some of you will think this is a lie

[Guest guest]

It appears our public health measures such as removing lead from gas

and banning smoking in public places and controlling fish consumption

are working to dramatically reduce heavy metal toxicity in almost all

americans. This will no doubt comes a shock to some and will be

disputed as a result. Anyone who has moved to CA from a public

smoking state knows how true this is, though. The only perhaps

conspiratorial part of this press release is the comment that these

things don't make you sick anyway (which makes one wonder why they

were banned and why the right wing admin is bragging about their

success - Gerberding is a bush appointee, I believe)

 

In Americans, Lower Levels Of Chemicals

Lead, Secondhand Smoke Exposure Has Decreased

 

Associated Press

Friday, July 22, 2005; Page A03

 

 

 

ATLANTA, July 21 -- Americans have lower levels of lead, secondhand-

smoke byproducts and other potentially dangerous substances in their

bodies than they did a decade ago, according to the third government

survey of exposure to environmental chemicals.

 

" These data help relieve worry and concern, " Julie L. Gerberding,

director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said

Thursday.

 

CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding says work remains to reduce

secondhand smoke. (Haraz Ghanbari - AP)

The CDC released its first National Report on Human Exposure to

Environmental Chemicals in 2001. For its latest findings, it took

blood and urine samples from about 2,400 people in 2001 and 2002 and

tested for 148 environmental chemicals, including metals, pesticides,

insect repellants and disinfectants.

 

The CDC stressed that the presence of an environmental chemical in

blood or urine " does not mean that the chemical causes disease. "

 

In the early 1990s, 4.4 percent of U.S. children between the ages of

1 and 5 had elevated lead levels. That dropped to 1.6 percent between

1999 and 2002, according to the latest study.

 

" This is an astonishing public health achievement " that is related to

the removal of lead from gasoline and other efforts to screen and

treat children for lead exposure, Gerberding said.

 

To gauge the effect of secondhand smoke, the CDC tested nonsmokers'

levels of cotinine, a product of nicotine after it enters the body.

Levels dropped by 75 percent in adults and 68 percent in children

between the early 1990s and 2002, the CDC said, as a result of

restrictions on smoking.

 

But more work needs to be done to reduce secondhand smoke, Gerberding

said. Blacks still had more than twice the cotinine levels of whites

or Mexican Americans.

 

Other findings:

 

· No women in the survey had dangerous concentrations of methyl

mercury, which can come from eating shellfish or fish. But the CDC

said mercury levels in women of childbearing age should be monitored

because 5.7 percent of women in this age group had levels close to

what is believed to cause birth defects.

 

· About 5 percent of the U.S. population 20 or older had cadmium, a

heavy metal, in their blood at a level that could cause a kidney

injury. Cadmium can come from cigarette smoke.

 

· Traces of aldrin and dieldrin, pesticides for cotton and corn

discontinued in 1970 in the United States, were very low or

undetectable in U.S. adults.

[Guest guest]

Be careful this is the administration that has changed the meaning of many

terms in order to claim so-called successes (environment, economy, etc). If

we look at this concept of job success alone, I would say they have been a

dismal failure.

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

 

> <

>

>cha

> some of you will think this is a lie

>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 04:39:34 -0700

>

>It appears our public health measures such as removing lead from gas

>and banning smoking in public places and controlling fish consumption

>are working to dramatically reduce heavy metal toxicity in almost all

>americans. This will no doubt comes a shock to some and will be

>disputed as a result. Anyone who has moved to CA from a public

>smoking state knows how true this is, though. The only perhaps

>conspiratorial part of this press release is the comment that these

>things don't make you sick anyway (which makes one wonder why they

>were banned and why the right wing admin is bragging about their

>success - Gerberding is a bush appointee, I believe)

>

>In Americans, Lower Levels Of Chemicals

>Lead, Secondhand Smoke Exposure Has Decreased

>

>Associated Press

>Friday, July 22, 2005; Page A03

>

>

>

>ATLANTA, July 21 -- Americans have lower levels of lead, secondhand-

>smoke byproducts and other potentially dangerous substances in their

>bodies than they did a decade ago, according to the third government

>survey of exposure to environmental chemicals.

>

> " These data help relieve worry and concern, " Julie L. Gerberding,

>director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said

>Thursday.

>

>CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding says work remains to reduce

>secondhand smoke. (Haraz Ghanbari - AP)

>The CDC released its first National Report on Human Exposure to

>Environmental Chemicals in 2001. For its latest findings, it took

>blood and urine samples from about 2,400 people in 2001 and 2002 and

>tested for 148 environmental chemicals, including metals, pesticides,

>insect repellants and disinfectants.

>

>The CDC stressed that the presence of an environmental chemical in

>blood or urine " does not mean that the chemical causes disease. "

>

>In the early 1990s, 4.4 percent of U.S. children between the ages of

>1 and 5 had elevated lead levels. That dropped to 1.6 percent between

>1999 and 2002, according to the latest study.

>

> " This is an astonishing public health achievement " that is related to

>the removal of lead from gasoline and other efforts to screen and

>treat children for lead exposure, Gerberding said.

>

>To gauge the effect of secondhand smoke, the CDC tested nonsmokers'

>levels of cotinine, a product of nicotine after it enters the body.

>Levels dropped by 75 percent in adults and 68 percent in children

>between the early 1990s and 2002, the CDC said, as a result of

>restrictions on smoking.

>

>But more work needs to be done to reduce secondhand smoke, Gerberding

>said. Blacks still had more than twice the cotinine levels of whites

>or Mexican Americans.

>

>Other findings:

>

>· No women in the survey had dangerous concentrations of methyl

>mercury, which can come from eating shellfish or fish. But the CDC

>said mercury levels in women of childbearing age should be monitored

>because 5.7 percent of women in this age group had levels close to

>what is believed to cause birth defects.

>

>· About 5 percent of the U.S. population 20 or older had cadmium, a

>heavy metal, in their blood at a level that could cause a kidney

>injury. Cadmium can come from cigarette smoke.

>

>· Traces of aldrin and dieldrin, pesticides for cotton and corn

>discontinued in 1970 in the United States, were very low or

>undetectable in U.S. adults.

[Guest guest]

This seems like PR work to me. Smells like dung.

Let's see the administration wants to take claim for an improved

environment, perhaps? Maybe they want to point out that we aren't in

any real danger with pesticides(Monsanto) because we can easily

adapt. . They want to give a false hope how easily things can be

cleaned up?

 

I'm going to email this to a couple of friends at the UCS (Union of

Concerned Scientists) to get their take on the spin, I'll report

back, (it may take a few weeks as I think they are traveling).

 

regards,

George

 

On Jul 22, 2005, at 7:39 AM, wrote:

 

> It appears our public health measures such as removing lead from gas

> and banning smoking in public places and controlling fish consumption

> are working to dramatically reduce heavy metal toxicity in almost all

> americans. This will no doubt comes a shock to some and will be

> disputed as a result. Anyone who has moved to CA from a public

> smoking state knows how true this is, though. The only perhaps

> conspiratorial part of this press release is the comment that these

> things don't make you sick anyway (which makes one wonder why they

> were banned and why the right wing admin is bragging about their

> success - Gerberding is a bush appointee, I believe)

>

> In Americans, Lower Levels Of Chemicals

> Lead, Secondhand Smoke Exposure Has Decreased

>

> Associated Press

> Friday, July 22, 2005; Page A03

>

>

>

> ATLANTA, July 21 -- Americans have lower levels of lead, secondhand-

> smoke byproducts and other potentially dangerous substances in their

> bodies than they did a decade ago, according to the third government

> survey of exposure to environmental chemicals.

>

> " These data help relieve worry and concern, " Julie L. Gerberding,

> director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said

> Thursday.

>

> CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding says work remains to reduce

> secondhand smoke. (Haraz Ghanbari - AP)

> The CDC released its first National Report on Human Exposure to

> Environmental Chemicals in 2001. For its latest findings, it took

> blood and urine samples from about 2,400 people in 2001 and 2002 and

> tested for 148 environmental chemicals, including metals, pesticides,

> insect repellants and disinfectants.

>

> The CDC stressed that the presence of an environmental chemical in

> blood or urine " does not mean that the chemical causes disease. "

>

> In the early 1990s, 4.4 percent of U.S. children between the ages of

> 1 and 5 had elevated lead levels. That dropped to 1.6 percent between

> 1999 and 2002, according to the latest study.

>

> " This is an astonishing public health achievement " that is related to

> the removal of lead from gasoline and other efforts to screen and

> treat children for lead exposure, Gerberding said.

>

> To gauge the effect of secondhand smoke, the CDC tested nonsmokers'

> levels of cotinine, a product of nicotine after it enters the body.

> Levels dropped by 75 percent in adults and 68 percent in children

> between the early 1990s and 2002, the CDC said, as a result of

> restrictions on smoking.

>

> But more work needs to be done to reduce secondhand smoke, Gerberding

> said. Blacks still had more than twice the cotinine levels of whites

> or Mexican Americans.

>

> Other findings:

>

> · No women in the survey had dangerous concentrations of methyl

> mercury, which can come from eating shellfish or fish. But the CDC

> said mercury levels in women of childbearing age should be monitored

> because 5.7 percent of women in this age group had levels close to

> what is believed to cause birth defects.

>

> · About 5 percent of the U.S. population 20 or older had cadmium, a

> heavy metal, in their blood at a level that could cause a kidney

> injury. Cadmium can come from cigarette smoke.

>

> · Traces of aldrin and dieldrin, pesticides for cotton and corn

> discontinued in 1970 in the United States, were very low or

> undetectable in U.S. adults.

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services,

> including board approved continuing education classes, an annual

> conference and a free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

, " mike Bowser " <naturaldoc1@h...>

wrote:

> Be careful this is the administration that has changed the meaning of many

> terms in order to claim so-called successes (environment, economy, etc). If

> we look at this concept of job success alone, I would say they have been a

> dismal failure.

>

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>

 

good point. I wonder if the study compared different standards and called it a

decrease. the

raw data would make that clear.

 

[Guest guest]

, " mike Bowser " <naturaldoc1@h...>

wrote:

> Be careful this is the administration that has changed the meaning of many

> terms in order to claim so-called successes (environment, economy, etc). If

> we look at this concept of job success alone, I would say they have been a

> dismal failure.

 

on a second look, it appears that the raw figures are down. so unless the

figures were

fudged, this is good news. but could it be even better and is it too late

anyway. I

personally think the evidence suggests it is too late for any changes we make at

the

current level of technology to stop the damage we have done. Even if we

abandoned all

technology and went back to the stone ages, the climate will change dramatically

and the

buried radioactive waste will haunt us forever. Ironically, if we went back to

the stone age,

we'd probably all die of radiation poisoning in a generation after the current

halfassed

safety measures failed altogether due to no electricity, etc.

 

That is really the main reason biotech and nanotech interest me. Sure, they

could doom

us, but if we are doomed any way, our only hope is technology that can actually

take apart

our mess molecule by molecule and make solar power so cheap its almost free so

none of

this will ever happen again. Perhaps if we had seriously listened to Rachel

Carson 43 years

ago, we could have reversed the trend. but its been bandaids all the way. And

don't

blame the US alone. We are the kings right now, but China will soon far eclipse

us in the

waste of resources and the creation of pollution.

 

[Guest guest]

 

I don't know about you but I am concerned with all of the above but it first

starts with us demanding accountability of our elected officials not some

corporate sponsored spin. The truth is out there. It is a matter of us

knowing where to find it (try Air America radio). Sorry about the plug but

they share a lot of info that is not corporate media sponsored and I also

had a job offer from them in their beginning.

 

Let's start by getting involved with what we can do. Educate ourselves with

changes that we can make, more walk, less car etc. Doing things locally is

also a great way to boost the regional economy. Corporations have taken far

too many of our resources and left localities barren (Walmart is a great

example of this). Everything that comes to mind about Oriental herbs is

what is needed in our current times maybe we just need to market it better

(low cost, renewable, locally beneficial to economies, fewer negative

side-effects, etc).

 

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

 

> " " <

>

>

>Re: some of you will think this is a lie

>Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:29:55 -0000

>

> , " mike Bowser " <naturaldoc1@h...>

>wrote:

> > Be careful this is the administration that has changed the meaning of

>many

> > terms in order to claim so-called successes (environment, economy, etc).

> If

> > we look at this concept of job success alone, I would say they have been

>a

> > dismal failure.

>

>on a second look, it appears that the raw figures are down. so unless the

>figures were

>fudged, this is good news. but could it be even better and is it too late

>anyway. I

>personally think the evidence suggests it is too late for any changes we

>make at the

>current level of technology to stop the damage we have done. Even if we

>abandoned all

>technology and went back to the stone ages, the climate will change

>dramatically and the

>buried radioactive waste will haunt us forever. Ironically, if we went

>back to the stone age,

>we'd probably all die of radiation poisoning in a generation after the

>current halfassed

>safety measures failed altogether due to no electricity, etc.

>

>That is really the main reason biotech and nanotech interest me. Sure,

>they could doom

>us, but if we are doomed any way, our only hope is technology that can

>actually take apart

>our mess molecule by molecule and make solar power so cheap its almost free

>so none of

>this will ever happen again. Perhaps if we had seriously listened to

>Rachel Carson 43 years

>ago, we could have reversed the trend. but its been bandaids all the way.

>And don't

>blame the US alone. We are the kings right now, but China will soon far

>eclipse us in the

>waste of resources and the creation of pollution.

>

>Todd

>

>

[Guest guest]

try Air America radio

>>>A breath of fresh air

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609