Ocean Health / Human Health

Poisoning Through Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals, Organochlorides, and Other Toxins

Effluents that find their way into the sea have significant impacts on human health, thanks to our tendency to eat high on the marine food chain. Whereas our diet from land sources is dominated by plants and by animals that eat plants, much of our diet originating from the sea centers on animals that eat animals, which causes toxic compounds to be concentrated in their flesh (a process known as bioaccumulation)¹⁵. Farmed fish products may be even more dangerous than wild caught, especially preferred species like salmon that as predators bioaccumulate toxins themselves¹⁶.

Contaminants in the aquatic food chain are threatening all fishing communities that rely on seafood for their subsistence¹⁷. The highest body burden of methyl mercury or organochlorines (OCs) such as DDT and PCBs, have been found in remote maritime populations in the Northern and Southern hemispheres. Recent reports show that highest human concentrations and related health effects were found in children living in the Canadian Arctic and remote Canadian fishing populations. Various biological effects as well as clinical effects have been seen on the immune system and the brain development of exposed children. More recently, these compounds have been found to possess endocrine properties and have been associated in animals and humans with male fertility problems, however we do not have exposure data for most parts of the world.

Heavy metal contamination is a growing problem as well. Mercury levels in certain seafood species, especially in large specimens of top predators like swordfish and tunas, are often so high that countries release advisories limiting consumption. There is currently much controversy about whether the health benefits of eating such fish products, loaded in omega-3 fatty acids and protein, are outweighed by the risks of ingesting high levels of heavy metals and other toxins. One difficulty in understanding the public health impacts of such toxins is that the effects can be sub-lethal, and may manifest as neurological problems that are slow to surface, or mutagenic effects that are not seen until the next generation.

Freshwater Contamination

The link between healthy oceans and availability of potable water is not obvious, but the link does indeed exist. In experimental settings, polluted seawater was shown to affect water quality in freshwater aquifers; this is thought to have particular implications for arid coastal regions, where potable water is already a scarcity¹⁸. At the same time, hydrological balances are regulated by functioning coastal ecosystems. The destruction of such ecosystems can and does wreak havoc with such balances, affecting freshwater recharge and freshwater quality.

Reduced Protein Intake and Paucity of Healthful Food

For approximately 2 billion people around the world, marine fisheries provide the sole or primary source of dietary protein. Billions more eat fish from the sea for its nutritional benefits, since marine fish are not only rich in protein but provide the best source of healthful omega-3 fatty acids. Marine fisheries provide products that are also culturally important, with seafood playing a key role in celebrations and special events in coastal and even inland communities all across the globe. Fisheries landings from coastal seas have averaged around 82 million tons annually from 1991-2000, but have been declining since, largely due to overfishing¹⁹.

As oceans become degraded, these important sources of protein and essential nutrients which support human societies around the world are fast disappearing. Overfishing has both reduced stocks of healthful fisheries species, and caused imbalances in marine food webs that affect overall ocean productivity. Indiscriminate and destructive fishing practices further undermine marine ecosystems. At the same time, loss of coastal nursery habitats, provided by estuaries, saltmarshes, mangrove forests, and other coastal ecosystems, has made fisheries increasingly unable to regenerate themselves.

Paradoxically, the very same forces of globalization that have made marine products more widely available for sale and consumption have added to the stresses on marine ecosystems which impede continued productivity. Marine transportation (of goods including seafood) has impacted marine ecosystems by conventional pollution and by introducing alien species through the release of ballast water (see Exporting Pollution, World Ocean Observer archives). Fish processing for export has harmed many coastal ecosystems and atolls, adding to the ocean pollution burden.

Declining Availability of Marine Pharmaceuticals

Pollution and the wearing down of ocean health is causing public health and human well-being to deteriorate in many parts of the world, and these trends are expected to accelerate²⁰. At the same time we are sliding down this slippery slope, the ability of the oceans to come to our rescue with marine pharmaceuticals is being compromised, as marine biodiversity is impacted by the very same things that threaten ocean health more generally.

Compounds derived form marine organisms have much potential in fighting human disease, including cancers and viral diseases. Over 20,000 biochemical compounds have been isolated from marine organisms, and many are used as anti-cancer, anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, and anti-neurodegenerative agents today. Approximately 70% of recently patented anti-cancer compounds that are derived from marine sources come from sponges²¹. Novel pain therapies are also being developed from marine organisms, including, strangely enough, the toxins that some naturally produce and emit. Alarmingly, we are losing many marine species even before they are documented and tested for their pharmaceutical properties.

Health and buildings

Health and buildings, what this means to your home and office environment? As you are reading this from the comfort of your lounge or whilst sitting in your office chair. Look around at the room; the furniture, walls, flooring, products and accessories. What are they made from? Are they natural or man-made materials? Are you suffering from any illnesses? What affect do they have on your health?

Your health

We spend around 90% of our time inside buildings breathing, living and working. Most modern day materials used in interior design and architecture contain toxic additives. These materials are harmful to human and animal health as they slowly release toxic vapours, gases and pollutants into the air at room temperature (offgassing). This creates indoor air pollution and low air quality levels.

You cannot see, smell or taste these toxic gases.

Interior air also becomes polluted through tobacco smoke, the use of space heaters, electrical equipment, appliances and chemical cleaning supplies. Interior air pollution is more damaging to your health than exterior air pollution as it is condensed and contained within small areas. Over time you may develop symptoms and illnesses such as sick building syndrome, asthma or allergies from indoor air pollution.

Health articles

The following group of articles look at your health and buildings - from illnesses associated with building related pollutants, to typical sources of allergens and sources of indoor toxins within your home. These articles will help you on your way to understanding how your health relates to building materials, furniture and furnishings.

As with any symptoms please consult with a medical professional if you experience any adverse health effects similar to those described in these articles.

My aim is to provide you with information from ongoing research of how your health and buildings are related.

Obesity Could Cut Womens Lives Short

Obesity, a growing problem in the United States. It contributes heart disease, high blood pressure and a whole array of health problems to both men and women. But, for women, being obese in middle age could cut the chances of making it to their golden years 80 percent. This data should make you stand up and be aware, not to mention stand up and start exercising. Researchers studied more than 17,000 female nurses, with an average age of 50 residing in the U.S. At the beginning of the study in 1976 all of these women were healthy.

The researchers then monitored the women’s weight, along with other health changes, every two years, for 24 years, until 2000. For each point raised of their Body Mass Index (BMI) the women had a 12 percent lower chance of living to age 70. These women were in good health when they were compared with women who were thin. The researchers defined “healthy survival” as not only living free of any chronic disease, but also having ample physical and mental ability to perform daily outlines such as housework, shopping for groceries, or even walking up one flight of stairs.

The experts consider people that have a BMI between 19-25 to be healthy, while those that are over 30 are considered obese and from 25 to 30 are considered to be overweight. The women who were formerly overweight at the early age of 18 and then gained more than 10 kilograms later on in life only had about a 20 percent chance of living to the age of 70 and be in good health. The most frequently reported illnesses in these women were heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. A professor and chair of the public health and community medicine department at Tufts University School of Medicine, said, “people may think they can harmlessly gain weight through their 20s, 30s, and even 40s, but there is no proof that
gaining weight is natural.”

These results suggest that small weight gains are not harmless. A British study that was broadcast earlier this year found that people that had a BMI from 30 to 35 die about three years sooner than normal while those that were thought to be morbidly fat, with a BMI above 40, dies approximately a decade earlier. Fat acts mostly the same way for both men and women. The experts said that the finding underlined the relevance of preventing becoming obese in the first place. One researcher who is an obesity expert at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, suggests, “If you are on the obesity track early in your life, it could get quite dangerous by the time you are middle-aged.”

He stated that it was still uncertain if they did lose their weight later on in life if people could regain their health benefits from when they were thin. With scientific advances in treating obesity, the average life spans have increased in recent years. But the experts advise that the obesity epidemic could ultimately one day undo those gains. We know we’re extending life span, but we don’t know if we’re extending healthy survival. It is not a pretty picture to think one is going to spend the last three decades of one’s life with a give and take of physical and mental function.

That may not be the picture of aging we have when we think of living into our 90s. Our health is more important than we take it to be and only we can help ourselves. This study was published online in the medical journal, BMJ. The U.S. National Institutes of Health and the Boston Obesity Nutrition Research Center funded the study.

We Can’t Live Without It

We Can’t Live Without It

Copper is one of a relatively small group of metallic elements which are essential to human health. These elements, along with amino and fatty acids as well as vitamins, are required for normal metabolic processes. However, as the body cannot synthesize copper, the human diet must supply regular amounts for absorption.

How Much Copper In Your Body?

The adult body contains between 1.4 and 2.1mg of copper per kilogramme of body weight. Hence a healthy human weighing 60 kilogrammes contains approximately a tenth of one gramme of copper. However, this small amount is essential to the overall human well-being.

How Does It Work?

Copper combines with certain proteins to produce enzymes that act as catalysts to help a number of body functions. Some help provide energy required by biochemical reactions. Others are involved in the transformation of melanin for pigmentation of the skin and still others help to form cross-links in collagen and elastin and thereby maintain and repair connective tissues. This is especially important for the heart and arteries. Research suggests that copper deficiency is one factor leading to an increased risk of developing coronary heart disease.

Do We Get Enough?

Until recently, it was generally believed that most people consumed adequate quantities of copper. However, modern research has shown that this is not the case. In the United Kingdom and the United States for example, many typical meals have been analyzed for their metals content. According to recent surveys, only 25% of the US population consume the amount of copper a day estimated to be adequate by the US Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Sciences. Typical diets in the US provide only about half of this amount and some diets in mainly industrialized countries contain less than 40% of the recommended dietary allowance. In the United Kingdom, it is now recommended that the daily intake should range from 0.4mg/day for 1-3 year old children to 1.2mg/day for adults. In addition, more recent studies are suggesting that there are serious doubts concerning the adequacy of diets containing less than lmg copper/day for adults.

Can We Have Too Much?

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agricultural Administration (FAA) are likely to suggest that the population mean intake of copper should not exceed 12mg/day for adult males and 10mg/day for adult females. These are regarded as the lowest intakes likely to produce the slightest biochemical evidence of undesirable effects in all but a small number of members of a population. Sufferers from Indian childhood cirrhosis or hereditary diseases such as Wilson’s Disease retain excessive amounts of copper in the body and suffer from liver damage, often with fatal consequences. The symptoms of acute copper poisoning include nausea, vomiting and abdominal and muscle pain. Excess body copper can be removed by means of specific chelating agents or by the consumption of high levels of zinc.

What Are Copper Rich Foods?

Some foods are especially rich in copper. These include most nuts (especially brazils and cashews), seeds (especially poppy and sunflower), chickpeas, liver and oysters. Natural foods such as cereals, meat and fish generally contain sufficient copper to provide up to 50% of the required copper intake in a balanced diet. In addition, a further part of the daily intake in the United Kingdom may be obtained from drinking water transmitted through copper pipes. However in most areas, the copper content of water is not sufficient to provide the balance of the required normal daily intake of this element. In addition, it should be appreciated that some water filters are claimed to remove metals including the essential element copper from drinking water.

Copper In Medicine

Copper has been used as a medicine for thousands of years including the treatment of chest wounds and the purifying of drinking water. More recently, research has indicated that copper helps prevent inflammation in arthritis and similar diseases. Research is going on into anti-ulcer and anti-inflammatory medicines containing copper, and its use in radiology and for treating convulsions and epilepsy. Although there is no epidemiological evidence that copper can prevent arthritis, there have been claims that the wearing of copper bangles does alleviate the symptoms.

Copper Toxicity

Acute copper poisoning is a rare event, largely restricted to the accidental drinking of solutions of copper nitrate or copper sulphate which should be kept out of easy access in the home. These and organic copper salts are powerful emetics and inadvertent large doses are normally rejected by vomiting. Chronic copper poisoning is also very rare and the few reports refer to patients with liver disease. The capacity for healthy human livers to excrete copper is considerable and it is primarily for this reason that no cases of chronic copper poisoning have been reported.

Getting Healthier School Meals

A new government report that would set maximum calorie counts for school breakfasts and lunches finds new guidelines are needed to improve the diets of U.S. school children. The report from the Institute of Medicine says it called on the federally funded National School Lunch Program and the School Breakfast Program to update its current policies. School meals should have less salt; more vegetables, fruits and whole grains; skim and low-fat milk, and other dairy products offered.

A professor and director of the Nutrition Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Dr. Virginia A. Stallings said, “The program was due for a revision and the committee’s job was to give advice to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which runs the school meal program,” Stallings said. “We expect that they will take this information and revise the program,” she said.

The current standards for school meals are based on the 1995 dietary guidelines so this revision would bring school meals in line with the latest dietary guidelines and reference intakes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The report noted that added funding will be needed to put into action the changes because of the higher cost of vegetables and whole-grain foods. But these changes are needed to assure parents that schools are providing healthful, satisfying meals.

The report on healthy school meals suggests lunches include no more than 650 calories for students in grades kindergarten through five; 700 calories for children in grades six to eight, and 850 for those in grades nine to 12. reducing sodium over the next decade from today’s average of 1,600 milligrams per lunch to 740 milligrams will make for an easier adjustment. In addition, breakfasts should contain one cup of fruit, and lunches for grades nine to 12 should also contain one cup of fruit.

Vegetable servings should increase to three-quarters of a cup a day for grades kindergarten through eight, and one cup a day for grades nine to 12. Half of the breads and pasta should be only whole grain, Stallings said. Milk served with school meals should be skim or 1 percent fat. The School Breakfast Program is available in 85 percent of public schools today with the National School Lunch Program is available in 99 percent of U.S. public schools and in 83 percent of private and public schools.

About 30.6 million school children participated in the school lunch program in 2007, and 10.1 million children had school breakfasts. In 2007, schools in the program served about 5.1 billion lunches and 1.7 billion breakfasts, according to the report. Stallings hopes the recommendations will filter down to the meals parents prepare at home for their kids. ” Little changes like going to skim or low-fat milk and thinking about sodium both in cooking and table salt,” she said. “I do believe that parents will be able to use some of this to talk about the kinds of fruits and vegetables they should be serving at home and other recommendations that are easily put to use.

Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University said “this update to school nutrition standards is timely, and most welcome. School nutrition standards were originally devised to protect children from malnutrition and want.” “But in this age of epidemic childhood obesity, when children are far more likely to get too many calories than too few, and when more and more succumb to what was called ‘adult onset’ diabetes just a generation ago, the time-honored school food standards are clearly obsolete,” he said.

Read more: http://www.healthadel.com/getting-healthier-school-meals/#ixzz0doRUNScU