of using products with man-made chemicals, Teri Olle will be spreading diaper rash ointment with beeswax and apricot oil on her newborn baby.


For the GLRC, I’m Julie Halpert.

Related Links

Cosmetics Companies to Phase Out Phthalates

Three major cosmetics companies have announced they’ll stop using certain chemicals that have been linked to health concerns. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erin Toner reports:

Transcript

Three major cosmetics companies have announced they’ll stop using certain chemicals that have been linked to liver and kidney damage, and reproductive system problems. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erin Toner reports:


L’Oréal, Revlon and Unilever say they’ll comply with a European Union policy that requires cosmetics companies to stop using chemicals that are suspected of causing cancer, birth defects or impaired fertility. Those banned chemicals include phthalates, which are used in some hair and nail products and fragrances. Bryony Schwan is with The Breast Cancer Fund, the group leading the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. She says phthalates are just the first step.


“There are a lot of chemicals in cosmetics that are potentially dangerous. We have a lot of chemicals that have not been tested. We have other chemicals that are linked to cancer and reproductive health effects. So removing phthalates is just the beginning.”


The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is asking all cosmetics companies to sign a pledge to remove all EU-banned chemicals, and replace them with safer alternatives within three years.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Erin Toner.

Related Links

A Closer Look at Mercury Hair Test

  • Hair is now a way to test people for mercury levels, as opposed to more invasive tests of blood and urine. (Photo by Anna Miller)

Health officials are experimenting with another way to gauge the level of mercury in people who eat a lot of fish. The only test sample needed is… hair. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach
reports:

Transcript

Health officials are experimenting with another way to gauge the level of mercury in people who eat a lot of fish. The only test sample needed is… hair. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


Doctors can already test your blood and urine for mercury. Now, as a less invasive technique, some health officials can test the hair near your scalp for the toxic chemical. There’s some debate over the quality of the tests, the lab analyses, and over what a high test reading means. The federal health warning for mercury in hair is one part per million. But that’s for susceptible populations like an unborn fetus.


Jack Spengler is a professor of environmental health at Harvard University. he recently ate a lot of fish and says his hair tested out at 3 parts per million of mercury.


“But I’m not going apoplectic about it because I know if I just watch my consumption, I can moderate that over time… and there’s that safety margin…that I suspect I’d have to be much higher for much longer to really have symptoms. ”

Prolonged high levels of the most toxic form of mercury, methyl mercury can trigger various health problems in adults such as memory loss and cardiovascular damage.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Lynx Found in Northwoods

The Canada lynx used to live in forests from New York to Minnesota, but some people doubted that the northern relative of the bobcat still lived in the Great Lakes region. Now, biologists have confirmed that lynx are in northern Minnesota. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris Julin reports:

Transcript

The Canada lynx used to live in forests from New York to Minnesota, but some people doubted that the northern relative of the bobcat still lived in the Great Lakes region. Now, biologists have confirmed that lynx are in northern Minnesota. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris Julin reports:

Biologists have been trying to snag hair from lynx for the past couple years. None of the “hair traps” around the Great Lakes turned up any lynx fur. So researchers in the Superior National Forest tried following tracks where people said they had seen lynx. They collected samples of hair and droppings. Superior National Forest spokeswoman Jo Barnier says DNA tests confirm that some of the droppings came from lynx.

“We’re not sure exactly what it means beyond that fact that we know they’re here this year. What we don’t know is whether we have lynx here year after year, and how many individual lynx we may have.”

The evidence of the lynx won’t mean any changes in logging or recreation. Forest managers in much of the lynx’ former range already follow rules assuming the presence of lynx.

In Duluth, this is Chris Julin for the Great Lakes Radio Consortium.