Strollerderby : environment

Could We Be Turning Our Kids Into Anti-Environmentalists?

Jen Chaney — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:25:00 GMT

On Earth Day -- a 24-hour period dedicated to celebrating our planet, encouraging environmentalism and insisting that it's super-easy to be green -- Slate's Emily Bazelon asks whether we might be laying it on a little thick.

She notes that the daughter of one of her colleagues is already, at the ripe age of six, really tired of hearing about how important it is to be environmentally friendly. Sure, she does all the right things, like recycling. But at the same time, part of her yearns to rebel and do something totally anti-establishment, like maybe use a styrofoam cup or throw something plastic into a regular trash can.

Bazelon's essay makes me wonder whether other children feel the same way. Is it possible we are raising a generation of individuals who -- after hearing everyone from their parents to their teachers to the hosts of their favorite TV shows constantly spouting inconvenient truths -- wishes they could be anti-environmentalists? Or, to put it more bluntly, have we Al Gore-d our kids to death?

Personally, I don't see our children doing a 180 and starting to send us back as far as environmental consciousness is concerned. Too many green practices have already become such a part of their daily lives and attitudes that it would be impossible to make them stop using recycling bins or trying to conserve water when they brush their teeth. And that's a good thing. But when any young person starts to drown in a barrage of messages on the same subject -- no matter what it is -- there is a tendency to either tune out or get fed up.

Bazelon suggests that one way to overcome this is to make sure the environmental lessons we teach our kids are age-appropriate and administered in reasonable doses. She also thinks that the best way to start encouraging kids to love the Earth is by simply letting them breathe it in. Take them to a park, but don't talk to them about the litter you spot on the ground. Watch a documentary about animals without preaching about how global warming could be threatening said creatures' extinction. Enjoy a sunny day without thinking about anything but the beauty of all that warmth and light.

Do that, she suggests, and when it's time for the Earth-Day-style lessons, maybe they'll mean a lot more. I think she's absolutely right.

Ready for Easter? Peter Rabbit's Gone Green

JeanneSager — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:24:00 GMT

Part of getting ready for Easter in my house means stocking up on books for the basket to take up as much room as possible (leaving space for a few jellybeans, but just a few).

This year, you can go green for Easter with a new edition of the beloved bunny books from Beatrix Potter, reissued in a "naturally better" format.

Using Potter's original drawings and text, the new line of Peter Rabbit . . . Naturally Better books are as much an ode to Potter herself as they are the earth. A staunch environmentalist and conservationist, Beatrix Potter's love of the outdoors inspired her bunny books as well as her work with the National Trust in her native England during her life. She bred sheep and kept rabbits so child visitors would not be disappointed.

When Potter died, she left some four thousand acres and several fams to the Trust to keep the land pristine and undeveloped. To this day, the area remains one of the most rural in all of England.

Now her books are going to help her cause, along with new environmentally-friendly food, toiletries and toys.The licensor of theThe World of Beatrix Potter has drawn up a comprehensive Corporate Social Responsibility calling for all products to be made by suppliers who adhere to ethical working practices and who support healthy formulation of products. "Everyday food products will contain organic ingredients, be GM free, and will contain no added salt or sugar. Toiletries are free from harmful and unnecessary chemicals such as artificial musks, parabens and phthalates, are not tested on animals and will be hypoallergenic."

Publishers of the twenty-three original Peter Rabbit books plus a few new titles (including the Peter Rabbit Peekaboo with interactive flaps) have earned certification from the Forest Stewardship Council, an international non-profit which focuses on the sustainability of forests. According to FSC, "products bearing the FSC logo, which guarantees that the wood from a certified well-managed forest, are available across the world from a variety of mills, manufacturers, and distributors."

Want to turn your kids' Easter baskets green? Fill up on bunny books from Beatrix Potter that are "naturally better" at Amazon.

Image: PeterRabbit.com

Asthma Coaches Keep Kids Breathing

JeanneSager — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:33:00 GMT

It might be time to welcome a new member to the team of healthcare professionals helping keep your kid healthy - their asthma coach.

In a study at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, community health workers randomly assigned to make home visits and phone calls to low-income parents to teach them about asthma and encourage positive management behaviors decreased the need for hospitalization for kids.

Just over thirty-six percent of the kids, ages two through eight, who were assigned an asthma coach were hospitalized during the two-year study. By comparison, just over fifty-nine percent of the kids assigned to "usual care" (ie. a pediatrician only) were hospitalized during that same time period. There was no reduction in the number of emergency room visits.

It's important to note that asthma is not being cured by the coaches - they're simply providing parents with the skills to better manage their children's care. And although this study was based on low-income families, it's fair to say that EVERY family could use an education that doesn't come straight from Google.

A lot of parents are wary of allowing a professional to come into their homes to make suggestions on how to care for their kids, and I can't blame them. I don't want someone walking into my house to tell me why I'm a bad parent. But even the most caring pediatrician doesn't have adequate time to explain every detail and answer every question. With a disease like asthma - which can often be exacerbated by environment - these home visits seem that much more crucial to getting a handle on a child's disease management. A trained professional can make a real difference in a child's life - and as much as we hate to admit it, sometimes we parents need their help.

Would you call on an asthma coach?

Image: TopNews

UPDATE: Bye Bye BPA: WHICH Bottles Will Go Bisphenol Free

JeanneSager — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:57:00 GMT

Checking for the BPA-free label when shopping for baby bottles may soon be a thing of the past. The six largest manufacturers of bottles in the United States have voluntarily agreed to go Bisphenol-A free.

We reported on this story over the weekend (see below), but thanks to our friends at SuperEco, we now have a list of who's involved in the manufacturer cave in.

Going toxin free are Gerber, Avent America (which stopped production back in December), Evenflo, Disney's First Years, Dr. Brown and Playtex.

Attorneys general in Connecticut and New Jersey put forward a request to the bottle makers, asking for the hormone-disrupting chemical to be removed from the manufacturing process. The request came on the heels of newer research that shows the affects of BPA are large even at low doses, doses lower than the FDA's current standards. Studies have linked BPA to everything from cancer and obesity to problems with brain function and mood disorders. They've also shown BPA is building up in the bloodstream. In a study of people age six and older, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found detectable levels of BPA in ninety-three percent of two thousand five hundred seventeen urine samples.

Of course, the big companies aren't exactly doing this all out of the goodness of their hearts. Babies R Us and a number of other retailers announced last year that they would phase out all sales of bottles with BPA in them. Canada has outright banned the substance.

But sometimes even the big companies make decisions that are good for parents.

Image: OhMyGov

Family Mounds Up 250 Pounds of Plastic in a Year

JeanneSager — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:06:00 GMT

All these "I did it for a year" people are starting to get to me.

They live the Bible for a year. They live on $1,500 for a year. They cook from the Julia Child cookbook for a year. Get ready to hear about one family, one year, two hundred fifty pounds of plastic (yes, this is where we start being REAL!).

The Garcias of Phoenix, Ariz. did everything they could to eliminate plastic from their lives. Jesse and Kim and their young kids skipped plastic bags at the supermarket and opted out on plastic water bottles.

Every piece of plastic that made their way into their house, they saved (where, I don't know - I get irate just dealing with a month's worth of yogurt cups and empty milk cartons waiting for the recycling truck to make its rounds). In the end, they had two hundred fifty pounds.

That's my three-year-old times eight! That's the more meat than you get from your average side of beef. It's disgusting. But not all that surprising (we fill an average of five milk crates with plastic recyclables each month. What's actually worst about all of this is that the Garcias were only able to recycle twenty five percent of the entire pile - the rest went into the landfill. And remember, this is a family trying to CUT BACK on plastics.

The problem is, not every "numbered" plastic is recycled in ever area. The "chasing arrows" at the bottom of a plastic container don't necessarily mean they're recyclable. And as the economy slumps, so does demand for recyclables - which means haulers don't want to take them off your hands.

Which means the only option is to do what the Garcias have done from the beginning - attempt to reduce consumption. But is it feasible? What percentage does plastic represent in your garbage can or your recycling bin?

Image: WasteRec

Oregon School Cuts Back to Four-Day Week

JeanneSager — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:25:00 GMT

It's greener and better for student achievement, but how are parents taking a shift to four-day school weeks?

The Oakridge School District in Oregon is about to find out - they're making the switch for all thirteen grades in an effort not to help cut costs (although it certainly could help) as enrollment continues to decline but to improve improve academic achievement

Donald Kordosky, the superintendent of the Oakridge School, told NPR that the studies his district looked at showed the four-day school week increases student and teacher attendance, including a reduction in staff turnover. Staff morale is upped, and kids' academic progress is improved.

So how will they do it? They'll extend the school day for one - although not massively. Kids are currently attending from 8:15 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., and they'll soon spend from 8 a.m. to 3:36 p.m. in a classroom. They'll also rework the current holidays - taking days when the kids might have three days off because of superintendent's conference days or a holiday and enforcing a strict four-days-a-week policy.

The big question - what are parents supposed to do with their kids on Friday? Especially in this economy?

Surprisingly, Kordosky says parents are more supportive of this plan because it will make it EASIER to find daycare. The regularity of the four-day-a-week system will mean parents have just one day every week to find a sitter. Otherwise, there are weeks where they face two days with no school and no sitter or three days or . . . Out of thirty-eight weeks, there are only twenty-one weeks in which there is school on all five days.

The school is also putting its junior and senior high students through childcare training and CPR courses to step in as babysitters either to younger siblings or to neighborhood kids - the training will make them more employable.

Beyond the benefits for kids, four-day weeks are potentially better for the environment. One day less of buses running and emitting diesel fumes, one day less of lights being turned on (running classes slightly later in the day takes advantage of daylight to reduce energy consumption) are supposedly greener - or at least more energy efficient for a school district. Some argue that the green benefits of a four-day work week, for example, are a wash when you consider workers use that extra day to drive around on errands or to turn on lights in their own homes. At the very least, it's saving money for the taxing entities - like school districts - who are, in turn, putting less of a burden on taxpayers (parents).

How would you feel if your school district made this kind of switch?

Image: Oakridge Elementary

They Say: U.S. Toilet Paper Usage Worse for the Environment than Driving a Hummer?!

Shannon LC Cate — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:30:00 GMT

Ah potty-training! There are so many benefits to convincing your kids to use the potty. Big savings on the expense of diapers and wipes--whatever type you use. And then there's the eco-guilt factor. When cloth diapers probably harm the environment by using excessive water and detergent (and possibly chlorine bleach, depending on your own proclivities), and disposable diapers are all but considered the highest form of environmental sin known to the first world, getting the kids into underwear and onto the potty lets you off the hook, right?

Wait just a minute, say environmental experts. According to Allen Hershkowitz, senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council:

"Future generations are going to look at the way we make toilet paper as one of the greatest excesses of our age. Making toilet paper from virgin wood is a lot worse than driving Hummers in terms of global warming pollution."

According to an article in the Guardian, Americans have a dangerous proclivity for what the Brits term "luxury" t.p.--those with two or (gasp!) three "plys," quilting, and even lotion infused in the roll. These varieties are the worst sinners when it comes to decimating virgin forest.

My roll of choice has always been one of the very simple, single-ply, 1000-sheet varieties. A friend with a cruder sense of humor than I calls it "John Wayne toilet paper" because, according to him, it's "rough and tough and don't take s--t off anybody." I like my t.p., personally, but alas, it is not made of recycled paper. Not one bit of it.

Who knew?

If you're curious about the effect your roll has on the planet, Greenpeace has helpfully created a PDF that you can conveniently print, clip, fold and carry around in your wallet to spot-check any paper product you're thinking of buying. Unfortunately, it would seem that the "good" brands cost more than some of the "bad" brands (though not all). I suppose I will swap out my virgin 1000-sheet choice for a recycled option, but probably not 100% of the time. I just can't resist the bargain of buying 20 rolls for that low, low price.

What do you think? Does your toilet paper choice merit reconsideration, given the scorn of the Europeans for "delicate American buttocks" or will you just teach your kids to chant "USA!" as they reach for the Charmin?

Florida Dad Pushing To Ban ALL Thimerosal in Vaccines

JeanneSager — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:01:00 GMT

I'm already prepared for what "Dr. Gary" is going to say to this post.

Because the chiropractor friend of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and father of two autistic children isn't listening to anyone in his bid to have the state ban all vaccines that contain thimerosal.

All of them. Even those not administered to kids.

The proposal by Dr. Gary Kompothecras would be the strictest in the nation, and doctors say it would keep vaccines like the one that prevents the flu, from saving people most at risk of dying. Kompothecras's response? He calls everyone who dares disagree with them "dirt bags."

The argument over vaccines and autism is at an all-time fervor of late, spurred by last week's revelation by the London Times that the "study" that started all the hubub about autism and thimerosal back in the nineties was bogus. As in fabricated. Made up. Nonsense. Then came the report from a special court here in the states that says the measles vaccine didn't cause three children's autism. All of that was preceded by another study, this one in Italy, that determined thimerosal itself is safe.

What's concerned me most in the responses here on Babble to each reporting of these incidents is not that parents are concerned about autism or concerned about vaccines. That's natural. Autism is real. Autism is terrifying. And there is still a lot about vaccinations that we don't know.

It's the all-consuming nature of the focus on vaccinations. It's the refusal to home in on anything else. It's the assumption that disagreement means another parent doesn't care about your plight. We have written dozens of stories here on the 'Derby about other studies that have been linked to autism. The environment. Aged parents. Prematurity.

But there are still parents like Kompothecras who are blind to any other suggestions. Dare disagree with him, and he calls you a "dirt bag." The trouble is, they are not only doing a disservice to their own kids, but a disservice to other people. In Kompothecras' case, his proposed ban of the flu vaccine would put the thousands of Florida residents who are at highest risk for the flu - ie. the elderly, the asthmatic - at permanent risk. People die from the flu. But he doesn't care.

He is doing this because, as he told the Herald Tribune, "If I can do this, my son won't go down for nothing."

How can you argue with that? How can you argue with the parent of an autistic child who only wants an answer? Because I do believe autism is real. And I do believe that the parents of autistic children need an answer. The fact that I am pro-vaccination because I've seen it save lives does not mean I am unfeeling or that I refuse to see the forest for the trees. Autism diagnoses are up, and there are children in trouble. Somewhere, some scientist has to break this code.

But I don't see how taking the flu vaccine out of the hands of people who need it, people who choose to use it, is going to help the parents of autistic children. I don't see how ignoring existing science and accusing parents who are "pro-vax" of being "dirt bags" or "not caring," is going to provide an answer.

Might there be something else in a vaccination that might lead to autism? Maybe. There might also be a link in the environment. In aged parents. In prematurity.

So let's get started on those. Thimerosal is a dead horse. It doesn't deserve another beating.

Image: Herald Tribune

Pollution Causing Asthma Before Baby's Even Born

JeanneSager — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:30:00 GMT

A warning to all pregnant women: stay out of traffic.

A new study says traffic fumes will actually reprogram the DNA of an otherwise healthy fetus, paving the way for the child to be born asthmatic.

Scared? Me too. We've long known that pollution = bad for your health, and for pregnant women there's always that extra fear that what harms her harms her baby as well. But the idea of DNA being reprogrammed whilst inside the body runs a bit too close to science fiction for my tastes.

Expect it's not . . . fiction that is. The study at the Center for Environmental Genetics at the University of Cincinnati homed in on the ACSL3 gene, which other studies have shown is involved in the structure of cell membranes. Looking at the cord blood of fifty-three kids (a very small study, I'll admit), the BBC News has reported that scientists found "a significant association between chemical changes which control activation of the gene and high levels of maternal PAH exposure."

Curiously, the kids themselves were reportedly showing signs of asthma by age five, not at birth. As an asthmatic myself, I know that asthma in kids is still mystifying medical experts because a child can show signs at a very young age, only to have them disappear for a time and then show up again when they're teenagers (a major bone of contention between pediatricians and parents over whether it's appropriate to continue treatment when a child isn't showing symptoms). It manifests itself in different ways from person to person - with some kids highly affected by the cold, others by the warmth. Some people have symptoms brought on by stress, others by environmental factors. Pollution itself reportedly causes at least two-thirds of asthmatic events - which would seem to support this study.

So why is this good news? Because if a mother knows she's been subjected to traffic fumes, and doctors can test her child for the malformed gene, treatment can start early - before kids show symptoms.

The only question I have - will they be willing to listen?

Image: BBC NEWS

Ten "New" Species of Amphibians Found in Colombia

Shannon LC Cate — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 14:01:00 GMT

When my kids and I make our regular jaunt to the aquarium, my four-year old's favorite stop is the frogs. We can spend a good ten minutes (those of you with preschoolers and toddlers know how long that is!) watching the big poison-arrow frog display looking for the still, quiet creatures until someone spots a bright spot in the otherwise brown-filled cage.

Scientists doing a survey in Colombia have found ten new species of amphibians there. By "new," they mean previously unknown to scientists. The tiny, beautiful creatures are considered some of the most vulnerable to changes in the environment from climate change to toxic contamination. But the discovery of new species is happy news for biologists concerned about preservation.

The Guardian offers a slideshow of the animals. Call your four-year olds over to the computer screen, cozy up and enjoy these little jewels of nature!

Little White Whales Going, Going...Gone?

Penguins March to Extinction

National Zoo Inseminates Panda

Image: thedailygreen.com

Green Expert Says: Limit Kids to Two

JeanneSager — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:27:00 GMT

Have at least two kids? Planning on having more?

A UK sustainable development expert says you should think twice about making any more babies – lest you want to see the world a blacker place.

The way Jonathon Porritt sees it, anyone with more than two kids is "irresponsible" about the way they're affecting the environment.

"I think we will work our way towards a position that says that having more than two children is irresponsible. It is the ghost at the table. We have all these big issues that everybody is looking at and then you don't really hear anyone say the "p" word." Porritt told the London Times.

By "P" word, of course, he means procreation.

The way he sees it, we should be shifting our monies away from curing illnesses (which, of course, keep the population on this earth) and push them toward increasing contraception and abortion.

It's true that each person has his or her own personal carbon footprint. A British study late last year put the figure around eleven tons of CO2 per year by a Brit, nearly double that per year by us in the states.

But if Porritt's adovacating for a shift in funding, how about focusing on ways to reduce people's carbon footprint rather than cutting people's family planning dreams off at the knees? Carbon emissions are indeed an important issue, and one that won't go away anytime soon.

I'm also deeply disturbed by the suggestion that abortion is one of the best ways he can come up with for keeping families down to just two kids. I'm pro-choice, but that's for women who want or need an out from a pregnancy, not for women who are happily pregnant and being told they need to suddenly reduce their carbon footprints.

Does this sound something coming a bit too close to the Chinese? You know, the country accused of human rights violations for its extreme methods of population control that borders on eugenics?

It's true Porritt isn't calling for selective breeding to create a master race but for an overall reduction in peoples populating the earth. But even as a mom who has just one kid, and one who would call for more parents to take a look at their capabilities (financial, first and emotional, next) before getting pregnant again and again, I think Porritt is cutting off the nose to spite the face.

The world is in trouble because people have been stupid. So let's smarten up, and create a "master race" of kids who are wise about the ways of green living - no matter how many there are. Our kids don't have to be a burden on the world's resources if we don't let them be.

At least this guy practices what he preaches. Porritt has just two kids. Wonder if that has anything to do with his magic number?

Vatican to Women: The Pill Pollutes Environment, His Testes

Are Pick-Up and Drop-Off Moms Killing the Environment?

Pulling the Plug on Plural Pregnancies

No Great Outpouring of Support for Struggling New Mom of Quintuplets

Little White Whales Going, Going...Gone?

Shannon LC Cate — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:00:00 GMT

Move over Cook Inlet Beluga Whales, no more babies in the deep blue sea for you! Alaska governor, Sarah Palin says that the whale population, having dwindled from a small 650 to its current 375 since 1994 are doing just fine, thank you. She is suing the federal government for listing the Belugas as endangered.

Why? Because the protection required by the listing would threaten oil drilling, gas development and other "lucrative" projects, according to Mother Jones.

This isn't the first time Palin has challenged an endangered species listing. Last August, she asserted the polar ice caps aren't melting and the polar bears will be just fine. To prove this, she turned to some classic anti-global warming science and was compared to someone "debating the theory of gravity as they plunge off a cliff" by Kieran Suckling, the executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity.

What I don't understand is how a mother and grandmother of babies could be willing to support policies that would most likely lead to the extinction of at least two treasured mammals, not to mention countless less glamorous, but perhaps even more ecologically important species. None of us know how the destruction of half the biodiversity on the planet will effect what remains--including human beings, assuming they do.

It's time for people in positions to do something to protect our grandchildren's planet to do so. For all her talk of the value of family, Palin seems awfully eager to sell her babies' futures to her own pockets' present.

Are Pick-Up and Drop-Off Moms Killing the Environment?

JeanneSager — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:26:00 GMT

New York City is getting tough on going green. Their latest targets? Parents.

Moms and dads who leave their cars idling for more than one minute near New York City's public AND prive schools will be slapped with a $100 fine.

Mark this on the calendar, because I don't say this much. Bravo Mayor Bloomberg. Now can we spread this around the country?

I admit I've been a little guilty of this one myself of late. When it's ten below, I pull up as close to the nursery school door as possible, pop out with my daughter and run her inside - leaving the keys in the ignition the entire time What can I say, I'm a cold wuss! Although I live upstate, and the city's new law won't hit me, it's still made me give myself a slap on the wrist and vow not to do it anymore.

Every two minutes a car idles equals just about the amount of gasoline necessary to drive one mile. Gas prices might be down from the highs of last year, but in this economy, most of us could realy use the money saved on an extra mile of gas. Then throw in the environmental affects. Every gallon of gasoline produces about twenty pounds of carbon dioxide. Left to idle for ten minutes, and a car can use as much as half a gallon of gas - producing ten pounds of CO2.

Schools across the nation have started turning the buses off to cut down on pollution and fuel consumption. Studies have estimated that if every school bus in the country reduced by two minute the amount of time the engine is operating between the trips to and from school, annual emissions would drop by three hundred nineteen tons of carbon monoxide, one hundred eighty-five tons of nitrogen dioxide and just over eight tons of small particulate matter.

But while the buses themselves might produce more than a passenger vehicle, there are generally a lot more cars and trucks in the pick-up and drop-off lines than there are school buses. So how about we moms and dads get their acts together?

Image: Carbon Offset Solutions

Source: The Daily News

Penguins March to Extinction

Shannon LC Cate — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 16:00:00 GMT

The stars of March of the Penguins, Emperor Penguins, are poised to suffer extinction by the end of this century, say researchers.

We can blame the usual suspect--global warming--for melting too much ice in Antarctica. If significant reductions in global warming are not reached soon, the pattern of ice melt will shrink the penguins' habitat dangerously. It is estimated that one penguin colony under study would decline from 3,000 to 400 mating pairs.

It is not just that shrinking ice floes would leave the penguins nowhere to stand. The penguins' primary food source is krill that lives on the underside of the ice. As the ice melts, the krill decline and so do the many animals that eat it, including penguins.

Stories like this depressed me before I had children. But now that I do, I project a future in which my children's children's live in a penguin-less world, and that leaves me even sadder. Because it's not just penguins. By some estimates 50% of all species will be near-extinct or extinct by the turn of the next century.

If my kids live to be 80, they'll be here until 2085 or so. And no one is suggesting that the great mass extinction will necessarily stop at 2100. Without knowing more about A) what species actually exist now--some say species have already probably hit extinction without ever having been discovered and B) what exactly each species' overall effect on the Earth's ecosystem is, we can't say human beings won't be on the critically endangered list by the time our babies are sending their babies off to college.

I guess we should all swap out our cars for bicycles.

Also in Animal News:

300 lb Snake Attacks Toddler

Baby Moose Falls Through Window of Family Home

PCBs Found in Air Near Several Schools

Shannon LC Cate — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:00:00 GMT

"Most" of the air samples taken at 40 schools around Chicago were contaminated with PCB-11, says the Chicago Tribune. Banned over 30 years ago, polychlorinated biphenyls are highly toxic and linked to diseases like cancer, liver and kidney damage.

Though PCBs are known to linger in ecosystems, "bio-magnifying" in the fatty tissue of animals, researchers were surprised to find this particular type of PCB (11), as it was never specifically manufactured back before the chemicals were banned. There is some suspicion that the the source is yellow paint or factories that produce yellow paint of yellow pigments for paint, as that was a known source of PCBs in the past.

Why schools in particular as affected is also a mystery, though many schools are located in formerly industrial areas.

New Family Green Mag Tracks Greening of Obama, Country

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:55:00 GMT

Sure, he talks a good game, but how's he going to live up to all those "green" promises? A new online environmental magazine pledges to keep an eye on how the Obama Administration makes good on its vows to help turn this country green-- starting with a stellar article on the "greening" of the White House by our very own Madeline Holler.

I was pretty excited to see this magazine, Super Eco, take shape, because frankly, a lot of environmental, greeny stories make me feel slightly shamed for not jumping off the grid and growing baby new potatoes on my roof. SuperEco mixes humor perfectly with environmental conciousness but still gives a load of wonderful information about every day things you can do to make life a little better for us all.

Look at me -- I'm gushing.

Still, want to know what to do with pesky batteries? Bottled water? The list of essays and tips is endless.

Check out Super Eco here.

U.S. Children's Health - Biggest Study Ever

SunnyChanel — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:14:00 GMT

Autism, asthma, birth defects, childhood disorders; all scary and all are on the rise. Thing is, there doesn’t seem to be a clear cut answer to why these maladies are affecting more and more babies and kids each and every year. The biggest suspect? The environment. Scientists are going to try their darndest to find some answers to this mystery and prove or disprove this assumption and are about to launch the largest study on children of the United States ever. They have begun signing up mothers-to-be in North Carolina and New York to participate and are looking for women who are newly pregnant or are planning on becoming pregnant soon. In the spring, they’ll be looking for recruits in California, Pennsylvania, Utah, South Dakota and Minnesota with a total of about 100,000 participants.

The scientists will study the newborns from birth (or conception) until they turn twenty-one. The moms-to-be will be required to give various samples of their blood, hair, urine, drinking water, and house dust and will have to participate in various interviews. After the baby is born, the child’s house will be environmentally examined and the baby’s health will be carefully tracked.

This lofty study has been in the works for about a decade and is now just coming to fruition. They’re hoping to have the first set of results in 2012 with data on birth defects and premature births and data on early childhood issues/disorders within five years.
Here’s hoping some answers are found. It’s a shame it’s taken ten years to make this happen, we probably would have had some clues sooner than later. But with the funds necessary and the complexity of such a big study, it doesn’t come as a surprise it did take a decade to happen.

Do you blame the environment?

Source

Vatican to Women: The Pill Pollutes Environment, His Testes

JeanneSager — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:01:00 GMT

Sometimes being a Catholic is all about ducking your head in shame and saying, "this is not my life."

Because the boys in the Vatican - you know the ones, they don't have sex - have come out with another decree about the woman's body. This time, it's the way our contraceptive pill is harming everyone else, and men worst of all.

As if we didn't know already that each little round pill popped out of the foil packet was destroying the world 28 days at a time by preventing the creation of more Catholic babies, now it's apparently sending toxins out to destroy the earth via our urine. The hardest hit? The male reproductive system.

"We have sufficient evidence to state that a non-negligible cause of male infertility in the West is the environmental pollution caused by the pill," Pedro Jose Maria Simon Castellvi, president of the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations," said in the report.

Bear with me here. A report just printed in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano says the pill makes women pee toxins. Which hurt the environment. Which makes men infertile.

Ah yes, making sense now. Because as any good Catholic girl knows, it all comes back to making babies. Which is why this one and done Mom is now a casual Catholic (well, one of the reasons).

I know pointing to the lack of baby-making experience anywhere inside the Vatican is an easy mark, but that doesn't make it any less true. As long as the church wants to focus its attentions on contraception and conception rather than equality between the sexes, as long as the misogynistic approach toward women's choices remains the Holy See's holy sayings, I'm wondering how they expect to retain credibility on a global scale.

Image/Source: Yahoo

New to Birth Certificate: Does Mom Have Chlamydia?

Why They Shouldn't Eat the Snow

Vatican Issues Advice: Have Babies! Unless You're Infertile!

Kid's Balloon Travels Nine Hundred Miles

JeanneSager — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:58:00 GMT

When a Swedish couple hiking in the woods near Lapland found a balloon, they could hae just snagged it as trash and chucked it away. Instead, they read the message attached and decided to post a letter to the children's center in Britian from whence it came.

The children's center just happens to be more than one thousand five hundred kilometers (about nine hundred thirty miles) away. And since children released one hundred balloons in November 2007, this is the first letter sent back to let the kids know how their little floating friends fared.

The balloons were released in honor of opening day at the Old Clee Children's Centre in Grimsby, Lincolnshire on Nov. 17, 2007. It wasn't until Oct. 26 of this year that the Swedish couple were out in the mountains and found it. They sent a letter back to Old Clee with a little story about the sunny day when they discovered the balloon and included pictures of its whereabouts. In exchange, a Swedish-speaking employee of Old Clee has drafted a letter back, including pictures of Grimsby.

It's a sweet little story, but I always wonder what happens to the rest of the balloons in these circumstances. Do they snag on trees and litter the landscape? Or do people pick them up, notice the notes and trash them anyway? Neither one is really palatable if you think about it. I'd hate to think that the environment suffers, but disappointed kids don't make me any happier. What would you do? Do you think most people would send a letter back?

Image/Source: The Local

Say Hi To Grandma Through the Screen

Blogging Moms Find a Kidney For Teen on Dialysis

Journalist Suing for Sperm-Donor Dad's Identity

Dad Wants Daughter Back Despite Negative DNA Test

Deck the Halls With Boughs of Lead

Jen Chaney — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 17:58:00 GMT

Christmas lights have always been one of my go-to decorations. I don't just hang them on the tree, I wrap them around banisters, drape them on mantels and wind them around window frames until almost every room in the house is bathed in a comforting yuletide glow.

This year that has to change. Why? Because almost every string of Christmas lights contains lead, and if you have a small, mobile child in the house, that's just not safe.

According to this report on physorg.com, a recent Cornell University study found that the levels of lead in several sets of Christmas lights exceeds the regulatory limits for window sills and floors set by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Translation: It's not a good idea to have these things strung up around the house where hands, especially little ones, can access them.

The problem comes back to that pesky PVC plastic that coats most strings of holiday lights. That's the stuff that makes them durable and heat-resistant, but it also contains lead. Miriam recently wrote about how common PVC plastic is and helpfully pointed readers to this Pass Up the Poison Plastic guide. The guide lists a number of products that are PVC-free, ranging from clothing to pacifiers to (no joke) adult sex toys. After scanning the guide, however, I saw some PVC-free artificial Christmas tree options, but nothing about lights that lack lead.

This is an issue that comes up every holiday season but one that seemingly no one has resolved. Companies need to use the PVC in the lights, allegedly anyway, so they won't cause fires or other electrical problems. But many consumers, understandably, want lights that can be handled without having to wash one's hands every two seconds. So what can we do?

Well, we could spend hours trying to track down a set of lead-free lights. But based on my initial research, that might not get us anywhere.

Personally, my plan is to restrict the lights to the tree, keep my son away from the tree and find new ways to decorate the house that don't involve so many of those lead-ridden hazards. Truth be told, that's probably a much more energy-sound approach anyway, as this Seattle Times story suggests.But it still makes me sad. I love seeing all that festive twinkle-twinkling. But if it's a choice between that and keeping my son away from potentially dangerous material, there is only one decision to make.

I just don't understand why some enterprising person or company can't come up with a way to make Christmas lights lead-free, durable and safe on all levels. If someone ever does, I suspect he or she could make some serious cash from parents who would be more than happy to buy a few sets.

Image: Consumerist.com

How to Avoid #3 Plastic (That's PVC) in Everything

Miriam Axel-Lute — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:00:00 GMT

There are lots of reasons to dislike PVC, also known as #3 plastic or just "vinyl." Its production uses more mercury than nearly any other industry. When it's made or incinerated it creates dioxins, some of the nastiest of the nasty toxics. It's full of icky, bad-for-you additives like phthalates (that's "thay-lates" if you want to sound knowledgable when arguing with retail clerks) that can leach out. The list goes on...

The creepy thing is, it's everywhere. It's the covering on most waterproof "chewable" baby books. It's in some pacifiers. It's the frame of most new windows and all new "linoleum" floors. It covers three-ring binders and shows up in raingear and shower curtains and some disposable silverware and dozens of other common items. Not to mention tons of packaging.

Frankly, this sounds to me like a stellar case of why sometimes a little regulation is good. You could spend a full time job (and the pay from a part time one) seeking out and getting rid of all the PVC in your life. Not an efficient allocation of resources, in my book. Much better that we collectively decide this is something we don't want in our air, homes, landfills, or kid's bodies.

But in the meantime if you want to find PVC-free alternatives in at least some areas of your life (say, the stuff entering your baby's mouth or your own), or at least not add any more during the holiday season, the good folks at Center for Environmental Health and Justice are here to help with their Pass Up the Poison Plastic guide. The guide explains how to identify PVC and where it often shows up and offers a list of manufacturers of PVC-free versions of key items.

You may not be up for suggestions like "Call the manufacturer's 800 number if you can't tell from the labeling whether the packaging on a product has PVC or not" (though kudos to you if you are. I'm sure it will help get the stuff phased out), but surely anyone with a baby at least wants the list of safe pacifiers.

Picture of PVC pipes by Groupe Aménagement Numérique des Territoires, via Flickr.

They say: Obama Wins

Brett Singer — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:11:00 GMT

CNN, The New York Times, and even Fox News have called the Presidential race for Barack Obama. (UPDATE: so has everyone else.)

Amazing to think that it's almost all over after so much campaigning.

Not much to say. I'm still going to watch the news for awhile; I'm like Yogi Berra – it ain't over 'til it's over, y'know? Then again, McCain just conceded. Wow. (Classy speech too, for what it's worth.)

UPDATE: I'm watching Barack's speech now. I can't imagine what must be going through his mind. Think about where he was in 2004. Wow. I know I should have something more articulate to say but "wow" is going to have to do. (It's late.)

My kids don't seem to care that much, which was actually sort of nice in a way. No matter who wins, they get up, go to school, eat lunch, run around, jump on my ribs – a typical day. Eventually I'll talk to them about this election, but not right now.

What about you – how do you feel?

image: me waiting to vote today

McCain's Mom's Morale Super Low

Other Stuff to Vote On Today – Same Sex Marriage, Chicken Cages

McCain Campaign Verbally Abuses an Innocent Child

Obama doesn't say I love you anymore

They say: John McCain is not a maverick

Babble Podcast for November 3, 2008

Republican Candidate Uses Porn-esque Robocall

Jon Stewart says: Ted Stevens is a Cheap Date

N-Word Flies at Palin Rally

Babble Podcast for October 27th, 2008

Babble Talk: The Candidates Health Plans

Joe the racist plumber?

They Say: Obese During Pregnancy? Hatch a Republican!

Sarah Palin Gets Pranked By Canadian Radio Hosts – Video

Which Candidate Has The Best Name?

They say: no one with a uterus should vote for McCain

They say: McCain not thrilled with Palin and she wants to run in 2012

Best political shirt ever - Everyone Poops

109 Year Old Daughter Of Slave Votes For Obama

Other Stuff to Vote On Today – Same Sex Marriage, Chicken Cages

Brett Singer — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:15:00 GMT

So the United States is picking a President today. But there are other candidates, and also many ballot measures in play today.

A quick round-up:

ARIZONA:
- Ban same-sex marriage.
- Require that any initiative involving spending or tax hikes be approved by majority of all registered voters, not just those casting ballots.

ARKANSAS:
- Create state lottery.
- Ban unmarried couples from adopting or being foster parents.

CALIFORNIA:
- Ban same-sex marriage.
- Authorize high-speed rail project.
- Require parental notification for a minor's abortion.
- Create 14-member commission to draw state legislative districts.
- Require all utilities to generate 20 percent of their power from renewable energy by 2010.
- Ban cramped metal cages for egg-laying hens.

I think I'm noticing a trend here.

Several states are voting on ballot measures to "ban same-sex marriage." Personally, I find this bizarre. Isn't it already banned? Are people that freaked out at the possibility of two men or two women marrying each other that they need to put it on double secret probation? (For the record, I think if gay people are crazy enough to want to be married, it's fine. Go for it.)

Looking at the article on MiamiHerald.com, it looks like the to-do of an insane person. Authorize slot machine gambling, check. Allow state's first casino, check. Ban abortion and dog racing, check. Ban cramped metal cages for egg-laying hens, check. (Those are all from different states, not the same one.) That's not to say that all of the measures are insane, it's just funny to think about them out of context. "Let's see, today...Prohibit mandatory union membership and mandatory union dues, authorize slot-machine gambling, and make English the official language of government proceedings. Got it." Busy day.

Sources: Miami Herald, MTV

Read more:

Obama doesn't say I love you anymore

They say: John McCain is not a maverick

Babble Podcast for November 3, 2008

Republican Candidate Uses Porn-esque Robocall

Jon Stewart says: Ted Stevens is a Cheap Date

N-Word Flies at Palin Rally

Babble Podcast for October 27th, 2008

Babble Talk: The Candidates Health Plans

Joe the racist plumber?

Sarah Palin Gets Pranked By Canadian Radio Hosts – Video

Which Candidate Has The Best Name?

They say: no one with a uterus should vote for McCain

They say: McCain not thrilled with Palin and she wants to run in 2012

Best political shirt ever - Everyone Poops

109 Year Old Daughter Of Slave Votes For Obama

Brett Singer — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:45:00 GMT

The line to vote for President and other stuff today might be kind of long. If you get cranky, here's an inspiring story to keep you a little bit sane.

From the Austin American Statesman:

Amanda Jones, 109, the daughter of a man born into slavery, has lived a life long enough to touch three centuries. And after voting consistently as a Democrat for 70 years, she has voted early for the country's first black presidential nominee.
…
Jones' father herded sheep as a slave until he was 12, according to the family, and once he was freed, he was a farmer who raised cows, hogs and turkeys on land he owned. Her mother was born right after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed, Joyce Jones said. The family owned more than 100 acres of land in Cedar Creek at one point, she said.
Amanda Jones' father urged her to exercise her right to vote, despite discriminatory practices at the polls and poll taxes meant to keep black and poor people from voting. Those practices were outlawed for federal elections with the 24th Amendment in 1964, but not for state and local races in Texas until 1966.

First of all, the fact that anyone lived to be 109 is cool. More importantly, though, is her story. I can't imagine what it must have felt like for Amanda to cast her vote in this Presidential election.

Source/Image: Statesman.com

Read more:

Other Stuff to Vote On Today – Same Sex Marriage, Chicken Cages

Obama doesn't say I love you anymore

They say: John McCain is not a maverick

Babble Podcast for November 3, 2008

Republican Candidate Uses Porn-esque Robocall

Jon Stewart says: Ted Stevens is a Cheap Date

N-Word Flies at Palin Rally

Babble Podcast for October 27th, 2008

Babble Talk: The Candidates Health Plans

Joe the racist plumber?

Sarah Palin Gets Pranked By Canadian Radio Hosts – Video

Which Candidate Has The Best Name?

They say: no one with a uterus should vote for McCain

They say: McCain not thrilled with Palin and she wants to run in 2012

Best political shirt ever - Everyone Poops

Why Monday Night Football Is Important To This Election

Brett Singer — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:00:00 GMT

You probably think that a football game has no bearing on tomorrow's election.

Silly voter!

First: both Barack Obama and John McCain will appear tonight on Monday Night Football. They will be interviewed by Chris Berman, a man whose idea of humor is referring to quarterback Jack Delhomme as "Daylight Come And You've Gotta Delhomme." (Get it? "Go home?" "Delhomme?" It's even funnier when he says it every single week.) According to media reports, "The interviews will give both candidates a last major chance to appeal to Americans during a coveted spot on prime-time television. Monday Night Football has averaged 12.2 million viewers this season." That's better than the typical halftime show, although I doubt Janet Jackson will show up and offer a wardrobe malfunction. And while I would personally love it if Obama quoted Chris Rock and said, "Redskins? That's racist! That's like having a team called the New York Ni**ers," I'm guessing he won't say that. But maybe McCain will? Nah. Wouldn't be prudent, you know?

Second: if the Redskins win the game, the incumbent party – the Republicans, in case you've forgotten – wins the election. This has been true since 1948, except for once. In 2004, the 'Skins lost and George W. Bush won. Obviously this isn't a lock. Still, this is one of those weird little things that make you believe in a higher power that has a sense of humor.

The predictions I've seen generally favor the Steelers tonight, but it should be close. So if you want to start obsessing a day early, you can stay up late tonight and watch the game.

Also of interest: Obama was on Monday Night Football back in 2006 to announce… that he was a Chicago Bears fan. Here's the video.

Sources: WSJ, CBC (also image), Sporting News