Paying Attention to Food Additives

The New York Times ran an article last week about a teenager who started an online petition asking PepsiCo to remove an ingredient called brominated vegetable oil from its sodas and sports drinks.

Even if you avoid these types of drinks, the article is an eye-opening account of the almost total lack of oversight of food additives in the U.S. Since 1997, the vast majority of new food additives, including flavorings, dyes, and preservatives, never received a safety determination from the government. What's more, since 1958 at least 1,000 new ingredients have entered the food supply without the knowledge of the government officials responsible for ensuring food safety. Manufacturers are not required to submit even basic information to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before including a new additive in their products.

How is this possible? For the past 15 years, the FDA has ceded its responsibilities to the food manufacturers themselves. If a a company can get a hand-picked "expert," that is, one of its own employees or contractors, to say that an ingredient is safe, the company doesn't even have to alert the FDA that it is putting the ingredient into food.

This almost complete lack of regulation stands in sharp contrast to most of the rest of the developed world. It is so troubling that many ingredients that have been banned from the food supply in other countries remain in products sold in the U.S. Food manufacturers, instead of removing a banned ingredient from all versions of a product, will manufacture two versions: one free of the banned chemical for sale in the rest of the world and one containing the banned chemical for sale in the U.S.

Why? Because in those instances, it is cheaper to use the potentially harmful additive, rather than a safe alternative.

      Brominated Vegetable Oil

The case of brominated vegetable oil (BVO) in sodas and sports drink is a good example of the major food companies' tactics. This ingredient is added to drinks to keep the flavoring ingredients from separating. BVO contains bromine, the element found in brominated flame retardants, and it is patented as a flame retardant for plastics. Only limited studies of BVO have been conducted in humans and animals. However, it has been found to build up in fatty tissue, raising concerns because overexposure to bromine causes a host of neurological and reproductive effects.

The European Union has long banned the use of BVO in food. Sodas sold in the EU market use alternative, natural ingredients to achieve the same stabilizing effect. Why don't companies replace BVO in drinks sold in the U.S.? The companies say that switching would be too costly.

      Artificial Food Dyes

Petroleum-derived food dyes are added to a myriad of products, many of them designed to appeal to children--products such as macaroni and cheese, candies and fruit snacks. Some of these dyes are known carcinogens. British studies have linked consumption of artificial dyes to hyperactivity in kids.

European Union regulations require a warning label on food containing artificial dyes; the warning must state that the food "may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children." These regulations have prompted U.S. companies, including Kraft, Coca-Cola and Mars to remove artificial colors from products distributed in other countries, but not from their products sold in the U.S.

Earlier this year, Nestle completed the process of removing all artificial colors, flavors and preservatives from all of its candies sold in the U.K. In that market, Nestle uses concentrates of fruits, vegetables and edible plants to provide colors to it products. At the same time that the company was announcing these changes, it announced that it had no plans to make similar changes in its products sold in the U.S.

Avoiding Harmful Food Additives

• I've linked to the Center for Science in the Public Interest's guide to food additives before. It is a useful guide with safety ratings for a large number of additives.
• Read labels. (Also be careful with children's medications; many contain artificial colors and preservatives).
• Choose organic products whenever possible, by law they may not contain artificial dyes and preservatives.
• Avoid brightly colored candies and other foods. Eat chocolate!

Jackie's Thoughts

Karen does such an incredible job with this blog and I am always grateful for every one of her posts.  I had a thought today that I just wanted to share in light of what we all have been dealing with this weekend.  Everyday many children in our schools say these words out loud: "One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all".  For our children we must be "one", we must be "indivisible" we much teach "liberty" and we must seek "justice for all".  Under the watchful eye of our God we must recognize when we are called to act.  I have no idea what we are to do but I think every real good change begins with conversation and ends with compromise.  As we all mourn, my prayer  is that we live what we claim and truly become "one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all"!

How Green is Your Christmas Tree?

From flickr by borkur.net

Which is more eco-friendly, a real or an artificial Christmas tree? Environmental groups, including the Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club and National Resources Defense Council all agree: natural is best, both for the environment and for your family's health. 

Nevertheless, sales of artificial trees continue to climb; they are expected to hit 13.4 million trees this year, for a record $1.07 billion in sales. In the U.S., twice as many homes will put up fake trees as will display real ones.

The vast majority of artificial trees are manufactured in, and shipped here from, China. Their transportation alone creates a huge carbon footprint. Fake trees are made from PVC, a petroleum-derived plastic. PVC is toxic to the environment and to human health throughout its life cycle, from production to disposal. During the production of artificial trees, highly toxic dioxins are released into the environment. Dioxins are potent carcinogens. Further, PVC cannot be recycled; these trees will end up in landfills or being incinerated, again releasing dioxins.

In addition, lead is added to PVC during its production. The PVC in artificial trees degrades under normal conditions, releasing lead dust. According to the EPA, when fake trees are 9 years old, the degradation of the PVC can result in "dangerous lead exposures."

A PVC tree has no place in anybody's home, but certainly not a home with children.

Real trees, on the other hand, help the environment by absorbing carbon from the atmosphere while they are growing. You can also support a local small business by buying a tree from a local tree farm. Pennsylvania is one of the top Christmas tree growing states and there are a number of tree farms in our area. We buy our tree every year from Nutbrown's Christmas Tree Farm in Carnegie. You can cut your own tree, or they will cut one for you. It is a wonderful holiday tradition.

Finally, remember to recycle your tree after the holiday. Many communities, including the City of Pittsburgh and Mt. Lebanon, will pick up your tree and chip it for mulch. I will post information about pick-up dates and drop-off sites as it becomes available.

Why and How to Avoid Triclosan

Truly "green" rubber gloves--no triclosan in these

I had purchased the same brand of rubber dishwashing gloves for years. When I needed a new pair I simply grabbed one at the grocery store, never paying any attention to the packaging. The last time I brought a new pair home, however, these words in small type in the corner of the box caught my eye: "Ultra-Fresh--Antimicrobial protection." 

As a rule, I avoid products marketed as "antimicrobial" or "antibacterial" because many of these contain triclosan. In fact, in turns out that "Ultra-Fresh" is a trade name for a triclosan additive.

What is Triclosan?

Triclosan is an antibacterial chemical found in thousands of consumer products, including soaps, dishwashing liquids, cosmetics, cutting boards, sponges, shoes, and toys. It is a pesticide. This ubiquitous chemical has adverse effects on our health and the environment, while at the same time being largely ineffective at what it is supposed to do. For example, the FDA and many other groups say there is no evidence that triclosan in antibacterial soaps provides any benefit over washing with regular soap and water.

Health Effects

Triclosan is so prevalent in consumer products that a study by the Centers for Disease Control detected it in the urine of 75% of Americans aged 6 years and older. Triclosan is absorbed through the skin and the mouth when we use products containing the chemical.

Animal studies have shown that triclosan is an endocrine disruptor that can, among other adverse effects, decrease levels of a thyroid hormone. Thyroid hormones are critical to brain development and function, particularly in children. These studies, according to a 2010 letter by the FDA, "raise valid concerns about the effect of repetitive daily human exposure to these antiseptic ingredients." (A link to a PDF of the letter can be found in this article.)

More recently, a paper published this year found that triclosan impairs muscle function, including cardiac muscle function, in both humans and animals.

Finally, some studies have raised the possibility that triclosan contributes to making bacteria resistant to antibiotics! Products marketed as protecting us from bacteria may actually be helping to breed drug-resistant bacteria or "superbugs."

Environmental Effects

Most of the vast quantities of consumer products containing triclosan get washed down our drains and end up in our waterways. Triclosan is one of the most frequently detected chemicals, at some of the highest concentrations, in U.S. streams. One reason that this is a cause for concern is that triclosan may react with UV rays to produce low levels of dioxin, a highly toxic substance. Furthermore, triclosan is toxic to various types of algae, making it it a potential disruptor of aquatic ecosystems.

 Triclosan is also discharged into the ocean. A 2009 study found traces of triclosan in the blood of bottlenosed dolphins tested off the coasts of South Carolina and Florida. The triclosan was found in their blood in concentrations known to disrupt the hormones, and growth and development, of other animals. Scientists called the accumulation of triclosan in these wild marine mammals--top level predators in the food chain--a worrisome finding, because it demonstrates that the chemical is building up in the ocean's food web.

Avoiding Triclosan

The bottom line is that the use of triclosan in consumer products is a marketing gimmick that poses a whole host of threats to our health and to the environment, while at the same time providing no real benefit whatsoever. My rubber gloves are a good example of how prevalent this unnecessary chemical is. What possible good could be derived from adding this chemical to rubber gloves?

How to avoid it:

• Read labels: Antibacterial soaps and body washes, toothpastes and cosmetics are regulated by the FDA. If these products contain triclosan, it will be listed as an ingredient on the label. 
• Stay away from other products labeled "antibacterial" or "antimicrobial," such as cutting boards, towels, yoga mats, shoes, clothing, towels, bedding and toys. These items may also be labeled with terms such as "fights germs," "protection against mold," "odor-fighting," or other similar claims.

Finally, I was happy to find a safe and eco-friendly alternative to my triclosan-laced rubber gloves. The gloves pictured at the top of this post are made by a company I really like: If You Care. They are made from Fair Trade Forest Stewardship Council certified natural rubber. And I found them at my local Giant Eagle.

Cough and Cold Relief for Kids (and Grown-ups, Too)

We are well into the season for colds and coughs; our family has already suffered from one bout with a nasty cold. I thus wanted to share some remedies that gave us relief from some of our symptoms.

My daughter is still at an age where it is not safe to give her over the counter (OTC) cold and cough medications. The FDA strongly recommends that children under 2 not be given OTC cough and cold products at all. It is still studying the safety of these products for kids ages 2 to 11, and thus has not issued a recommendation regarding kids in this age group. In addition to potentially dangerous drugs, most conventional cough and cold products for kids also contain things like artificial dyes, artificial sweeteners and harmful preservatives that I want to avoid.

We had good results from two chest rub products that we tried. My daughter was able to sleep through the night despite having a persistent cough during the day with each of these products. Badger Aromatic Chest Rub is certified organic and contains essential oils of eucalyptus, peppermint, rosemary and tea tree in an olive oil and beeswax base (it smells really good).

We also tried another rub that worked well for her: Maty's All Natural Baby Chest Rub (even though she is no longer a baby). This also contains essential oils, including eucalyptus, lavender and chamomile, in a sunflower and coconut oil base. Maty's also makes an All Natural Vapor Rub to be used by anyone age 2 and up.

I purchased the Badger Chest Rub at Whole Foods and the Maty's at the South Hills Giant Eagle Market District.

It is important to me that these ointments don't contain the potentially harmful ingredients found in more popular products, such as Vicks VapoRub. The camphor in the Vicks product can be toxic if it is absorbed through mucous membranes or broken skin. VapoRub also contains turpentine oil, which is not safe for children or people with lung problems, including asthma. Finally, it also contains petrolatum, a petroleum product which I prefer to avoid.

In addition to these products, I also gave her teaspoons of honey to mitigate her cough. Several studies (including this one, and one here) have demonstrated that, in addition to soothing a sore throat, honey may be an effective cough suppressant. Remember: never give honey to infants under one year of age; in rare cases it can cause infantile botulism.

The combination of one of the above chest rubs and honey worked really well for us. What do you use to treat your family's colds?

Controlling Stink Bugs Safely

They're back. As reported in this recent article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, our area is seeing an increase in stink bug activity this fall. We are experiencing this increase at my house--a large number of these annoying creatures are turning up inside.

Although stink bugs are completely harmless to people and pets, the article reports that a local pest control company is currently hard at work spraying the outside of houses with pesticides! An employee of the pest control company is quoted in the article: "They don't pose any threat, but still people don't want them . . . They are ugly."

Yes, they're ugly, but it makes absolutely no sense to spray your home, outside or inside, with hazardous pesticides in an attempt to control these harmless bugs. Pesticides are poisonous. The pesticides sprayed on the exterior of homes to control stink bugs, synthetic pyrethroids (click on link to PDF), are toxic to people and the environment. What's more, according to this fact sheet from the Penn State Cooperative Extension, these pesticides offer, at best "minor relief," as they "may not kill the insects much beyond several days or a week."

In addition, the Penn State Department of Entomology advises against the use of pesticides inside the house after stink bugs have entered the structure. Pesticides used indoors, such as insecticidal dust, spray insecticides and aerosol-type foggers, are not effective at controlling stink bugs. They may even cause infestations of carpet beetles (they feed on dead stink bugs) which will then attack woolens, dry goods and other natural products in your home.

So, what is the best way to control these pests? The best way to keep them from entering your home in the first place is to seal all cracks in your home through which stink bugs might enter, and to repair any damaged door and window screens. If bugs are entering your home, try to locate interior openings where they are coming in. Usually these will be openings such as cracks in baseboards, around window and door trim, and around exhaust fans or ceiling lights.  These entry points need to be sealed. Live and dead bugs can be removed with a vacuum cleaner. But, the above fact sheet warns, "the vacuum may acquire the smell of stink bugs for a period of time."

Finally, this video from the University of Maryland Extension provides a lot of information about keeping stink bugs out of your house and getting rid of them if they do get in (although I think I yelled "heck, no" out loud at my computer when the presenter suggests putting stink bugs that you've collected with a vacuum cleaner in your freezer to kill them).

Chloramine in our Water

If you are a customer of Pennsylvania American Water (PAW) living in Washington County or southern Allegheny County, since March of this year your water has been disinfected using chloramine. Perhaps like me you are wondering why PAW switched from chlorine to chloramine for disinfection, and if there are any reasons to be concerned about the use of chloramine in the water flowing into my home and from my faucets.

WHY PAW SWITCHED FROM CHLORINE TO CHLORAMINE

Chlorine creates toxic disinfection byproducts (DBPs) when it reacts with certain chemicals and organic matter in water. These DBPs have been linked to cancers and birth defects.

One of the class of chemicals with which chlorine reacts to create dangerous DBPs are called bromides. In 2010 and 2011 the Monongahela river, from which PAW draws its water supply, was found to have elevated levels of bromides, threatening the safety of our drinking water. Bromides get into our rivers from various sources, including power plant, conventional oil and gas drilling wastewater, and Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater discharges.

From 2008 until the spring of 2011, natural gas drilling companies brought millions of barrels of chemically tainted shale drilling wastewater to municipal water treatment plants. These plants, which were not equipped to properly treat this wastewater, discharge directly into the rivers from which hundreds of thousands of us get our drinking water. This practice did not stop until the state Department of Environmental Protection asked the drilling companies to voluntarily stop it. Nevertheless, at the end of 2011 bromide levels remained high in our rivers. Nobody appears to have a definitive answer as to why levels remain elevated; one possibility seems to be that wastewater from power plants, as well as from conventional oil and gas drilling (all of which contain bromides) is still being discharged into our rivers.

The combination of chlorine disinfection and elevated bromide levels caused the water supplied to many western Pennsylvania homes to exceed permitted levels of certain DBPs. Specifically, in 2011 some samples of the drinking water that PAW supplied to its customers exceeded the maximum allowable levels of some of these DBPs by nearly 30%. (You can access the 2011 Water Quality Report for the Pittsburgh, McMurray, Mon-Valley service area here). In previous years, some samples contained nearly double the maximum allowable levels of these toxic substances.

PAW made the switch from chlorine to chloramine in order to comply with new, stricter federal regulations, to go into effect this year, governing levels of chlorine DBPs in drinking water. Chloramine produces lower levels of certain DBPs regulated by the EPA.

ISSUES RAISED BY THE USE OF CHLORAMINE

Unregulated Disinfection Byproducts

However,  "[c]ompared to water treated with chlorine, water treated with monochloramine may contain higher concentrations of unregulated disinfection byproducts." This is from the EPA's statement on Chloramines in Drinking Water. In other words, our water may now contain different, even more dangerous DBPs that are simply not monitored and not regulated by the EPA. The best the EPA can give us is that it and other organizations are conducting research into potentially dangerous but currently unregulated DBPs.

The EPA acknowledges that the use of chloramine with source waters with high bromide, high iodide or high total organic matter may lead to the formation of unregulated disinfection byproducts such as iodoacids and nitrosamines.

Studies have shown that chloramine can indeed react with bromides, iodides and organic matter to create DBPs that are highly toxic, yet are not regulated by the EPA. These unregulated DBPs include iodoacids, discovered in water treated with chloramines in a 2004 study. One of the scientists conducting that study said iodoacids "may be the most toxic family of DBPs to date." He went on to note that the study demonstrated that switching from chlorine to chloramines " . . . may be opening a Pandora's box of new DBPs, and these new DBPs may be much more toxic, by orders of magnitude, than the regulated ones we are trying to avoid."

Another chloramine DBP of concern is NDMA (it is also a chemical used in the manufacture of rocket fuels). NDMA is a nitrosamine and is classsified by the EPA as a probable human carcinogen. The World Health Organization, on the other hand, says it is "clearly carcinogenic." But even though NDMA is clearly dangerous, and has been detected in our drinking water, the EPA does not regulate it, so it is permitted in our drinking water at any concentration.

Leaching of Lead

The EPA acknowledges that changes in water chemistry from chloramine use may impact lead levels in water. Chloramines can make water more corrosive, which can lead to pipe corrosion (in the distribution system or in the home) and an increase in lead levels in water. This happened when Washington, D.C. switched from chlorine to chloramine in 2001, causing lead to leach from aging pipes into drinking water. Between 2001 and 2004 tens of thousands of children were exposed to extremely high lead levels; in some homes lead levels in the water were hundreds of times higher than the amount the federal government considers a level of concern. Blood tests revealed that hundreds of young children had potentially damaging amounts of lead in their blood.

Closer to home, West View began using chloramine in its water in 2009. Testing in 2010 revealed high lead levels in water supplied to older homes with lead pipes. West View stopped using chloramines in 2010, but started using it again this year.

As my house was built in the 1930's, I am extremely concerned about the possibility of chloramine causing lead to leach into our water. PAW states that it practices "corrosion control" at its water treatment facilities. However, this is a complex science and the details of all the related environmental chemistry are not fully understood.

Removing Chloramine from Your Water

So, are there ways to remove chloramine and its dangerous byproducts from our water? Chloramine is not easy to remove from water; it is much more difficult to remove than chlorine. According to the EPA you cannot remove chloramine from water by boiling it, allowing it to sit at room temperature, or by using a reverse osmosis filter.

While it appears that some products claim to remove chloramine from drinking water or from shower water, the NSF only certifies certain products for chloramine reduction.

I am continuing to research ways to reduce or remove chloramine and chloramine DBPs, and will follow up in a future post.