PFCs may be more toxic to the immune system than current dioxin exposures

Boston, MA—A new study finds that perfluorinated compounds (PFCs), widely used in manufactured products such as non-stick cookware, waterproof clothing, and fast-food packaging, were associated with lowered immune response to vaccinations in children. It is the first study to document how PFCs, which can be transferred to children prenatally (via the mother) and postnatally from exposure in the environment, can adversely affect vaccine response.

The study appears in the January 25, 2012 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

“Routine childhood immunizations are a mainstay of modern disease prevention. The negative impact on childhood vaccinations from PFCs should be viewed as a potential threat to public health,” said study lead author Philippe Grandjean, adjunct professor of environmental health at Harvard School of Public Health.

PFCs have thousands of industrial and manufacturing uses. Most Americans have the chemical compounds in their bodies. Prior studies have shown that PFC concentrations in mice similar to those found in people suppressed immune response, but the adverse effects on people had been poorly documented.

The researchers analyzed data on children recruited at birth at National Hospital in Torshavn, Faroe Islands during 1999-2001. A total of 587 participated in follow-up examinations. Children were tested for immune response to tetanus and diphtheria vaccinations at ages 5 and 7 years. PFCs were measured in maternal pregnancy serum and in the serum of children at age 5 to determine prenatal and postnatal exposure.

The results showed that PFC exposure was associated with lower antibody responses to immunizations and an increased risk of antibody levels in children lower than those needed to provide long-term protection. (Antibody concentrations in serum are a good indicator of overall immune functions in children.) A two-fold greater concentration of three major PFCs was associated with a 49% lower level of serum antibodies in children at age 7 years.

“We were surprised by the steep negative associations, which suggest that PFCs may be more toxic to the immune system than current dioxin exposures,” said Grandjean.

The PFC concentrations are similar to or slightly below those reported in U.S. women, and most serum PFC levels in Faroese children at age 5 were lower than those measured in U.S. children aged 3 to 5 years in 2001-2002.

Literature:

Harvard School of Public Health, PFCs, chemicals in environment, linked to lowered immune response to childhood vaccinations, Jan, 24, 2012

Related Articles:

• DuPont agreed to pay $8.3 Million to install water filters
• Norway proposes to prohibit four hazardous substances in consumer products
• Compounds in non-stick cookware may be associated with elevated cholesterol in children and teens

Why do smells make some people sick?

Do you get a headache from the perfume of the lady next to you at the table? Do cleaning solutions at work make your nose itch? If you have symptoms prompted by everyday smells, it does not necessarily mean you are allergic but rather that you suffer from chemical intolerance. According to Linus Andersson at Umeå University, this hypersensitivity can be the result of an inability to get used to smells.

Normally your smell perceptions diminish rapidly, as when you enter a friend’s apartment. Even though you clearly notice smells just inside the door, you don’t think about them for long. For people with chemical intolerance, on the other hand, smells seem always to be present. Psychology researcher Linus Andersson has exposed both intolerant and non-intolerant individuals to smells and compared their reactions.

“The hypersensitive individuals felt that the smell was getting stronger even though its concentration had not changed. Their brain activity images also differed from those in the other group,” he says.

The results were observed using methods based on both electroencephalography (EEG) and functional brain imaging technology (fMRI). The EEG method involved placing electrodes on the heads of trial subjects and registering the minute changes in tension in the brain that arise following exposure to smells. Unlike the people in the normal group, Linus Andersson explains, the intolerant people did not evince a lessening of brain activity during the period of more than an hour they were exposed to a smell. The inability to grow accustomed to smells is thus matched by unchanging brain activity over time.

“These individuals also have a different pattern in the blood flow in their brains, compared with those who perceive that a smell diminishes. A similar change can be found in patients with pain disorders, for example.”

Sensitivity to smell impacts the entire body. A further finding in the dissertation is that chemical intolerant people also react strongly to substances that irritate the mucous linings of their nose and mouth. People who cough more when they inhale capsaicin, the hot compound in chili peppers, also have heightened reactions in the brain to other smells. Besides the fact that intolerant individuals perceive that smells grow stronger, effects are also seen in mucous linings and in the brain.

Chemical intolerance is surprisingly common – up to ten percent of the Swedish population report they are bothered by everyday smells, whereas roughly two percent experience severe symptoms. Yet, in contrast to the situation regarding allergies and asthma, there is very little research about what causes this condition. Linus Andersson maintains that if it were possible to identify what characterizes this hypersensitivity then it would be possible to develop methods for diagnosis and treatment. But research can also provide new knowledge about how we should think about our work and everyday environments.

“Some co-workers are bothered more than others by the smell of the printer — what should we do to make our working conditions acceptable to as many people as possible?”

Author:

UMEA University, Why do smells make some people sick?, 20. Januar 2012 Expertanswer (Expertsvar in Swedish

Linus Andersson, Sick of smells: Empirical findings and a theoretical framework for chemical intolerance, Umeå, 2011-12-02

Related Articles:

• Ministry of Health presents Consensus Document on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
• Experts says: MCS is a physiological disease with clear manifestations
• Environmental diseases are not unexplained mysteries
• MCS registered as physical disease at ICD-10 in Germany

Mary Lamielle, executive director of the National Center for Environmental Health Strategies, is one of fourteen Camden County, New Jersey, residents chosen to receive the 2012 Camden County Freedom Medal, honoring the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., for their unselfish contributions to improving their community.

For three decades Mary has dedicated herself to promoting the public health and improving the lives of people sick or disabled by environmental exposures. She has served on dozens of federal and state advisory committees including the recently concluded CDC National Conversation on Public Health and Chemical Exposures. She is a member of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ Public Interest Partners and HUD’s Disability Task Force.

Mary was nominated for the Freedom Medal by Diane Reibel, Assistant Professor of Physiology at Thomas Jefferson Medical School in Philadelphia. In nominating Mary, Dr. Reibel noted that “I met Mary twenty-five years ago when I became ill from chemicals in my research laboratory. Mary’s knowledge, support, and advocacy were a life saver for me. What Mary did for me, she has done for thousands of people across New Jersey and tens of thousands nationwide.”

Mary was recently honored with the 2011 New Jersey Governor’s Jefferson Award for Public Service, PSEG Environmental Stewardship Award, and a 2010 US EPA Region 2 Environmental Quality Award, the highest civilian award given by the EPA.

The Camden County Freedom Medal award was created in 2001 to honor the ideals indicative of the slain civil rights leader. According to Camden County Freeholder Director Louis Cappelli Jr., “This is Camden County’s way of honoring Dr. King.”

Medals will be presented during an evening ceremony at the Camden County Boathouse at Cooper River on January 20.

Author: National Center for Environmental Health Strategies, Press Release, January 2012

Congratulation Mary, this is so, so well deserved!

In the amoral milieu of the corporate bottom line, you can’t blame Tokyo Electric Power Co. for trying.

Tepco owns the six-reactor Fukushima complex that was wrecked by Japan’s March 11 earthquake and smashed by the resulting tsunami. It faces more than $350 billion in compensation and clean-up costs, as well as likely prosecution for withholding crucial information that may have prevented some radiation exposures and for operating the giant station after being warned about the inadequacy of its protections against disasters.

So, when the company was hauled into Tokyo District Court October 31 by the Sunfield Golf Club, which was demanding decontamination of the golf course, Tepco lawyers tried something novel. They claimed the company isn’t liable because it no longer “owned” the radioactive poisons that were spewed from its destroyed reactors.

“Radioactive materials that scattered and fell from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant belong to individual landowners there, not Tepco,” the company said. This stunned the court, the plaintiffs and the press. An attorney for the golf club said, “We are flabbergasted….”

The court rejected Tepco’s notion that its cancer-causing pollution is owned by the areas it contaminated. But you have to hand it to Tepco. For brash balderdash, there’s hardly a match in the world.

Even Union Carbide, whose toxic gas in Bhopal, India, killed 15,000 people in 1984, hasn’t tried that one. Dow Chemical, which bought Union Carbide in 2001, is still fighting India’s demand for $1.7 billion in compensation. Perhaps Dow could try Tepco’s dodge: “The gas belongs to the breather now, since possession is nine-tenths of the law.”

Meanwhile, babies in Japan may be in for a life of debilitation and disease because radioactive cesium-137 and cesium-134 was recently found in infant milk powder. A December 6 announcement by the Meiji Holdings Company, Inc. said it was recalling 400,000 cans of its “Meiji Step,” powdered milk for babies older than nine months. The powder was packaged in April – at the height of Fukushima’s largest radiation releases – distributed mostly in May and has an October 2012 expiration date.

The amount of cesium in one serving of the milk powder was about 8 percent of the total contamination allowed by the government. But no one knows how much formula individual babies may have consumed prior to the recall. It is well known that fetuses, infants, children and women are harmed by doses of radiation below officially allowed exposures. Most exposure standards have been established in view of radiation’s projected effect on “Reference Man,” a hypothetical 20- to 30-year-old white male, rather than women and children, the most vulnerable.

Even tiny amounts of internal radioactive contamination can damage DNA, cause cancer and weaken the immune system. Fukushima’s meltdowns dispersed radioactive contamination found in vegetables, milk, seafood, water, grain, animal feed and beef. Green tea grown 250 miles from Fukushima was found contaminated. Rice harvested this fall from 154 farms in Fukushima Prefecture was found in November to be poisoned with cesium 25 percent above the allowable limit. Shipments of rice from those farms were banned, but not before many tons had been sold. Presumably, that radiation is now the property of each consumer under the inventive assertion of Tepco’s corporate attorneys.

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

Source:
John LaForge, Truthout, Fukushima’s Owner Adds Insult to Injury – Claims Radioactive Fallout Isn’t Theirs, Monday 16 January 2012

Related Environmental Medicine Matters articles:

• The Hanford Nuclear Reservation becomes an American Pop-Icon Amusement Park?
• Expert discovers simple method of dealing with harmful radioactive iodine
• People may eventually develop cancer as a result of the radiation exposure

Scent marketing alarms the trade supervision and labor unions

Businesses that use fragrances in order to encourage customers to linger and buy, are becoming increasingly common. The scent marketing industry promotes the retail branch strongly. The fragrances that one finds in the shops are mixtures of different natural essential oils or chemical compositions. Neither is harmless for employees or customers. In Denmark, the trade supervision and labor unions are keeping their eye on the American fashion chain, “Abercrombie & Fitch”. The fashion chain is known for using the fragrance Citronellol, an aromatic oil that is classified as questionable because it can be harmful to one’s health and it can trigger allergies. The Danish trade supervision is currently committed to putting an end to the scenting in order to protect the employees and customers of the fashion chain.

Authorities and labor unions are going up against scented store environments

In Denmark, labor unions are paying close attention to the authorities’ course of action against the American fashion company “Abercrombie & Fitch”. In their shops, it smells strongly of perfume. The significant fragrance is supposed to bind the customer to the brand and increase sales. The newspaper “Politiken DK” reports that so-called scent marketing has extremely increased in Denmark in the past three years. Anyone who visits certain stores frequently or is employed there, can develop allergies. It is an unnecessary burden on the employees, because many of the fragrances can cause allergic reactions – the newspaper quoted the head of the trade supervision.

Contamination of indoor air with chemicals and allergenic fragrance oils

The perfumes for a scented environment are often led directly into the store through the air conditioning and ventilation system. Smaller shops set up bottles with aromatic oils, containing wooden sticks which release the fragrance into the room. Both are questionable, not only for people who already suffer from perfume allergies, but also for asthmatics and chemically sensitive people (MCS). Even healthy people may sensitize over time and develop allergies.

The trade supervision wants to protect employees and customers

We are most likely dealing with allergens, which are injected into the stores, is what the head of the trade supervision told the newspaper “Politiken DK”. That’s why the authorities tried to contact “Abercrombie & Fitch” at the end of last year. The authorities tried to make it clear to them that they wanted to protect employees against the high concentration of perfume in the shops, because it is an unnecessary burden.

Labor unions are receiving more and more complaints

Danish labor unions report that they receive more and more complaints from union members about the scenting of their workplace. Therefore, the actions of the trade supervision in the case of “Abercrombie & Fitch” are being closely observed. It is a major health problem for the employees in those stores, but also for the customers, said a union spokesperson to “Politiken DK”. The customers, unlike the employees have the choice and can simply stay away from the scented store. The employee unfortunately does not have this choice, especially in times when everyone is happy to even have a job.

It remains to be seen how the American company will behave, what measures the Danish trade supervision will take, and how much pressure the Danish labor unions will make. If the Abercrombie & Fitch” management is smart, they will stop exposing their employees and customers to substances that can cause illness. Sick employees cost a company money, and when customers realize why they don’t feel well in a shop and stay away, they too, can cost the company a lot of money.

The German Federal Environmental Agency has been warning against the use of fragrances for this purpose for years – through several press releases and it’s own published background paper which writes about this issue, „Fragrances: When something pleasant becomes a burden.” (german) An increase of scented shops has also been reported in Germany. So far, there is no authority or union which is really trying to prevent it.

Autor: Silvia K. Müller, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, 17. Januar 2012

Literatur:

Politiken.DK, Duftende butikker er farlige for ansattes og kunders helbred, 13. Januar 2012

Related Articles:

• Aromatherapy Can Produce Harmful Indoor Air Pollutants
• Scented laundry products emit hazardous chemicals through dryer vents
• Reckless Self-Interest Of The Fragrance Industry
• Scented consumer products shown to emit many unlisted chemicals