Recently, the Coca-Cola company decided to stop selling food products (read breakfast cereals, snacks and drinks) in the UK that contained artificial dyes. Bravo Coca-Cola and to all the other companies that decided to do this! Bravo for listening to the hoards of consumers in the UK who decided to fight back and won! Here is the glitch though, despite knowing that consumers do not want these dyes in their food and the harm they can do these companies, like Kraft and McDonald’s, still continue to produce these items for us folks here in the US.

Mad now?

I am.

Why should you fight back?

Read the rest of this entry »

by Ann Bibby 

We recently replaced our gas stove with an electric range. As an asthmatic I am forever discovering new dangers to my sensitive airways, and gas stoves are one of them. Secure in this knowledge (and driven by a recent annoucment by our power company that natural gas prices were about to double, triple or worse at the end of the month), we headed off to the appliance store to make our purchase. After settling on a ceramic topped self-cleaning model, we waited patiently for it to be shipped.

While we waited, I ran across an article on Wired by Patrick Di Justo about the oven cleaner, Easy-Off. A bit tongue in cheek (my favorite part was when he referenced Brad Pitt’s lines in the movie Fight Club when his character explains what happens when one mixes lye with animal fat - the “animal” being “human”), the article is sobering. Read the rest of this entry »

Over at Living Health I just found a good overview article about the most toxic areas in our homes (and what to do about them).  The author of the article wrote The Complete Organic Pregnancy, and she shares some helpful tips for clearing out particular problem areas. 

One thing I learned from the article was that conventional cat litter has inhalable silica in it, which is a carcinogen.  I knew it was bad for the environment, but I didn’t know that those chalky dust clouds were cancer causing (I grew up with three cats, and in the 80s nobody knew or cared about any of this stuff).  I just wrote about the problem of silica and asbestos showing up in play sand for children over at Non-Toxic Kids. 

Many of her suggestions are actually doable, not counting the “buy an organic mattress” tip.  I do dream of the day when I can pass along my old mattress and dive into miles of springy, organic and non-toxic bedding goodness. 

One of the reasons I enjoy writing for Moms Speak Up is the opportunity to research topics that are fairly new to me.  Recently, I learned the difference between an aquifer and aquitard.  More importanly, I learned how these two water-related words affect our every day life. 

Read the rest of this entry »

(originally posted on Non-Toxic Kids) 

A few weeks ago after reading this post on Mom’s Speak Up, about one mom’s struggle with her daughter’s serious reactions to vaccines, and an awful doctor who threatened, belittled and bullied her into a chickenpox vaccination on her child, I was motivated to do some research. This mama ultimately decided to vaccinate her child, but with some thoughtful adjustments to the regular schedule (and other ideas to decrease her child’s chance of a reaction).

One thing she did say in the article that made me pause was this: “Thimerosal (mercury) is not 100% removed from vaccines. Even doctors in the American Academy of Pediatrics admit it is usually 90% removed, not 100%.” And she cited article from Reuters, which explains that Thimerosal has been phased out of most vaccines, but is still in flu vaccines (along with many other potentially toxic substances such as aluminum). That certainly got my attention since I have been assured that there is no thimerosal in the vaccines given in my pediatrician’s office, and by a doctor on the news clip I cited in my recent post on vaccines.

Here is a quote from the American Academy of Pediatrics about the safety and use of thimerosal:

Some parents have expressed concerns about a potential link between health problems, particularly autism, and vaccines containing thimerosal. Thimerosal is a preservative that contains a form of mercury (organomercurial). Beginning in the 1930s, thimerosal was used in very small amounts as a preservative in vaccines. Thimerosal is effective in preventing bacterial and fungal contamination, particularly in opened multi-dose vaccine containers. In 1999, the Public Health Service agencies and the AAP recommended that thimerosal be taken out of vaccines as a precautionary measure. By the end of 2001, all routine pediatric vaccines contained no thimerosal or only trace amounts (some influenza and Td vaccines). There is no convincing evidence of harm caused by the small amounts of thimerosal in vaccines, except for minor effects like swelling and redness at the injection site due to sensitivity to thimerosal.”

This is in stark contrast to the Reuters article about the same topic. The main difference I see is the language of there being “trace” amounts of thimerosal in vaccines, so let’s explore this further. The Centers for Disease Control and the American Academy of Pediatrics say that all vaccines (accept the flu vaccine) have either no thimerosal or only trace amounts. The flu vaccine, for whatever reasons, has a higher rate of thimersol present (although still considered safe, according to the CDC and the AAP).

Here is a more through explanation from the CDC:

“Today, all routinely recommended licensed pediatric vaccines that are currently being manufactured for the U.S. market, with the exception of influenza vaccine, contain no thimerosal or only trace amounts. Thimerosal preservative-free influenza vaccines are available, but in limited quantities. The total amount of inactivated influenza vaccine available without thimerosal as a preservative will continue to increase as manufacturing capabilities are expanded.”
Read the rest of the CDC article here, which goes on to cite the studies indicating the use of thimerosal in vaccines presents no harm. The short of it is that regular flu vaccines can still contain thimerosal, and you can request one without it for your child. This seems like the best choice to me, but I do worry about the parents who do not know about this choice or do not have this (albeit confusing) information.

There have been recent studies disproving the link between thimerosal and autism. Read a recent article on this from Science Daily here. Here is a roundup of the prevailing medical opinion about the relationship between thimerosal and autism, from ABC news.

The Centers for Disease Control says “There is no convincing scientific evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except for minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics says”No scientific data link thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines with any pediatric neurologic disorder, including autism.”

The Food and Drug Administration conducted a review in 1999 — the year thimerosal was ordered to be removed from most vaccines — and said that it “found no evidence of harm from the use of thimerosal as a vaccine preservative, other than local hypersensitivity reactions.”

The Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee concluded “that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.”

And a study of California Department of Developmental Services data published last month indicated that there was “an increase in autism in California despite the removal of thimerosal from most vaccines.”

So is thimerosal gone from vaccines? The best answer I can give from this research is: mostly (which is not very satisfying, I know). I would encourage you to discuss this more with your child’s pediatrician if you are concerned or want more information.

It is truly my goal to provide readers with balanced, thoughtful information, with links to the sources for parents to read and consider. I am not a doctor, only a concerned parent and writer. I want what is best for all of our kids. Please take this post and others as simply more information for you as you and your child’s doctor make important decisions about your child’s health.
Sources: American Academy of Pediatrics, Centers for Disease Control, ABC news, Science Daily

I don’t know what causes autism. Even the real experts don’t know what causes autism.

We do know that autism is on the rise, but nobody is sure how much or why. According to the CDC via the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, before the 1990s the rate of autism was one in every 2000-3000 and now it is one in 150. During this span of time, the tools and categories for diagnosing autism changed, which might explain some (or theoretically all) of the increase.

But that still doesn’t explain the cause.

However, according to one story (”Autistic Children Linked to Same Sperm Donor“) in the all-day CNN coverage of autism yesterday, for Autism Day, there is a prevailing theory:

Most experts believe that genetics are a component, making a child predisposed to autism or responsive to an environmental trigger.

“It’s a combination of being genetically vulnerable and then having some kind of social or toxicant exposure that tips you over,” according to Dr. Gary Goldstein of the Kennedy Krieger Institute.

That theory is supported by the recent Hannah Poling lawsuit. In that case, the government agreed—without even requiring a hearing—that Hannah’s autism was caused by childhood vaccines.

But not all vaccinated children get autism. Not all children react to vaccines. But some do.

So what are moms to do? Vaccines prevent diseases that are horrible or potentially fatal. They are necessary to both public and individual health.

But are all vaccines necessary and are they necessary on the CDC schedule?

In my humble and non-medical opinion, no.

When my oldest daughter was barely one, she got a combo vaccine. In total, that day, she got five vaccines. I had been nervous and reluctant, but my pediatrician assured me there was no more than a one in a million chance that anything would happen. She promised she’d never seen any child react at all to this combination of vaccines.

My child did. In fact, my child reacted so violently to the vaccines that we rushed to the emergency room, where we stayed until her reaction and fever were under control.

I took that very seriously. My pediatrician did not.

I began researching vaccines. Before the next schedule vaccination, I told the pediatrician I would not accept more than one shot at a time based on how my daughter reacted. I also told her I wouldn’t do the vaccine if my daughter appeared ill. She pressured me, applied guilt, and patronized my concerns.

However, at the next visit, she could not overrule me and my daughter received one shot with three vaccines in it.

Again, she reacted, although not as violently.

I took that even more seriously. My pediatrician still did not. We engaged in a battle of vaccines. I battled due to love and she battled due to inflated ego. I refused certain vaccines (ones not needed past age 2, ones designed for children in childcare situations or who were exposed to groups of children—my daughter was not) and told her I planned to delay “optional” vaccines such as chicken pox. I stated I wanted the vaccines broken down and spaced out. My pediatrician was furious. She refused. She told me vaccines could not be broken down or spaced out. I provided documentation to the contrary. Finally, the deciding battle was over the chickenpox vaccine. I did not believe the vaccine had been studied thoroughly or used long enough for me to agree that it was appropriate at that time for my daughter, all things considered.

My pediatrician had her nurse get a phone and told me she was dialing child services to report me as a negligent and abusive mother.

I was terrified and felt powerless. I thought child services would take a pediatrician’s word seriously. I thought they would take her word over my own. At least initially. I was terrified my daughter would be in foster care (we had no family nearby) and would have a reaction to the vaccine. I thought I could lose my daughter, even if only temporarily, and she’d be vaccinated anyway.

So, trapped, backed into a corner, terrified, and sobbing, I stepped back, and let the doctor force the chickenpox vaccine on my daughter, against my will, on threat of having my child removed from my home.

That was the last time we went to that office and saw that pediatrician. I quickly changed doctors.

Upon investigation, child services said that yes, based on the pediatrician’s call, they probably would have removed the child from me to investigate, but that I probably would have had her back within 48 hours. Two days. Two days my baby would have been in foster care and my family under investigation due to a malicious and vindictive doctor who could not respect my request to wait and let me research a vaccine before administering it to my daughter.

I think I made the right choice that day, but that doctor made the wrong one. I hear similar—if less egregious—stories from other parents about doctors not listening to their concerns and wishes.

I learned a big lesson that day: doctors don’t know everything, listen to your gut, ally yourself with a doctor who listens to you and respects your expertise on your child, only go to a doctor who will do his or her best to work with your preferences and beliefs, and above all, respect yourself enough to demand respect from your health care professional.

I believe in vaccinations and even ensure that my children get most of them.

However, I have a set of caveats to that and will only work with pediatricians who are willing to work with me on these requirements:

1. I will not ever vaccinate a sick child. Most pediatricians who are responsible agree with this.

2. I space out my vaccinations to accommodate my children’s reactions to them. By doing this, we’ve never had another vaccine injury.

3. I tend to vaccinate in the summer, when my children are out of school and less likely to be sick or fighting sick. I believe their bodies are less overtaxed then.

4. The caveat to 3 is that I try to avoid high ozone or pollutant alert days.

5. I breakdown or limit amount of vaccine going into my children’s body at one time.

Yes, this is more work for everyone, especially me. It can cost a little more because I have more office visits and have had to pay out of pocket for a few individualized vaccines. I save up for this through a Health Savings Account.

Not every child needs this amount of customization. Some children manage vaccines without a problem.

But my children don’t, and I believe that puts them at greater risk for permanent or severe vaccine injury, based on what new studies and the experts say about the cause of problems in some cases, such as Hannah Poling and her autism.

Thimerosal (mercury) is not 100% removed from vaccines. Even doctors in the American Academy of Pediatrics admit it is usually 90% removed, not 100%.

From Reuters:

Although the mercury content in many vaccines on the current schedule has been reduced to trace amounts, these trace amounts are not regulated by the FDA. Large doses of mercury still remain in some vaccines, including flu shots.
Other highly toxic substances including aluminum remain as well.

Those other toxins (that are considered Not Safe at any level) can include: Formaldehyde (used in vaccines as a tissue fixative), Phenol, Methanol, Glutaraldehyde, MSG (especially dangerous for infants), Sulfate and phosphate compounds, Ammonium Sulfate, Gentamicin Sulfate, Neomycin Sulfate, Tri(n)butylphosphate, Polymyxin B, Sorbitol, Polyribosylribitol, Beta-Propiolactone, Amphotericin B, and so on.

In response to growing parental concern about vaccines, vaccine injury, and ingredients, in February the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) began a campaign using “parent spokesperson” to put a positive spin on vaccinations, with a little guilt and fear thrown in.

I agree with this sentiment:

Parent advocates for children’s health believe the AAP should direct their
resources towards increasing the safety of vaccines, rather than
damage-control media campaigns and attempts to censor fictional TV shows such as ABC’s “Eli Stone.” “Their resources are so valuable,” says Rita Shreffler, parent and Executive Director of NAA. “It is my hope that the AAP will stop defending the continued use of poison in vaccines and instead direct that energy towards implementing promising medical treatments that have thus far been denied to the vast number of children diagnosed with autism. In the last several years, we have come to know that improvement and even recovery from autism is possible when children receive appropriate medical attention, yet the AAP continues to dismiss these treatments.”

I highly recommend you research vaccines, vaccine ingredients, vaccine schedules, and vaccine injury on your own. I got much of the above information from Vaccine Information Service (Vaccine Ingredients).

As I said, I’m not anti-vaccine. My children are vaccinated.

I am, however, pro-knowledge. I believe as parents we need to be informed about what is being injected into our children and why—why this combination, why this time, why this amount, etc. And we deserve doctors who can support this and partner with us as we make the best—informed—decisions about our children’s health care.

By luck and grace, my daughter shows no lasting injury from her vaccinations. Not all parents and children are so fortunate. The bottom line is that upfront we don’t know what camp we’ll fall in, so it’s up to us to be informed and advocate as best we can for the best care possible for our kids.

For more information about CNN’s autism coverage and many of the incredible stories, click here.

Julie Pippert also writes at her personal blog, Using My Words, and at MOMocrats.

Insiders speculate that Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius is a hot contender for Democratic Vice Presidential candidate. Would she support initiatives that protected public health and the environment?

Indications are that she would.

Recently, Sebelius threatened to veto a bill that she says puts public health and the environment at risk. She made good on this threat, blocking the bill on March 21, 2008.

The bill would have overruled Kansas Department of Health and Environment Secretary Rod Bremby’s decision to deny Sunflower Electric Power Corporation’s application for an air-quality permit. It would also restrict his authority on future decisions.

State legislators are trying to get the required two-thirds majority they would need to override Governor Sebelius’ veto.

If they had received the permit, Sunflower and two out of state energy cooperative partners planned to construct two supercritical coal-fired power plants in southeast Kansas. The project is estimated to cost $3.6 billion, and Sunflower said it would provide affordable energy for the citizens of Kansas.

This did not persuade Sebelius, however, who maintained that the greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants overrode the good gained from the power the plants would produce. She said she is open to a compromise with Sunflower.

Her position on the environmental and public health impact of coal-fired power plants is a good match with both current Democratic presidential candidates.

Last fall, Sebelius wrote a public letter supporting Secretary Bremby’s denial of the permit application. In it, she said, “I am encouraged by this decision and am confident it protects the citizens of our great state. . . Instead of building two new coal plants, which would produce 11 million new tons of carbon dioxide each year, I support pursuing other, more promising energy and economic development alternatives. Kansas has great opportunities in clean energy and alternative fuels.”

In addition to the obvious issues of air pollution emissions and consumption of nonrenewable resources, the federal government declared coal-fired plants “too risky” for loans due to high construction costs.

According to an Associated Press article that quoted Sierra Club spokeswoman Stephanie Cole, “…dozens of coal-fired plants were abandoned or delayed last year.”

By Julie Pippert

Person Julie Pippert

Right click for SmartMenu shortcuts

We started buying compact fluorescent light bulbs a few years ago.  Fluorescent bulbs were supposed to last longer (than traditional light bulbs) and use very little energy. Like many families I know, my kids do not like the dark and have a terrible habit of turning on every blessed lamp and wall fixture to light their way.   Then, leaving them on.  Even in the daytime.  It seemed like I was changing light bulbs every other week.

Did I mention they’re expensive and I have a terrible habit of breaking things?

I’m a busy mother and, unfortunately, my husband often times has to remind me, “Can’t you slow down for even a minute?” or “Would it kill you to read a label?”

This time, he’s right.

Yesterday, I received an email from one of the many message boards I do read and was surprised to learn, when fluorescent bulbs crack, the materials inside are pretty dangerous.

I checked the manufacturer’s site to confirm this and, yes it’s true. These bulbs also need to be recycled and they should not be thrown away in the trash! According to manufacturer’s suggestions, here’s what I should have done:

What to do when compact fluorescents crack.

Compact fluorescent lamps contain small amounts of toxic mercury that can vaporize when the bulbs break, creating a potential health risk for infants, young children, and pregnant women. If a lamp does break, follow these cleanup procedures:

Keep people and pets away. Open windows, and leave the area for 15 minutes before beginning the cleanup.

Do not use a vacuum cleaner, even on a carpet. This will spread the mercury vapor and dust and potentially contaminate the vacuum.

Wear rubber gloves.

Carefully remove the larger pieces and place them in a secure closed container, preferably a glass jar with a metal screw top lid and seal like a canning jar.

Next, scoop up the smaller pieces and dust using two stiff pieces of paper such as index cards or playing cards.

Pick up fine particles with duct tape, packing tape, or masking tape, and then use a wet wipe or damp paper towel.

Put all waste into the glass container, including all material used in the cleanup. Remove the container from your home and call your local solid waste district or municipality for disposal instructions.

Continue ventilating the room for several hours.

Wash your hands and face.

As a precaution, consider discarding throw rugs or the area of carpet where the breakage occurred, particularly if the rug is in an area frequented by infants, small children or pregnant women. Otherwise, open windows during the next several times you vacuum the carpet to provide good ventilation.

Better late, than never.

I couldn’t believe my eyes yesterday when I read that trace pharmaceuticals such as antibiotics, anti-convulsives, anti-cholesterol, asthma, birth control, heart meds, sex hormones, and mood stabilizers as well as 56 other Rx byproducts were found in the drinking supply of 24 major metropolitan areas across the US (including my own town of NJ). I don’t know about anyone else, but this is alarming and it’s time to take it to the feds in a major way to call for mandatory testing of our water and eradication of these drugs from the water we drink, cook and make our children drink (all in the name of 8 glasses a day!) Every major city from Southern California to Detroit to Louisville, KY was found to have a considerable amount of trace drugs in their water supply and bottled water drinkers weren’t protected from this either. I’ve never been one for the conspiracy theory, but it’s looking more and more like something fishy is up with our nation, gov’t and it’s ties to the pharmaceutical machine - all at the expense of sleeping Americans who are on more drugs than ever before and now will be moreso when you take a swig of your favorite tap water (whether you are already taking drugs for this or that - or not.)

According to the Associated Press, who investigated and issued the story on 03/09/08, it was learned that the “federal gov’t doesn’t require testing of America’s water and hasn’t set safety limits for drugs in the water.” An utter atrocity considering there is a federal mandate to (loosely?) test for microbial wastes, pesticides, PCBs and lead which still mysterioiusly turns up in our drinking supply from time to time.  According to the story scientists have voiced concerns over the long-term exposure and effects to humans but stated they are limited to testing for a solution to due lack of federal funds, but recognize there has been negative effects on wildlife. How is it that longterm testing of our water supply has gone to the low end of the todem pole of importance in this highly volatile area but pharmaceutical companies have gotten fast track approval from the FDA on these same drugs that have now made their way into the drinking supply. How was it conveniently overlooked and not a part of the human trial portion of drug testing from the FDA to test the environment and test the long-term effects of the byproducts of some of the most powerful drugs on the market right now [who also just so happen to be at the top of the list amongst the nations top-selling Rx drugs also]. Not to mention how a vast majority of these same meds that were fast track drugs have been either pulled from shelves or locked in multiple law suits for ineffectiveness, damage and loss to human life(?) This is unbelievable and I will be sadly disappointed if Americans all over our vast country don’t rally together and demand a “fast track” solution from the federal government and pharmaceutical companies who are to blame for this atrocity.

I believe a federal mandate should be attached to the fast-track agreement and the entire drug approval process for pharmaceutical companies to put money aside to pay for continuous long-term testing of America’s drinking water and for testing of the environment since they are well aware that only small amounts of these drugs will actually be metabolized into the human body and the other components will be excreted out of the body and naturally be re-introduced back into the environment via reservoirs, rivers and lakes, and watersheds! It’s only comon sense that although these drugs are showing up in trace amounts now in the water supply, that there is certainly going to be a negative combined effect when all of them merge together over time in our water supply. Even now we shouldn’t be surprised that it’s packed a whallop of a punch to humanity and wildlife -as statistics are proving right now. I’ve only been in the medical field for X-number of [many] years working at 5 of the top research hospitals from NY to Seattle with the best researchers in the world to know how this process works and to be this outraged b/c the pharmaceutical companies know exactly what they’re doing and have enough money strategically placed in the places they want and where it’s going to net the highest return for them in their bottom line - PROFITS! It’s also not a big secret how pharmaceutical companies do everything they can to protect their own interest and leave the consumer out to dry in order to satify their shareholders, stock value and profitmargins. So, I guess I should believe the statement provided by microbiologist and pharmaceutical consultant for the Pharmceutical Resesearch and Manufacturers of America, Mr. Thomas White, when he told the AP that there was little to no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health. Or, maybe I should believe Mary Buzby - director of environmental technology for drug maker Merck & Co., Inc. who said, ”There’s no doubt about it, pharmaceuticals are being detected in the environment and there is genuine concern that these compounds, in the small concentrations that they’re at, could be causing impacts to human health or the aquatic organisms.” I mean who is more to blame here - the consultant who protects the pharmaceutical company because he’s on their payroll and worried about his retirement profile - or the Merck environmentalist who also works for the pharmaceutical company who agrees that there’s a problem, but doesn’t do use her power with Merck to do anything effective about it.

You didn’t hear it from me, but is anyone paying attention to any of the major signs of the decline of human health and the decline of the environment and species within it (within the last 20-30 years) despite the introduction of all these so-called miracle drugs and treatments by the pharmaceutical companies that line the shelves of our major drug stores before we finally accept that we are really facing a considerable crisis to human existence. I know no one listened to Al Gore back in 2000 when he first pointed this out and the forces that be (Bush) thought it best to steal the Presidency from him in order to shush him. Thank God he decided to release his award winning video independently on the subject anyway to get people’s attention - and finally did (however late.) But, this is an outrage to me and I think it’s time for a major change in Washington by someone who is not tied to the environmentalist and pharmaceutical lobbyists money on Capital Hill (Hillary - McCain) so that the pharmaceutical companies can truly be held accountable for once! This is not okay for my family and it shouldn’t be okay for anyone else’s family regardless of race, ethnicity, party preference, nationality, job status, economic status, religion, etc… With things like this going under the rug - nothing will be done and our children’s children will inherit this problem and God only knows what it will be like then. What is it that people are waiting for before they really take a stand - another thalidimide situation where more of our children are born in the millions with more unimaginable and untreatable birth defects, more mental handicaps, reproductive malfunctions that aren’t detected until their adults, or until people are born green with 8 heads? Not that that’s what’s happening now - and you didn’t hear it from me. But, when are we finally going to make the gov’t and the pharmaceutical companies accountable for what they’re doing to the environment and humanity all for the sake of the almighty dollar? I don’t know what you are going to do but I’m going to make my voice heard loud and clear with my vote in November and push for legislation on the grassroots level until something is done!

In a recent press release, Toys R Us has announced a new policy in which they will no longer allow the use of harmful PVC, phthalates, and lead in toys sold in their stores. This is commendable and definitely a step in the right direction. I hope other toy retailers and manufacturers will follow suit so we can freaking exhale already…