An article describing the effect of POPs on rat’s abaility to controk insulin is found at:
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2009/0901321/0901321.pdf
This study concludes that POPs levels in the environment can well be detrimental to human health.
That’s the title of an interesting article at:
http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Environment/agriculture/pesticides_linked_to_prostate_cancer_1001100417.html
A few paragraphs give the meat of the conclusions:
The researchers found (after adjustment for other factors) serum levels of β-hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), trans-nonachlor, and dieldrin were significantly associated with the risk of prevalent prostate cancer.
In comparison with those who had the lowest levels, those who were in the second and third tertiles of OC values were 46 and 236 percent for β-HCH, 484 and 1310 percent for trans-nonachlor, and 6 and 174 percent for dieldrin were more likely to have prostate cancer.
There was no association between OC levels of breast cancer prevalence,
They go on to tell what fruits and vegetables contain the most and least pesticides, but neglect seafood, where the largest concentrations of pesticides are found. For reference, according to EPA’s 2008 Lakewidw Management Plan for Lake Superior, its waters contain nearly 20 time the target leels of dieldrin and a similar amount of toxaphene which in not mentioned in this study.
The peer reviewed publication can be found at:
Source:
Xu X, Dailey AB, Talbott EO, Ilacqua VA, Kearney G, Asal NR 2009. Associations of Serum Concentrations of Organochlorine Pesticides with Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer in U.S. Adults. Environ Health Perspect 118:60-66. doi:10.1289/ehp.0900919
Reporting by David Liu and editing by Rachel Stockton of “Food Consumer”
If you read the latest press release circulating the web:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-10/acs-gmm102109.php
You would think that glacial melt was a significant POPs source. Those glacial lakes, just like the Arctic Ocean continue to receive POPs through the air from uses in the developing world. Let’s not get distracted. I sent the contact people the following:
Dr. Bogdal and Mr. Woods,
I question the conclusion that melting glaciers are a significant source of POPs to the environments of our northern lakes and the Arctic.
Please see the attached USEPA 2008 table of POPs concentrations in Lake Superior … far from any glaciers.
In the mid 1980s, Inuit women of Broughton Island, in the Canadian Arctic just above the Arctic Circle, were found to be consuming 15X the tolerable daily intake of chlordane, toxaphene, and PCBs. By the end of the last century, an eight nation circumpolar effort under the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme AMAP concluded that POPs concentration in the Arctic were being maintained by continuing uses in the developing world. The UNEP program to voluntarily eliminate POPs has had little to no success as measured by continuing AMAP monitoring. The Stockholm Convention has focuse on dioxin, chlorine chemistry, and DDT … efforts that will not help the levels of chlordane, toxaphene, and PCBs in your lakes, Lake Superior, or the Arctic.
The Northern Hemisphere will continue to be poisoned as long as megatonnes of POPs are used anywhere in the Northern Hemisphere.
For more information, see my website or read the book mentioned below.
Mel Visser
Melvin J. Visser is the author of Cold, Clear, and Deadly: Unraveling a toxic legacy (Michigan State University Press.) He currently works to raise the awareness of the pollution of North American air and waters from PCB and “banned” pesticide uses in developing countries. See coldclearanddeadly.com.
The flow of these chemicals around the world affects all waters of the Northern hemisphere. PCBs diminish toward the north. Others race to the Arctic. Lake Superior, due to its northern location and cold, clear water, catches and holds a variety of these “banned” poisons. According to the USEPA’s 2008 Lakewide Management Plan, Lake Superior contains excessive amounts of PCBs, DDT, Dieldrin, and toxaphene. Toxaphene, the pesticide that replaced DDT in 1972 and was used until 1982, is present at nearly 15X the most lenient of target levels. This results in trout containing up to five parts per million of toxaphene in its “edible” flesh. If dirt contains a tenth of that amount, it must be classified as hazardous waste.
In the past century we were warned about eating fish with high toxaphene levels. A 1999 EPA advisory recommended virtually zero consumption of lean Lake Superior Trout. In a twist of blatant disregard for our health, Fish Consumption Guidelines from Ontario, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan dropped toxaphene. Health departments did this while researchers were finding that the immune system destruction and endocrine mimicking functions of these poisons were as bad as their cancer threat.
Lake Superior has changed in another way in the past decades. The population of Siscowet, an inedible Lake Trout variety with a high fat content, has mushroomed. In an amazing proposal, our government scientists are planning to harvest this deep dwelling source of omega acids by the millions of pounds, make them into capsules, and sell them as health supplements. This is the most toxic fish fat in North America, and the article describing this act of mass poisoning does not even mention toxics.
See: http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/newsletter/2009/09/stout_trout_eyed_for_market.html
This is insanity in action. Why are we so concerned about health care and so ignorant and deceitful about health protection? Please let your health departments and representatives know that you want to know what levels of known toxics are in your health supplements and that you do not want to consume banned substances disguised as health enhancements.
States the article at: http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/62485172.html
The article states that the Fox River supplies Lake Michigan with 620 pounds per year of PCBs … the biggest source of PCBs to the lake. This is an amazing statement. When the USEPA did its very careful mass balance in 1994-95, the amount of PCBs entering Lake Michigan from the Fox River in 1994 and 1995 was found to be 484 pounds (220 kilograms per year) See very descriptive graphics of this study at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lmmb/results/loadpcbs.html . It is very surprising that this flow of has increased over 15 years. In the Kalamazoo River, there has been a steady downtrend.
The difference between 484 and 620 is just nitpicking when looking closer. Please view the EPA graphics and find that the largest flow into Lake Michigan is “Gas Absorption” at 2313 kilograms per year (5088 pounds per year) or about ten times what flows from the Fox River. Gas absorption is the process that takes PCBs out of the air. This happens in the colder months when the water of the lake has more capacity for PCBs and removes them from the air. Note that this process is much more significant in the main part of the lake, as it has less PCB contamination and is “hungrier” for taking up PCBs.
A closer look at the mass balance shows that the largest of all flows in 1994-95 was PCBs out of the lake through volatilization of 3502 kilograms or 7704 pounds per year. Here, the more contaminated Green Bay volatilized relatively more than the main lake. Given time, the bay and the lake would come to nearly the same concentration … the concentration supported by the air content of PCBs. During the 1994-1995 period Lake Michigan lost 977 kilograms (2149 pounds) of PCBs and its concentration went down. Lake Superior, at that time, was already in equilibrium with global air and its concentration was not changing.
The cost of this cleanup that will not result in consumable fish no matter how clean the Fox river becomes was staggering and is becoming outrageous. In the first year of operation, the cost has gone from $550,000,000 to $750,000,000 and now to $875,000,000. What will it be next year? After its nine years of operation?
The most naive statement in this article is the report of modeling efforts that predict fish will be safe to eat in 2036, 19 years after the project is finished. International researchers have found that PCBs travel from their global use points and distribute in a manner that decreases their concentration with increasing latitude. Lake Superior’s concentration is half of Lake Michigan’s and has been steady for several years. It has no significant sources other than air. Why should the PCB concentration of Lake Michigan go down because the Fox River was cleaned up … and then got dirty again as PCBs dropped into it from the rain and gas absorption? By 2036, our world will be warmer, and warmer weather will move PCB concentrations north to where Lake Superior will move to Lake Michigan’s concentration. I don’t know what the model the agency used was loaded with, but it was not reality. There is no way to get our lakes cleaned up other than to stop global use … an item that is not on the EPA’s or anyone’s agenda.
See this plan at: http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/epa-chemicals
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the USEPA would review the presence of DDT, toxaphene, chlordane. Aldrin, Dieldrin and the rest of the persistent organic pollutants we banned a quarter of a century ago? They are a major presence in our environment from the Gulf of Mexico to Alaska. With the Lake Trout of Lake Superior being the most toxic fish in North America and Alask’s cancer rate among the highest in the nation, shouldn’t we be addressing the chemicals that are the most likely cause?
Don’t hold your breath. The USEPA is an enforcer of Federal laws and the problem chemicals are coming from uses in developing countries. The EPA will work to get six comparatively minor problems taken care of locally while ignoring the developing world’s continuing use of the real problem. The USEPA has had two decades of “ZERO PROGRESS” on improving the levels of persistent organic popputants (POPs) in our foods and waters.
Spening billions to and drede dirt and ban chemicals locally are not producing environmental progress. Please spend my money on useful efforts such as telling people how toxic their food really is and stepping aside so the State Department can work on global banning of cancer causing and endocrine disrupt chemicals that are affecting our environmental and life quality.
States a article at: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20090927/NEWS01/909270356/1002/NEWS
NewsvineIt goes on to inform us that “If current trends continue, officials say, the advisories based on those legacy pollutants can be moderated in the not-too-distant future.” Then we will have to worry about the emerging POPs such as brominated flame retardants.
The “experts” quoted in this article should really look at the recent lack of trends in PCB concentrations in waters all over the U.S. They are not trending down and they will not as long as they are only “banned” in half the world. Putting focus on emerging POPs instead of PCBs, chlordane, and toxaphene, all found even in Lake Superior at levels that cause fish fish to be too toxic to be eaten will result in never addressing the real problem … continuing use in developing countries.
Banning emerging POPs will not result in their control if the banning is not global. We all live on the same planet and POPs travel globally. It is time to wake up to that fact and get to the tough task of global banning.
A very provocative article from BERLIN (Reuters) starts with” Cancer is a bigger killer in developing countries than tuberculosis, malaria and AIDS combined and a “tsunami” of the disease threatens to overwhelm the nations worst equipped to cope, experts said on Tuesday.
While only about 5 percent of global resources for cancer are spent in developing countries, the burden of the disease is far greater there, they said, with 60 percent of last year’s 7.6 million cancer deaths occurring in poorer nations.
Women-specific cancers like breast and cervical cancer, which account for more than a quarter of all female deaths worldwide, could be dramatically cut in low and middle-income nations by improving awareness and detection, they said.”
This is an amazing oupouring of disease but is it surprising? In the U.S., cancer incidence has been rising for decades and is just now slowing as the reduction in smoking is starting to reduce lung cancer. Meanwhile,cancer causing, endocrine disrupting, and immune system suppressing chemicals such as the PCBs and the persistent pesticides … toxapnene, chlordane, Mirex, Lindane, and others that we banned deades ago have found global favor and are still being used in developing countries. Is it any wonder that cancer is rapidly escalating in the developing world and remains a continuing threat in the developed world as global use continues to contaminate our food, water, and air.
Global banning of PCBs and POPs pesticides would do more for our health than any of the nealth care plans currently being discussed. Why don’t we put our resources where the problems are?
The White House taskforce on oceans, including the Great Lakes is being reviewed in meetings around the nation. See an introduction and get the report here: http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/18923
Its goal includes preservation and protection of the Great Lakes. However, it is silent on POPs contamination of our coastal bays by airborne foreign PCBs, the toxaphene in Lake Superior, and the pollution of the Arctic Alaska with chlordane, toxaphene, and PCBs.
An “ecosystem” approach is recommended with focus on all NATIONAL stakeholders. This is just like the IJC’s approach to the Great Lakes. They have “protected” Lake Superior through a strong ecosystem approach that controls all local inputs. Lake Superior trout contain toxaphene at multiples of the level that classifys dirt as hazardous waste and this problem is ignored as we “protect” our citizens from toxaphene by removing it from fish consumption guidelines.Unfortunately, these “ecosystem approaches” ignore the main source of POPs pollution … global air that is continuously polluted by megaton uses in developing countries.
Internatonal researchers realize this. Why do we waste effort at cleaning up residues while not addressing the source?
Please add your comment to: http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/oceans/interimreport/
Tell them that we want endocrine disrupting and cancer causing chemicals out of our lakes and oceans and that we are tired of our government agencies turning their backs to foreign sourced pollution.
Endocrine disruption seems to be getting more news as birth defects in man and beast become more prevalent.
This overview: http://www.miller-mccune.com/science_environment/seeking-chemical-culprits-for-those-deformities-1483
details the magnitude and increasing nature of the number of problems and the number of people affected.
Why do we tolerate the continuing use of “banned” substanses that are known to be in the environment and proven o be endocrine disruptors …. chemicals such as PCBs, toxaphene, chlordane and the rest of the “dirty dozen” that continue to poison our air, food, and water?
Why do we argue the costs and benefits of health CARE and ignore issues of disease PREVENTION?
