Benefits of Eating Fish Outweigh Mercury Risk

A recent study finds that the benefits of eating fish could outweigh the harmful effects of slightly elevated levels of mercury in the body. The GLRC’s Christina Shockley reports:

Transcript

A recent study finds that the benefits of eating fish could outweigh the
harmful effects of slightly elevated levels of mercury in the body. The
GLRC’s Christina Shockley reports:


Mercury from air pollution falls into the water and accumulates in fish.
The toxin can cause health problems and birth defects.


John Dellinger is from the University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee. He
spent 12-years looking at Native Americans, who tend to eat 10 times
more fish than the average American. He says participants had higher
than average levels of mercury in their bodies, but reported few cases of
illness or infection. Dellinger says one reason could be they types of fish
they eat.


“They’re eating primarily a wide variety of fish, and predominantly a
moderate size fish. This is different than the sport fishing person who
goes out on the Great Lakes and is going for the really big fish.”


Dellinger says big fish tend to contain more mercury. He says it’s not
known exactly how much mercury is harmful, but the federal
government says women of child-bearing age, and children, should eat
only two servings per week of fish that are low in mercury.


For the GLRC, I’m Christina Shockley.

Related Links

Feds Want Control of Food Labeling

A bill that would pre-empt states’ rights to label food is making its way through Congress. Most of the states’ Attorneys General have signed a petition opposing the law. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

A bill that would pre-empt states’ rights to label food is making its way
through Congress. Most of the states’ Attorneys General have signed a
petition opposing the law. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports:


The sponsor, Michigan Republican Mike Rogers, says the National
Uniformity for Food Act is an appropriate extension of national
standards protecting food. But if it becomes law it will prohibit states
from telling people about chemicals or additives approved by the FDA,
but likely to be of concern when you buy your groceries.


For example, in California any food that contains chemicals known to
cause cancer or birth defects is required to carry a label saying so.


Another additive – recently approved by the FDA – is carbon monoxide
to help keep the meat looking red. Labels warning about that would not
be allowed under the proposal.


37 state attorneys general have signed a petition opposing the law, saying
the states should be allowed to warn against such chemicals. Opponents
say the bill puts special interests in the food industry before public’s right
to know what’s in their food.


For the GLRC, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Group Releases Cosmetics Safety Database

Anyone who slathers on lotions, deodorants, and shampoos can now search an online database to find out how safe those products are for their health. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:

Transcript

Anyone who slathers on lotions, deodorants, and shampoos can now search an online
database to find out how safe those products are for their health. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:


The Environmental Working Group looked at the ingredients of more than 14,000
products, and it rated the safety of those products by matching their ingredients with
government listings of toxic chemicals. Consumers can search the database by product
type or by brand name.


Jane Houlihan is vice president for science at the Environmental Working Group. She
says the database is important because federal regulators in the U.S. leave safety testing
up to the cosmetics industry.


“What we have right now is a system where individual companies have the ability to
decide what’s safe enough to sell. We don’t have a national safety standard for cosmetics.
So safety really varies widely.”


Some of the products that have raised health concerns include dark hair dyes – which
some scientists have linked to bladder cancer, and there are concerns that chemicals used
in nail polishes could cause birth defects in baby boys.


For the GLRC, I’m Sarah Hulett.

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

‘Non-Stick’ Chemical Discovered in Great Lakes

New research shows that chemicals used to repel food, stains, and water are sticking just about everywhere else in the environment. They were recently found in the Great Lakes. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports, their discovery was not a surprise:

Transcript

New research shows that chemicals used to repel food, stains, and water are
sticking just about everywhere else in the environment. They were recently found
in the Great Lakes. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett
reports, their discovery was not a surprise:


The chemicals are called perfluoronated compounds. They’re used in products
like Teflon, Scotchgard, and Gore-Tex. They’ve been detected in animals from
Arctic polar bears to seals and birds in the Baltic.


Matt Simcik is a researcher at the University of Minnesota. His studies turned up
the chemicals in lake trout from all five Great Lakes. Simcik says a likely source
for the contaminants is wastewater treatment plants.


“Because these chemicals are used in everyday use – textiles and carpets and
things. And when you wash your clothes, or wash your carpet, that water gets
into the waste system, and eventually ends up in the lake.”


The effects of the chemicals on humans is the subject of intense debate – but at
high exposures they’ve been linked to problems including birth defects and
cancer .


One of the two known chemicals has been phased out of use. Federal regulators
are looking at the other to determine whether it should be restricted as well.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Great Lakes States Top Mercury Contamination List

Four Great Lakes states have some of the most severe cases of mercury contamination in the country. That’s according to a recent report by the group Environmental Defense. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erin Toner has more:

Transcript

Four Great Lakes states have some of the most severe cases of mercury contamination in the
country. That’s according to a recent report by the group “Environmental Defense.” The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erin Toner has more:


Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Pennsylvania made the group’s top 10 list of places with the worst
mercury pollution. Mercury can cause brain damage in babies whose mothers eat contaminated
fish. The report says mercury in the ground and water often comes from local sources, such as
power plants.


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is working on new mercury rules for power plants.
But Michael Shore, of Environmental Defense, says the rules aren’t strong enough.


Other sectors have been required to reduce their mercury pollution by 90 percent. These
standards would only reduce mercury pollution by 70 percent. Also, these standards wouldn’t be
in place until 2018.


The EPA’s policy could use a market-based approach. That allows companies to buy pollution
credits from others that have emission controls in place. Environmentalists say instead, the EPA
should force all power companies to pollute less.


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

Related Links

Congressman Takes on Mercury Emissions

A Republican congressman is calling for stricter control of mercury emissions. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

A Republican congressman is calling for stricter control of mercury
emissions. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports:


In Representative Mark Kirk’s congressional district on the
north side of Chicago, samples of rain water have shown mercury
levels as much as 32 times higher than the mercury levels that the
Environmental Protection Agency considers safe
in water.


Mercury is a naturally occurring element, but much of the
mercury in precipitation comes from coal-burning power plants.


Mike Murray is with the environmental group National Wildlife
Federation,
which supports Congressman Kirk’s legislation. Murray says forms of
mercury are taken up into the food chain, where its toxic effects multiply.


“Fish concentrations can be millions of times higher than the
concentrations
in the surrounding water, and that’s where it becomes a problem.”


Mercury contamination can cause neurological damage in fetuses and
small
children, leading to decreased intellect and problems with language
skills, among other things. High levels of mercury have been found in a
number of areas throughout the Great Lakes states.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

Herbicides May Complicate Pregnancies

A Midwest researcher has found that the combination of chemicals in some common weed killers may complicate pregnancies. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

A Midwest researcher has found that the combination of chemicals in
some common weed killers may threaten human fetuses. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


Warren Porter is an environmental toxicologist at the University of
Wisconsin – Madison. He says he went to the hardware store and bought
common herbicides containing the chemical compounds 2-4-d, dicamba, and
mecoprop. Porter diluted the mixture with water and fed it many times
to hundreds of lab mice. Porter says the mice experienced a 20 percent
increase in failed pregnancies and he contends exposure to the
combination of chemicals is to blame. He says government regulators
often test only individual chemicals and don’t realize how chemical
mixes might affect a living cell.


“It’s like a molecular bull in a china shop. It’s almost impossible to
predict in advance all the possible things they might do.”


Porter says exposure to the mix of weed killer chemicals can also
threaten human pregnancies. But other researchers say the risk to most
people is very low.


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

Cash to Clean-Up Polluted Lake Sediments?

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill that would provide 250 million dollars to help clean up the bottom of the Great Lakes. A similar bill is currently working its way through the U.S. Senate. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Matt Shafer Powell has this report:

Transcript

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill that would
provide two hundred and fifty million dollars to help clean up the bottom
of the Great Lakes. A similar bill is currently working its way through
the U.S. Senate. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Matt Shafer Powell has
this report:


It takes a long time for water to find its way out of most of the Great
Lakes. For instance, Lake Superior can retain its water for more than 150
years. But that means that it also takes a long time for those lakes to get
rid of pollution. Representative Vern Ehlers of Michigan says that’s why the
government needs to step in and help…


“You know once a lake is contaminated, it’s contaminated for a very long
time. And if you’ve got non-biodegradable contaminants, you’ve got a major
problem.”


Ehlers was one of the sponsors of the Great Lakes Legacy Act, which just
passed the House. If passed into law, the Act could provide money to the
EPA to assist in the clean up of polluted sediments on the lake floors.
Some scientists have linked those sediments to a variety of health problems,
including birth defects.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Matt Shafer Powell.

Algae: The Missing PCB Link?

Toxic chemicals known as P-C-B’s haven’t been used in the U.S. for morethan two decades. But dangerous levels of P-C-B’s remain in the naturalenvironment and pose a threat to human health. To address this problem,scientists are trying to understand how these chemicals get into thefood chain. Now, a scientist at Northwestern University has found alikely answer. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Steve Frenkelreports: