Archive | Research RSS feed for this section

Expensive fluoride  added to Birmingham’s water did not protect first teeth

22 Mar

Royal College of Surgeons’ dean points to ‘sweet habits’ as first teeth are removed

Today it was reported that NHS data obtained by the Faculty of Dental Surgery at the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) shows there were 9,206 extractions within the age group in 2015-16 compared with 7,444 in 2006-07 – a 24% rise. The figures prompted calls for parents, the government and the food industry to take action to reverse the alarming trend.

Prof Nigel Hunt, dean of the RCS’s Faculty of Dental Surgery, said: “When you see the numbers tallied up like this it becomes abundantly clear that the sweet habits of our children are having a devastating effect on the state of their teeth.

Hundreds of children are having their first teeth extracted as hospital treatments hit their highest level in six years in Birmingham.

There were 1,464 hospital admissions for teeth extractions for children from the Birmingham CrossCity CCG in 2015/16, the highest number since at least 2010/11, and up from 795 in 2014/15. In Sandwell and West Birmingham, the number of hospital admissions for teeth extractions has also hit a six year high, at 141 in 2015/16, up from 33 in 2014/15.

The numbers have increased sevenfold since 2010/11

In 2010/11 there were 208 hospital admissions for tooth extraction. Included in the admissions were 297 for children aged between one and four to have multiple teeth extracted, the highest number since at least 2010/11, as well as 730 admissions for children aged five to nine, the highest number since at least 2010/11.

Ingesting fluoride at best ‘controversial’: at worst, causing some damage to health

A report by Birmingham Professor of Epidemiology, K.K. Cheng and Dr Trevor Sheldon published in the BMJ deemed the practice ‘controversial’.

More recently, corresponding author Professor Stephen Peckham, University of Kent commented on research he and two co-authors had undertaken and published in the BMJ: “We found that practices located in the West Midlands (a wholly fluoridated area) are nearly twice as likely to report high hypothyroidism prevalence in comparison to Greater Manchester (non-fluoridated area).

Last year Ian Wylie reported that around one million people in Birmingham are supplied with artificially fluoridated water. But its average number of extracted or filled teeth is 1.17, higher than the national average. Across the West Midlands, where water has been fluoridated since 1964, there has been a 300% rise in children under the age of 10 being admitted to hospital for multiple teeth extractions in the last five years. 

 

Stop Press: today we read that a representative of leading brands including Mars, Cadbury, Kellogg’s and Nestlé (aka ‘food giants’) told The Times that they would reduce sugar content in food and drink but not to the government’s timescale.

 

 

 

Agrichemical industry resists OP pesticides ban proposed by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

19 Feb

In January EcoWatch reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its first nationwide assessments of the effects of three pesticides, all organophosphates, on endangered species. It found that 97% of 1,800 animals and plants protected under the Endangered Species Act are likely to be harmed by malathion and chlorpyrifos, two commonly used pesticides. The World Health Organization last year announced that malathion and diazinon are probable carcinogens.

TRAUDT AERIAL SERVICE

Another 78% are likely to be hurt by the pesticide diazinon. The results are the final biological evaluations the EPA completed as part of its examination of the impacts of these pesticides on endangered species. (See April draft here).

The three pesticides are all organophosphates, a class of insecticides which researchers at the University of California at Berkeley found in 87% of human umbilical-cord samples.

In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed to ban chlorpyrifos, a widely used insecticide sprayed on a variety of crops including oranges, apples, cherries, grapes, broccoli and asparagus. The pesticide, in use since 1965, was linked to illnesses among farm workers and neurodevelopmental problems in children. However, Dow AgroSciences and others in the agrichemical industry successfully resisted the proposal.

ecowatch-2-logoEcoWatch reports that Chemical & Engineering News (paywall) states the EPA is under a court order to make a determination about the use of chlorpyrifos by March 31 — about a decade after the agency initially failed to respond to a petition raising concerns about the chemical from environmental advocates.

Following these final evaluations from the EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service will issue final biological opinions to identify mitigation measures and changes to pesticide use by December 2017 to help to ensure that chlorpyrifos, malathion and diazinon will no longer potentially harm any endangered species in the U.S. when used on agricultural crops.

“We’re now getting a much more complete picture of the risks that pesticides pose to wildlife at the brink of extinction, including birds, frogs, fish and plants,” said Nathan Donley, senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity:

“The next step will hopefully be some commonsense measures to help protect them along with our water supplies and public health.”

 

 

 

 

MSM downplays EU ban/delay on use of glyphosate, a probable carcinogen, for 18 months

9 Feb

TRAUDT AERIAL SERVICE

On February 8th, Agranet reported that the European Citizens Initiative (ECI) was launched in several European cities. It calls on the commission to propose a “ban on glyphosate, to reform the pesticide approval procedure, and to set EU-wide mandatory reduction targets for pesticide use”.

Its main objectives: Ban glyphosate-based herbicides, exposure to which has been linked to cancer in humans, and has led to ecosystems degradation; ensure that the scientific evaluation of pesticides for EU regulatory approval is based only on published studies, which are commissioned by competent public authorities instead of the pesticide industry; set EU-wide mandatory reduction targets for pesticide use, with a view to achieving a pesticide-free future.

In January this year, the Farmers Weekly recorded the European Commission’s registration of petition calling for a ban on the use of glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s top-selling weedkiller. The initiative was formally registered on 25 January, starting a one-year process for the collection of signatures in support of the proposal. If the proposal receives the support of a million people from at least seven member states, the Commission will be obliged to consider a legislative response and provide justification for its decision.

The FW article adds that the European Chemicals Agency is undertaking a review into glyphosate and will consider whether it should be classified as a carcinogen by the EU. The review is due to be published this summer. It comes after a study, led by Michael Antoniou, at King’s College, London, linked glyphosate to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in rats. Monsanto maintains glyphosate, when used according to label directions, “does not present an unreasonable risk of adverse effects to humans, wildlife or the environment”.

On 2nd February William Bowles blogged The EU has refused to give Monsanto’s glyphosate the green light. It’s delayed the decision for 18 months while glyphosate is re-evaluated” adding ruefully:

“(Banned) but not, it seems in Lambeth in London where the stuff is sprayed regularly on the pavements in my neighbourhood”.

 

 

Hawaiian parents and environmentalists campaign against use of harmful sprays

7 Dec

In 2015 an American Academy of Pediatrics’ report, Pesticide Exposure in Children, found “an association between pesticides and adverse birth outcomes, including physical birth defects”. Local schools had been evacuated twice and children sent to hospital because of pesticide drift.

aerial-spray

Years earlier, whilst in America, a friend of the writer, who was in good health at the time, developed emphysema and died prematurely after being exposed to spray drift.

Carla Nelson, a pediatrician, pointed out that doctors need prior disclosure of sprayings: “It’s hard to treat a child when you don’t know which chemical he’s been exposed to.” Read her Guardian coverage here.

In the state legislature in Honolulu, Senator Josh Green, who then chaired the health committee, made his fourth attempt to curb pesticide and herbicide spraying, but ruefully commented that most heads of the agriculture committee have had “a closer relationship with the agro-chemical companies than with the environmental groups”.

A year later, Time magazine reported that there was growing evidence of glyphosate’s potentially dangerous health effects. It was judged a “probable human carcinogen” by the World Health Organization last year but despite this, on the Hawaiian island of Maui and elsewhere, sprayers simply sprayed and moved on; no one monitored the observance of the safety directions of their own product.

spray-hackneyHawaii environmentalists have used a little-known law, FIFRA, short for the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, which requires sprayers to follow the safety instructions on the product’s label down to the letter.

For products containing the herbicide glyphosate, that means keeping people away from the area where the product has been used for four hours after applications for agriculture, or until the product dries when sprayed for non-agricultural purposes. That can be difficult in places like long stretches of roads and highways where extended monitoring to keep people away from recently sprayed areas is virtually impossible.

Parents began to circulate photographs of government employees spraying Round Up, the primary commercial product containing glyphosate. Footage showed authorities spraying on highways, roads and near schools without any visible effort to keep people away.

Finally the uncertainty raised by activists over the labelling issue convinced Stephen Rodgers, who oversees pesticide application on Maui’s state highways to switch to organic pesticides. His department no longer purchases Roundup and will stop using the product entirely – but only when the existing supply has been used.

Significant exposure to glyphosate in farm workers has been linked to increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a type of cancer. Nature magazine, which is sceptical of the impact on human health, at least reports a study showing a link between glyphosate and cancer in mice. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization (WHO), ruled last year that the pesticide is a “probable human carcinogen.”

Dr. Philip Landrigan, a Harvard-educated pediatrician and epidemiologist, Dean for Global Health at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York, says, “For a long time glyphosate was viewed as an innocuous herbicide. A lot of things have changed”.

His colleague, Chuck Benbrook, an adjunct professor at Washington State University’s crops and soil science department, said “There is growing evidence that glyphosate is geno-toxic and has adverse effects on cells in a number of different ways. It’s time to pull back … on uses of glyphosate that we know are leading to significant human exposures while the science gets sorted out.”

Part 2: studies which conclude that glyphosate does not cause harm.

 

 

 

Causes of diseases are already well-known –  but nothing is done to remove those causes

28 Nov

Richard Bruce recently sent an email reflecting on the Queen’s opening of the £700 million Francis Crick Institute (below), which will have some £130 million in annual funding. Its aim is to find new ways to prevent, diagnose and treat conditions such as cancer, heart disease and stroke, infections and neurodegenerative conditions like motor neurone disease. It is the biggest research building under one roof in the entire European Union employing some 1500 scientists and staff.

francis-crick-institute_19_cwellcome-images-copy 

He asks: “Do they need all that money to re-discover what they already know?”

The Medical Research Council (MRC), Cancer Research UK, Wellcome, University College London, Imperial College London and King’s College London are involved.  Richard comments: “Some interesting names there with staff who must know what is really going on” and summarises his post examining what the MRC actually knew and what it has reported over the decades.

The Francis Crick Institute in London is said to be “a world-leading centre of biomedical research and innovation, it has scale, vision and expertise to tackle the most challenging scientific questions underpinning health and disease.

The aim is to find new ways to prevent, diagnose and treat conditions such as cancer, heart disease and stroke, infections and neurodegenerative conditions like motor neurone disease.”

Richard’s post states that the cause of these illnesses is already well-known and has been known for a very long time but nothing is done to remove those causes. He says that protecting the poisons industry seems to be the real aim: “Poisoned people earn the industry £millions in drug sales and research”.

He asks, “Why is the Medical Research Council now implying that it does not understand the ever present danger not only to the occupationally exposed but to everyone, adult, child and unborn, exposed as we are in our food, clothes, furniture, fuels, paints, oils and our environment?”

And comments: “Shocking really”.

Richard Bruce who has an extensive knowledge on the effects of organophosphates which are used far more widely in agriculture than just sheep dip. He personally was badly affected by Actellic used in grain stores documented at: Trouble in Store 

 

 

 

Some U.S. municipalities are reassessing the subject of fluoride added to their water sources

12 Oct

journ-header

 

The Journalist’s Resource project, based at Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, examines news topics through a research lens. It ‘surfaces’ scholarly materials that may be relevant to media practitioners, bloggers, educators, students and general readers. The following news items were published in a review on their website earlier this year.

Concern about fluoride, a neurotoxin

A 2014 review paper in The Lancet Neurology identified a number of potential development neurotoxins in children. One of these — fluoride — has continued to fuel a discussion since the article’s publication, as the water supplies of approximately 74 percent of the U.S. population have fluoridation. While the debate hasn’t yet risen to the same level as those over vaccines or global warming, some U.S. municipalities are reassessing the amount of fluoride in their water sources — or whether to fluoridate at all.

Anti-fluoride critics have extended their influence

The article comments that, despite evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of fluoridation, anti-fluoride critics have extended their influence and challenged public health experts. Despite the evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of fluoridation, anti-fluoride critics have extended their influence and challenged public health experts.

Some communities are rejecting fluoridation

portland-fluoride

  • Voters (above) in Portland, Oregon did so in 2013, the fourth time in almost 60 years — overruling the city’s commissioners, who had agreed to fluoridate the city’s water supply.
  • USA Today reported that in July, the commissioners of Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee, voted to stop adding fluoride. The vote was 6-1, with Commissioner Carlos Wilson casting the only vote in favour of fluoride, this despite objections from local dentists, who had argued that fluoride is a proven method for fighting tooth decay. Water system general manager David Collett said he will stop adding fluoride to the water supply immediately.
  • On the morning of August 4th, the city council of Port Angeles, Washington, stopped fluoridation of the municipal water supply following four ethics complaints against council members and repeated, intense City Council public comment sessions. A vote to decide whether to resume the practice will be held in November 2017.

A near thing – next time perhaps

In January 2016, city officials in Durango, Colorado debated whether to stop adding fluoride to city drinking water. The local effort to eliminate fluoride from drinking water has been led by Jim Forleo, a chiropractor who said too much fluoride can have negative effects such as joint pain. “They are giving us a drug without our consent,” he said. Fluoride opponents, reason that while a certain amount of fluoride may be safe, the weight and medical condition of the person would help to determine the appropriate dose. In April, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommended lowering the dosage of fluoride because so many people are exposed to it in toothpaste and mouthwash.

john-rothchildDr John Rothchild, a dentist, came to hear the council’s discussion in June. He filters out the fluoride from his home water and his clinic because of the potential side effects of fluoride, especially on the thyroid.

When it comes to tooth decay, sugar is far more important, he said: “We have to control the sugar”.

The question deadlocked the city’s Utilities Commission, so that advisory board did not have a united position to present, but the commission’s chairman, John Ballew, and San Juan Basin Health. Department Executive Director Liane Jollon both spoke in favour of fluoride and the Durango City Council decided that fluoride will stay in the Durango’s drinking water.

Early in 2016, residents of Healdsburg, California opposing fluoridation mounted a campaign

It is hoped that Healdsburg residents can be convinced to vote to stop adding the substance to the city’s water supply. They have been gathering voters’ signatures to place the issue on the November ballot, hoping the outcome will be different from last time in 2014, when 64% said “yes” to keeping fluoride in the water and 34% said “no.” They are seeking a moratorium on the additive until the city and fluoride suppliers provide detailed chemical reports and a written statement verifying its safety for ingestion.

In Collier County, Florida a debate over fluoridation has started

Camden Smith, the commissioner’s assistant, is to petition commissioners to stop fluoridation of the county’s drinking water. She said she will raise issues about the health and safety of using cavity-preventing fluoride in drinking water and ask commissioners to “stop putting a medical treatment into a public utility.”

A reader adds news from Patton Borough, Pennsylvania – another town which has continued the growing trend of ending fluoridation due to the corrosion and metal leaching caused by the chemical additive.  According to Borough water engineer David Cunningham, of Keller Engineers, “because Patton has older water lines, the added fluorosilicic acid seemed to be loosening sediment and causing corrosion. ‘The fear is that you’re going to raise lead and copper levels,’ he said.  The notice added that the fluoride also seemed to be increasing the water’s iron content.”

And from Kennebunk, Maine – Voters in Kennebunk, Kennebunkport, Wells, Ogunquit, Arundel, and portions of Biddeford and York, Maine will have the opportunity to end fluoridation on election day in November.  The water district has come out in opposition to adding fluoride additives, and a campaign has been organized to win the ballot vote.

As Florida’s Camden Smith says, “I’m not saying fluoride isn’t beneficial to children but 89% of our population is over the age of 10 and has no medical need for fluoride. When even the cheapest toothpaste on the planet has fluoride in it, we are not servicing the public good. While I agree it is a moderate amount of fluoride in our drinking water, the problem is we’re bathing in it, drinking it and swimming in it. I respect anyone’s choice to put medical treatment in their water and I ask to be given the same choice. Nobody should be forced to ingest fluoride”.

 

 

 

 

Rising antibiotic resistance in E.coli on UK supermarket meat

9 Sep

tracy-and-pigLast December this site reported that Tracy Worcester is drawing attention to the subject of antibiotic resistance, which is growing – developing not in humans, but in bacteria that can then infect humans. Surgical and cancer chemotherapy patients rely on antibiotics to protect them from potentially life-threatening illnesses and declining efficacy could turn routine procedures into life-threatening ones.

The Organic Research Centre now reports that a new study carried out by scientists at Cambridge University, looked at 189 UK-origin pig and poultry meat samples from the seven largest supermarkets in the UK (ASDA, Aldi, Coop, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Waitrose). It tested for the presence of E. coli which are resistant to the key antibiotics for treating E. coli urinary-tract and blood-poisoning infections in people. The highly resistant ESBL E. coli was found on meat from all of the supermarkets.

orc-header

The research found rising levels of resistance in chicken meat, with 24% of samples testing positive for ESBL E. coli, a type of E. coli resistant to the ‘critically important’ modern cephalosporin antibiotics. This is four times higher than was found during a similar study in 2015, in which just 6% of chicken tested positive for ESBL E. coli. Modern cephalosporins are widely used for treating life-threatening E.coli blood poisoning in humans.

51% of the E. coli from pork and poultry samples were resistant to the antibiotic trimethoprim, which is used to treat over half of lower urinary-tract infections. In addition, 19% of the E. coli were resistant to gentamicin, a very important human antibiotic used to treat more serious upper urinary-tract infections.

The findings provide further evidence that the overuse of antibiotics used to mass medicate livestock on British farms is likely to be undermining the treatment of E. coli urinary-tract and blood-poisoning infections in humans. Some of the antibiotics tested are used in far greater quantities in livestock farming than in human medicine.

Dr Mark Holmes, from Cambridge University, who led the study said: “I’m concerned that insufficient resources are being put into the surveillance of antibiotic resistance in farm animals and retail meat. We don’t know if these levels are rising or falling in the absence of an effective monitoring system. These results highlight the need for improvements in antibiotic stewardship in veterinary medicine. While some progress has been made we must not be complacent as it may take many years before we see significant reductions in the numbers of antibiotic-resistant bacteria found in farms.”

E-coli is by far the most common cause of urinary-tract infections and of dangerous blood poisoning, and can also cause meningitis. These infections must be treated with antibiotics. Dr Ron Daniels BEM, CEO of the UK Sepsis Trust said: “This study highlights a worrying trend towards rising resistance in E.coli on UK retail meat. E.coli in people is the greatest cause of deaths from sepsis, and poor antimicrobial stewardship in intensive farming is undoubtedly contributing to this trend. It’s of paramount importance that we act decisively to reduce this immediate threat to human life.”

Two recommendations:

 Other proposals:

Tracy points out that we have the choice to buy meat with the high welfare labels RSPCA Assured, Outdoor Bred, Free Range or Organic – eat less meat as Anna advocates – or go meat-free. See the World Health Organisation on the health issues here.

Buy organic/local?

Organic farming is perceived as providing a better quality of life for farmed animals and an earlier article reports that a new financial report on organic farming in England and Wales for 2014/15, undertaken by the Organic Research Centre for the Welsh Government, shows organic farm profits increasing, with organic dairy farming outperforming conventional dairy farming in England and Wales. In particular, the organic dairy industry is now generating higher profits than conventional farms despite producing lower yields.

Animal welfare has been a key motivator to consumers who are increasingly choosing organic products with quality assurance standards, because they want to know the origins of their food, and are willing to pay more for products which are ‘friendly’ to wildlife and the environment.

*

Professor Nic Lampkin from the Organic Research Centre in Newbury, was one of the co-authors of the report and the Cambridge study was commissioned by the Alliance to Save our Antibiotics, of which the Organic Research Centre is a member.