Environmental Health Tools – ESRI/FEMA Hazard Maps
While we’re all (hopefully) thinking a bit more about natural hazards, preparedness, response, mitigation, etc., here’s a web site that might be handy. The GIS software firm ESRI has partnered with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to provide a web-based tool for mapping and identifying natural hazards around your community – 100 year floodplains, locations of historical hurricanes, tornados, windstorms, and hailstorms. If you want to figure out how prepared your community is for disaster response, you’ll need to start with identifying the likely hazards.
This site focuses on natural hazards, and doesn’t include things such as forest or brushfire hazards (common out west) or potential impacts from chemical releases. As has been discussed before, the Bush Administration has suppressed right-to-know programs that go back to the Reagan Administration, which limit your ability to understand potential chemical hazards in your community, and hence limit your ability to assess your community’s ability to respond to them. However, with the investment of some work, there are tools available (here and here) to fill those data gaps.
Because hurricanes, floods, earthquakes or other natural disasters will happen again, it may be worth spending a moment while this event is fresh in our minds, to think about some of the lessons from it.
Was there severe flooding following the hurricane because the Bush Administration ramsacked the budget for flood control along the lower Mississippi River, to pay for homeland security and the war in Iraq? Or, have we simply overdeveloped the vulnerable coastline, putting more people and more stuff to destroy in the paths of hurricanes (see here, also)? Has the relentless focus on homeland security, defined narrowly as preventing acts of terrorism, resulted in the destruction of the bureaucracy responsible for disaster response and mitigation?
If this isn’t it, you have to wonder what magnitude of disaster will have to happen for us to start taking disaster preparedness and response more seriously.
Over at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Chris Mooney has written a nice article about the legacy of the Office of Technology Assessment, reminding us of a time when politicians actually gave a damn about science. The Republicans in Congress, as part of the Gingrich Revolution, defunded the OTA in 1995, and in the succeeding ten years, have managed to put forward leadership that shows even greater contempt for the role of science in society.
The collection of reports prepared by OTA can be accessed online here. As Chris notes, many of them have held up remarkably well for having been prepared fifteen and twenty years ago.
Two articles published in 2005 in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health explored the possible relationships between emissions from the combustion of petroleum and increased risks of childhood cancers. The outcomes from these studies was that significantly higher relative risks were observed with birth proximity within 1 km of emissions hotspots of carbon monoxide, PM10, volatile organic compounds, particularly benzene and 1,3-butadiene, oxides of nitrogen, dioxins and benzo(a)pyrene. The study compared the relative risks between two groups – the first being children born within 1 km of significant emissions sources who remained in proximity to those sources, and the second being children born within 1 km of the emissions sources, but who’s families had migrated away from those sources. The timeframe examined was between 1966 and 1980.
Emissions of 1,3-butadiene and carbon monoxide, from mobile source emissions were particularly strong predictors of increased childhood cancer risks. Emissions sources where proximity and increased childhood cancer risks were related included bus stations, hospitals, trucking terminals, railways and oil installations.
The epidemiological studies in the literature don’t uniformly show increased risks with proximity to emission sources, but there is some replication (one of those studies was posted here last year). One interesting source of amplification for these results is the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study, published in 2000 by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in California.
That study concluded that the lifetime cancer risk in the Basin is about 1,400 per million people (note: USEPA uses a risk range from 1 per million to 100 per million as risk management thresholds for regulating cancer risks from hazardous air pollutants). Emissions from mobile sources (e.g., cars, trucks, trains, ships, aircraft, etc.) represent the greatest contributor. About 70% of all risk is attributed to diesel particulate emissions; about 20% to other toxics associated with mobile sources (including benzene, butadiene, and formaldehyde); about 10% of all risk is attributed to stationary sources (which include industries and other certain businesses such as dry cleaners and chrome plating operations). An overview of assessing the health risks from toxic or hazardous air pollutants can be found here.
Only in the New York Times could you see a long article on exurban sprawl without a word about the impacts of it, including increasing air pollution and consumption of petroleum (people commute further, duh), loss of farmland and habitat, degradation of water quality, and increasing propensity for overweight and obesity through excessive reliance on automobiles (because nothing is within walking or biking distance). Where’s James Howard Kunstler when you need him? There’s plenty of hand-wringing on how these people will vote in the next election, though. Reporter Rick Lyman’s remedial reading on this topic can be found here, here and here.
Shifting gears for a moment, I find that because I’ve linked to free online content provided by a newspaper, I’m a parasite, at least according to Richard A. Posner. Judge Posner sits on a federal appeals court, teaches law at the University of Chicago and writes prolifically. A sample of what he’s about, in his own words, is here on Slate. He’s a very well read and thoughtful man, who’s obviously smarter and has better work habits than I. I encountered his name in the days when I read Slate regularly, as the author of Public Intellectuals: A Study in Decline. However, in this case he might be a demonstration of his own theorem, which is that celebrity makes you stupid.
According to WhirldView, bloggers copy “the news and opinions generated by the conventional media, often at considerable expense, without picking up any of the tab”, undermining the ability of media outlets to fund the reporting bloggers depend on. Judge Posner might have a point with some blogs, such as the ones with posts saying in essence “this is interesting read the whole thing”, or “this is interesting see what witty comments I can make about it”. This does a real disservice to the bloggers who genuinely have something entertaining to say, or link you to stories in the conventional media that normally wouldn’t get too much traffic, or more importantly, provide amplification or correction as needed. Quite often, when I cite something from the conventional media, it’s because the story isn’t very accurate, complete or informative, such as the Times writing about exurban sprawl in Florida. . . .
A recent paper published in Journal of Urology and based on work conducted at University of California, San Francisco, presents the first controlled study showing that intensive changes in diet and lifestyle could affect the progression of slow-growing prostate cancer. A group of 93 men, averaging 66 years of age, and with prostate cancer verified by biopsy, elected to not undergo conventional treatment (such as radiation, surgery or androgen deprivation therapy). This approach to managing slow-growing prostate cancer is also known as watchful waiting.
Risk factors identified for prostate cancer include: age – the disease is rare in men younger than 45; family history; race – it’s more common in African Americans (incidence and mortality trends can be found here); presence of high-grade neoplastic cells detectable under a microscope (requires a biopsy to confirm this); and diet – a diet high in animal fats or meat might pose an increased risk; a diet high in fruits and vegetables may be associated with a lower risk. Other factors that appear to be less important include benign prostatic hyperplasia, obesity, smoking, a sexually transmitted virus and lack of exercise. A vasectomy does not appear to be a significant risk factor. High levels of testosterone is another risk factor that is being studied.
Dietary factors that may be important in prevention include lycopene, a plant-derived carotenoid responsible for the red color in tomatoes and tomato-based foods, selenium and Vitamin E.
While these findings have created a little flurry of stories in the news, it seems that this work has been ongoing for some years now. A preliminary report was published in this research compilation on prostate cancer in Urology (April 2001, Vol. 57, Issue 4, Supplement 1, New Clinical Trial Strategies for Prostate Cancer Prevention).
The experimental group participants were placed on a vegan diet, and participated in moderate aerobic exercise, yoga/meditation, and a weekly support group session. The diet consisting primarily of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes supplemented with soy, vitamins and minerals. In addition to not having to undergo treatment for their prostate cancers, the participants in the experimental group also reported improvements in their quality of life.
The outcome of the study was that after one year, prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels decreased 4% in the experimental group but increased 6% in the control group. None of the experimental group patients, but 6 control patients, underwent conventional treatment due to an increase in PSA levels and/or detected progression of disease. Serum from the experimental group individuals inhibited the growth of LNCaP cells (a human prostate tumor cell line) 8-fold more than the control group. The conclusion from this study is that intensive lifestyle changes may affect the progression of early, low grade prostate cancer, warranting further studies and longer term followup.
Not everyone apparently is convinced this approach has merit. The Detroit Free Press tells us:
However, urologists not associated with the research said the length of the study was too short, the number of men too few and the outcome measures too imprecise to make definitive conclusions about the benefits of the intervention.
In addition, maintaining the strict diet used in the study would be very difficult for many men, urologists said.
"I don't know if draconian is the word," said William See, chairman of the urology department at the Medical College of Wisconsin. But "the ability of the average Midwesterner to tolerate that kind of diet is questionable."
I suppose the detractors have some points. Studies of larger groups of men, followed for longer periods of time should be performed to determine how to incorporate these findings into clinical practice; however, the authors did say that further study should be performed. There is some cause for concern in the implication that a doctor can’t convince the average Midwesterner to go vegan, even if it means preserving his life. I guess Skyline Chili and Bob Evans are powerfully habit-forming. I have difficulty appreciating the attraction, but then again I’m a transplanted Midwesterner. Have they tried motivational interviewing with their prostate cancer patients? You can learn something new all the time when you blog – MI now being something I’m familiar with thanks to The Rest of The Story.
I wonder if part of the problem with the critics is that the lead investigator is Dean Ornish, who is a strong proponent of preventive medicine through managing lifestyle factors (more on Dr. Ornish can be found here). He is somewhat lined up with the “alternative medicine” crowd. Also, I guess that watchful waiting and intensive lifestyle changes aren’t as certain or as “take-charge” as burning out the cancer cells with radiation, starving them with hormonal treatment or cutting them out with surgery. If I found myself as a prostate cancer patient, I’d be giving careful thought to the side effects from conventional treatment, along with the rate of growth of the tumor, in making treatment decisions.
A good summary of the lifestyle changes that can keep prostate cancer at bay, which gets to the point in fewer words than NCI, can be found here. Consumer’s note: LEF is a proponent of nutritional supplements, so they will tend to point you to the pills. But as long as you keep in mind that proper food choices are superior to supps to achieve optimal nutrition, the health and nutritional information appears sound and well documented, and warrants a look.
The last part of this story is the possible collateral environmental health benefits from diet and lifestyle changes. For example, the largest contribution to dietary exposure to dioxin-like compounds (dioxins, furans and co-planar PCBs) is from animal products (meat, particularly beef and animals fats including those used in processed foods). The very limited evidence available suggests that lower dietary intake of meat and animal fat also reduces exposure to dioxin-like compounds, although the authors caution that a long time may be needed to see any reductions because of the long half-lives of these compounds. It’s an area that requires wider study, however the Institute of Medicine seems sufficiently persuaded that they wrote an entire book on the topic of reducing dioxin exposure through the human foodchain.
In recognition of being blogrolled by The Rest of the Story, Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary, I’m introducing this paper recently published in the British Medical Journal about encouraging pregnant smokers to quit. The study evaluated the use of motivational interviewing, a behavioral therapy for addictive behaviors in a systematic manner. Standard health promotional materials were offered to both the control and intervention group. The intervention group was provided motivational interviewing at home by specially trained midwives. The outcomes measured were self-reported smoking cessation, verified by biological monitoring of cotinine (a nicotine metabolite).
Contrary to what the National Health Services argues, motivational interviewing did not result in an increase in the numbers of pregnant women who quit, and wasn’t as effective in getting pregnant smokers to cut down compared with just offering promotional materials.
These days, I struggle a bit with drawing the line between personal responsibility and corporate social responsibility in certain exposure settings. It’s abhorrent for cigarette manufacturers to continue marketing a product known to produce significant adverse health effects (we’re not left still wondering about this, as in the case of plasticizers or fire retardants – we know about tobacco smoking), and to continue their evasion in making full compensation for the harm caused by their product. But, can the smokers, particularly those who started after 1964 when the Surgeon General’s report came out, fairly say they weren’t warned?
The linkage with The Rest of the Story is important, beyond the value of developing a public health blog critical mass, because tobacco smoking is an environmental health issue (asbestos, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from PM exposure, cadmium and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure, and on and on). I look forward to returning from time to time.
The largest non-OPEC growth is projected for Canada, Kazakhstan, Brazil, Azerbaijan, Angola and Russia. In the OPEC countries, significant growth is expected to occur in Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Algeria and Libya, among others. Our estimate for growth in Iraq is quite modest -- only 1 million barrels a day -- reflecting the high degree of uncertainty there. In the forecast, the United States remains almost level, with development in the deep-water areas of the Gulf of Mexico compensating for declines elsewhere.
James Howard Kunstler smacks down this logic (look for the August 1, 2005 entry, it’s not permalinked), noting that Yergin is a little light on key details – for example, several of the oil fields mentioned have peaked and are being extended with tertiary extraction methods, which increases depletion as well as costs. Or, that many of these new sources of oil, such as tar sands or ultra-deep ocean drilling, are expensive and inconsistent with
. . . cheap oil that enables America's "non-negotiable" easy motoring way of life, and the debt-fueled suburban sprawl-building economy that has evolved to serve it. . . .
Or that oil reserve statistics for Saudi Arabia are closely held secrets, so that it’s questionable to conclude that more oil will flow from the Saudis. Kunstler mentions that Matthew Simmons’s book, Twilight in the Desert, makes the opposite point that the Saudis have maxed out their production. Not that he knows any better, but we might be advised to think about this issue sooner rather than later.
Or that much of that oil is in the hands of now unfriendly nations, thanks to what passes for statecraft by the Bush Administration.
I guess the operative word is we’re not running out of oil now. So, are we going to wait for the market to signal us as to the proper time to restructure our economy to avoid major disruptions? That could be extremely disappointing.
Off of the Robot Wisdom Weblog, I found this article about Italian researchers looking for urinary metabolites of cocaine in surface water. The article points to a paper in the online Environmental Health which summarizes a study where cocaine and its main urinary metabolite benzoylecgonine (or BE) were analyzed in water samples collected from the River Po and urban waste water treatment plants of medium-size Italian cities. The analytical data, water flow rate, and population at each site were then used to estimate local cocaine consumption. It seemed like a novel way to develop data on drug use, and may have other applications. It’s not the first time I’ve heard about analyzing surface water discharges for consumer products. The U.S. Geological Survey has been quantifying endocrine disruptors in wastewater, introducing the phrase “emerging contaminants”, which covers chemicals in municipal sewer discharges as well as industrial discharges. However, I’m not aware that anyone has tried to quantify product uses through wastewater data.
The researchers concluded:
We showed that cocaine and BE are present, and measurable, in surface waters of populated areas. The largest Italian river, the Po, with a five-million people catchment basin, steadily carried the equivalent of about 4 kg cocaine per day. This would imply an average daily use of at least 27+/-5 doses (100 mg each) for every 1000 young adults, an estimate that greatly exceeds official national figures. Data from waste water treatment plants serving medium-size Italian cities were consistent with this figure.
I don’t have a comment on this, not being familiar with the statistics on cocaine consumption. However, the news article I found had this to say about it:
The investigative team described the findings as "staggering", which comes as a bit of a surprise since the river Po benefits from the presence of world fashion capital Milan - generally considered to have the greatest percentage of anorexic models among its population and therefore the planet's highest per capita consumption of Bolivian marching powder.
