M3.1 Biomonitoring

-
Lab Results from Blood and Urine Samples
The following chemicals were found at levels for which there are no “safe” levels
Chemical(s)
Potential Health Effects 
Dioxins
Carcinogen, endocrine disruptor, cognitive disfunction
DDT 
Reproductive toxicant
Organophosphate
(pesticide) neurotoxicant, Parkinson’s
Lead
Neurotoxicant, kidney toxicant, insomnia, impotence
Solvent
Liver toxicant, neurotoxicant
PCBs
Carcinogen, toxic to immune, neuro, and repro systems
Phthalates
Repro toxicant (infertility), testicular damage, endometriosis, endocrine disruptor

Knowing that these chemicals are in most individuals, is scary. The Environmental Protection Agency is supposed to be regulating these products to make sure they are safe to use, however, they do not require any medical data or studies showing the effect of these chemicals on humans before it is placed on the market. Getting results like the ones above makes me angry and untrusting of the federal government and chemical companies. Endometriosis runs in my family and I recently came across an article on http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org (actual article:https://endometriosisnews.com/2018/09/05/women-with-endometriosis-have-high-levels-of-commonly-used-plasticizer/)  and saw that in the 50 women study participants, who suffer from Endometriosis, all had Diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) in their bodies and the 50 women who did not have Endometriosis did not have DEHP in their bodies. DEHP is a Phthalate that is used in many plastics. Knowing that being exposed to DEHP could have lead to mine and my mom's Endometriosis is infuriating. It scares me because a lot of these chemicals have been banned, but they are turning up in innocent children who were born after the banning. The EPA and chemical companies need to take responsibility and countermeasure the harm they are causing people around the world.



Comments

  1. Daisy AlbarranSeptember 16, 2018 at 3:04 PM

    Hi Kera,

    It is rather intimidating that a government that is meant to protect the population is harming us. I think the EPA is doing its best considering the federal funds have been cut severely due to the current administration - and can definitely do more. I agree that there should be more pressure on chemical companies from both the public and the government to fight the harm that is being caused.

    Thanks for your thoughts!

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousSeptember 16, 2018 at 7:06 PM

    Hi Kera,

    I too, find it alarming that the EPA does not have strict policies against the use of certain chemicals that may lead to illnesses and disorders such as endometriosis. I think we can learn a lot about the development of such disorders through chemical exposure, then use that evidence to enforce stronger policies against the use of toxic chemicals. Thanks for sharing!
    Carmen

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownSeptember 17, 2018 at 10:22 AM

    Hi Kera,

    I agree that the results would make me angry and untrusting of the federal government and the EPA. I always thought the EPA did more to protect us but it seems they are doing the bare minimum if that. It is shocking the amount of chemicals we are exposed to and the fact that some chemicals that have been banned can still be passed down from our grandparents! Very interesting article and information you found about Endometriosis. That is clear evidence that DEHP causes adverse health effects. I agree that the EPA and chemical companies need to take responsibility and start making changes. Thank you for sharing!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

M1.4 Blog Assignment: List of Environmental Exposures

-
There are several different types of exposures you can come into contact with in your lifetime. You spend the majority of your time at home, work, school, and in the community. It is important to be aware of the chemical, radiological, and biological agents you can be exposed to in those areas. For example, I currently live in Half Moon Bay. In Half Moon Bay it is common to get termites and whenever a property is sold, it is required to be fumigated. When I see so many tented structures, I cant help but wonder how effective are they are sealing and preventing access to those places and what are the lingering effects of sulfuryl fluoride on the things in the home. I did some digging and found an interesting report done by the EPA on fumigation and the risks that it poses to individuals: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-12/documents/_epaoig_20161212-17-p-0053.pdf Even if you feel healthy, it is important to know that you are still being exposed to hazards. One haz...
Read more

M2.3 Household Products

-
Image
In addition to all of the health risks that you can be exposed to through your personal care products, products that you use almost everyday can also pose a risk. The two products that I use a lot and wanted to look up on the Household Product Database were "Nature's Miracle 3 in 1 Stain Remover" and the "Mr. Clean Magic Eraser". I was surprised that the pet stain remover showed minimal risks. I figured that, based on the previous products I have looked up, it would be in the moderate-hazard range since it is a product for pets. The Mr. Clean Magic eraser also surprised me. I assumed that something that markets as "magic" cant be all that good for you. The HPD website showed that it was an irritant, but it also did not have any known hazards. I do think that we need to be more mindful of the different products that we keep in our homes and not just buy products that have "Green", "Organic", "Healthy" in the names. Ever...
Read more

M6.4 Industrial Farming

-
I am aware of the issue of vanishing bees. I found the teatronaturale article very interesting and informative. My dad used to bee keep (part of his many hobbies) in our home in Bakersfield. He taught me how valuable bees are and to not be afraid of them. He explained to me the importance that bees have on the environment and the world we know. This article addressed a lot of the concerns that he had told me about when I was growing up. One thing I did not realize before reading this article, was that loss of pollinators can cause detrimental health effects.  " The researchers found that the complete loss of animal pollinators globally would push an additional 71 million people into vitamin A deficiency and 173 million more into folate deficiency, and would lead to about 1.42 million additional deaths per year from non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and malnutrition-related diseases—a 2.7% increase in total yearly deaths. A 50% loss of pollination would result in roughly ...
Read more