<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Bushkill Farms &#38; Apiary</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bushkillfarms.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bushkillfarms.com</link>
	<description>Pure, All Natural Goodness from the Catskill Mountains</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:59:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Home Pesticides Linked to Childhood Cancer</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/study-home-pesticides-linked-to-childhood-cancer/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/study-home-pesticides-linked-to-childhood-cancer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/?p=193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rates of a rare leukemia are higher among children who show evidence of exposure to insect killers. As if links to Parkinson&#8217;s disease, diabetes and obesity, cancer, low sperm counts and other reproductive health problems, and childhood developmental problems and diseases were not enough &#8230; or that pesticide residue is common on foods, or that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Rates of a rare leukemia are higher among children who show evidence of exposure to insect killers.</strong><br />
As if links to Parkinson&#8217;s disease, diabetes and obesity, cancer, low sperm counts and other reproductive health problems, and childhood developmental problems and diseases were not enough &#8230; or that pesticide residue is common on foods, or that that children are even more susceptible than previously thought, or that pesticides stick around in the home for decades after being used, or that the EPA is slow to remove known toxic pesticides from the market, and doesn&#8217;t require chemical makers to even list toxic &#8220;inert&#8221; ingredients &#8230; now there&#8217;s another reason to avoid using pesticides around the home.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/home-pesticides-cancer-47072904"><em>Read More&#8230;</em><br />
</a></p>
<p><!--<br />
A new study of children in the Washington, D.C., area and published in the journal Therapeutic Drug Monitoring links one form of childhood cancer to exposure to common organophosphate pesticides used around the home to kill bugs. Children with lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and their mothers were more likely to have higher levels of organophosphates and their metabolites in their urine than healthy pairs, and mothers who reported household use of chemicals were more likely to have children with ALL. There is no evidence that the cancer is caused directly by pesticide exposure - but it does present the first evidence of a linkage in a non-agricultural setting, according to the study's authors, researchers from the Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center at Georgetown University.</p>
<p>"In our study, we compared urine samples from children with ALL and their mothers with healthy children and their moms. We found elevated levels of common household pesticides more often in the mother-child pairs affected by cancer," said Offie Soldin, an epidemiologist and the study’s lead investigator. "We shouldn't assume that pesticides caused these cancers, but our findings certainly support the need for more robust research in this area."</p>
<p>She added: "We know pesticides – sprays, strips, or 'bombs,' are found in at least 85 percent of households, but obviously not all the children in these homes develop cancer. What this study suggests is an association between pesticide exposure and the development of childhood ALL, but this isn’t a cause-and-effect finding. Future research would help us understand the exact role of pesticides in the development of cancer. We hypothesize that pre-natal exposure coupled with genetic susceptibility or an additional environmental insult after birth could be to blame."</p>
<p>It's well known that children are more susceptible to the harmful effects of chemical exposure than adults. For one, their bodies are still developing rapidly, so chemicals can interfere with the normal growth of their brains and other organs, or disrupt their hormones at key developmental periods. For another, doses are likely to be disproportionately large, because their bodies are so much smaller than adults' and because their breathing rates are so much more rapid. Finally, their habits -- crawling on the floor, testing the world with their mouths and frequently putting their hands into their mouths dirty -- mean they are exposed to more toxic chemicals on the ground.</p>
<p>Another recent study found that children are more susceptible to exposure to organophosphates because they lack an enzyme that helps adults break down the chemical.</p>
<p>Organophosphate pesticides are insecticides that attack bugs' nervous systems. They are used on farms, and some are labeled for home use to kill or repel mosquitoes, ants, cockroaches and other household and garden pests. Dozens of brands (pdf) use organophosphates in insecticides, according to the National Pesticide Information Center.</p>
<p>Like many harsh chemicals, they may cause serious health problems with humans, as well. Related chemicals were originally developed as nerve gases during World War I, and may affect normal brain, reproductive and other body development (some chemicals may even make you fat). Further, the EPA can often be slow to remove profitable pesticides from the market.</p>
<p>4 Ways to Protect Your Child from Pesticide Exposure</p>
<p>   1.</p>
<p>      Avoid the use of pesticides at home or in the garden, and look to Beyond Pesticides for the least-toxic method of dealing with common household pests.<br />
   2.</p>
<p>      Avoid pesticide residue on foods by learning the Dirty Dozen foods most likely to have pesticides, and by investigating a great new resource from the Pesticide Action Network at whatsonmyfood.org. Choosing organic foods, which are grown without chemical pesticides, as often as possible will reduce the chance of your child being exposed to pesticides inadvertently at the dinner table.<br />
   3.</p>
<p>      Talk to your school administrators, neighbors and friends about their pesticide usage. In most cases, when faced with a pest problem, nontoxic "integrated pest management" can achieve the same or better results.<br />
   4.</p>
<p>      To ward off ticks and mosquitoes, look for natural insect repellents that shun the use of harsher manmade chemicals, whenever possible. Check back to The Daily Green later this summer for recommendations about natural mosquito repellents that really work.</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/study-home-pesticides-linked-to-childhood-cancer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pesticide-Chemical Mixtures Affect Sex Organ Development</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/pesticide-chemical-mixtures-affect-sex-organ-development/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/pesticide-chemical-mixtures-affect-sex-organ-development/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:55:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/?p=200</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new study by researchers at the National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark shows that exposure to a mixture of pesticides and other chemicals has a synergistic effect on the development of male sex organs. Synergy occurs when the effect of multiple chemicals is greater than the sum of the individual effects. The study, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> A new study by researchers at the National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark shows that exposure to a mixture of pesticides and other chemicals has a synergistic effect on the development of male sex organs. Synergy occurs when the effect of multiple chemicals is greater than the sum of the individual effects. The study, “<em>Synergistic Disruption of External Male Sex Organ Development by a Mixture of Four Antiandrogens</em>,” was published July 15, 2009 in the online edition of Environmental Health Perspectives.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=2160">Read more&#8230;</a></p>
<p><!--<br />
The researchers designed their study to determine the consequences of simultaneous exposure to multiple “antiandrogens.” An antiandrogen, or androgen antagonist, is any of a group of hormone receptor antagonist compounds that are capable of preventing or inhibiting the biologic effects of androgens, male sex hormones, on normally responsive tissues in the body. Disrupting the action of androgens during gestation, certain chemicals present in food, consumer products and the environment can induce irreversible malformations of sex organs among male offspring.</p>
<p>The team investigated the effects of mixtures of a widely used plasticizer, di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), used in medical devices such as IV bags and tubing, beauty products, PVC toys, vinyl shower curtains, car seats, wallpaper and more; two fungicides present in food, vinclozolin and prochloraz; and, a pharmaceutical, finasteride, on landmarks of male sexual development in rats. These chemicals were chosen because they disrupt androgen action according to differing mechanisms of action.</p>
<p>According to the study results, combined exposure on malformations of external sex organs was synergistic, and the observed responses were greater than would be predicted from the toxicities of the individual chemicals. In relation to other hallmarks of disrupted male sexual development, including changes in anogenital distance, retained nipples, and sex organ weights, the combined effects were dose additive. When the four chemicals were combined at doses equal to no-observed-adverse effect levels estimated for nipple retention, significant reductions in anogenital distance were observed in male offspring.</p>
<p>The authors believe that current methods of chemical risk assessment “may lead to considerable underestimations of risks associated with exposures to chemicals that disrupt male sexual differentiation.”</p>
<p>For more information on pesticide synergy, see our article, “Synergy: The Big Unknowns of Pesticide Exposure,” published in our Winter 2004 issue of Pesticides and You. For information on individual pesticide health effects, see the Pesticide Gateway. </p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/pesticide-chemical-mixtures-affect-sex-organ-development/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study Finds Controversial Pesticide May Contribute to Obesity</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/study-finds-controversial-pesticide-may-contribute-to-obesity/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/study-finds-controversial-pesticide-may-contribute-to-obesity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/?p=103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tributyltin (also known as TBT), a ubiquitous pollutant that has a potent effect on gene activity, could be promoting obesity, according to an article in the December issue of BioScience, the journal of the American Institute of Biological Sciences. The chemical is used in antifouling paints for boats, as a wood and textile preservative, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tributyltin (also known as TBT), a ubiquitous pollutant that has a potent effect on gene activity, could be promoting obesity, according to an article in the December issue of BioScience, the journal of the American Institute of Biological Sciences. The chemical is used in antifouling paints for boats, as a wood and textile preservative, and as a pesticide on high-value food crops, among many other applications.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=964"><em>Read More&#8230;</em><br />
</a><br />
<!--<br />
(Beyond Pesticides, December 2, 2008) Tributyltin (also known as TBT), a ubiquitous pollutant that has a potent effect on gene activity, could be promoting obesity, according to an article in the December issue of BioScience, the journal of the American Institute of Biological Sciences. The chemical is used in antifouling paints for boats, as a wood and textile preservative, and as a pesticide on high-value food crops, among many other applications.</p>
<p>Tributyltin affects sensitive receptors in the cells of animals, from water fleas to humans, at very low concentrations–a thousand times lower than pollutants that are known to interfere with sexual development of wildlife species. Tributyltin and its relatives are highly toxic to mollusks, causing female snails to develop male sexual characteristics, and it bioaccumulates in fish and shellfish. Recent research has found it in deep-sea squids and octopods, and it has been banned for maritime use by an international treaty.</p>
<p>The harmful effects of the chemical on the liver and the nervous and immune systems in mammals are well known, but its powerful effects on the cellular components known as retinoid X receptors (RXRs) in a range of species are a recent discovery. When activated, RXRs can migrate into the nuclei of cells and switch on genes that cause the growth of fat storage cells and regulate whole body metabolism; compounds that affect a related receptor often associated with RXRs are now used to treat diabetes. RXRs are normally activated by signaling molecules found throughout the body.</p>
<p>The BioScience article, by Taisen Iguchi and Yoshinao Katsu, of the Graduate University for Advanced Studies in Japan, describes how RXRs and related receptors are also strongly activated by tributyltin and similar chemicals. Tributyltin impairs reproduction in water fleas through its effects on a receptor similar to the RXR. In addition, tributyltin causes the growth of excess fatty tissue in newborn mice exposed to it in utero. The effects of tributyltin on RXR-like nuclear receptors might therefore be widespread throughout the animal kingdom.</p>
<p>The rise in obesity in humans over the past 40 years parallels the increased use of industrial chemicals over the same period. Iguchi and Katsu maintain that it is “plausible and provocative” to associate the obesity epidemic to chemical triggers present in the modern environment. Several other ubiquitous pollutants with strong biological effects, including environmental estrogens such as bisphenol A and nonylphenol, have been shown to stimulate the growth of fat storage cells in mice. The role that tributyltin and similar persistent pollutants may play in the obesity epidemic is now under scrutiny.</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/study-finds-controversial-pesticide-may-contribute-to-obesity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pesticide mixes: when 1 + 1 does not equal 2</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/pesticide-mixes-when-1-1-does-not-equal-2/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/pesticide-mixes-when-1-1-does-not-equal-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:11:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/?p=101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A mix of two pesticides had greater toxic effects on exposed salmon than would be expected from one separately, adding to concerns that health risks from pesticides are underestimated. Read More]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A mix of two pesticides had greater toxic effects on exposed salmon than would be expected from one separately, adding to concerns that health risks from pesticides are underestimated.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/pesticide-mixtures-when-1-1-does-not-equal-2"><em>Read More</em></a></p>
<p><!--</p>
<p>Laetz, CA, DH Baldwin, TK Collier, V Herbert, JD Stark and NL Scholz.  2008.  The synergistic toxicity of pesticide mixtures: implications for risk assessment and the conservation of endangered Pacific salmon.  Environmental Health Perspectives doi: 10.1289/ehp.0800096.<br />
Synopsis by Abby D. Benninghoff, Ph.D.</p>
<p>A mix of two pesticides had greater toxic effects on exposed salmon than would be expected from one separately, adding to concerns that health risks from pesticides are underestimated.</p>
<p>Risk assessment tests determine how dangerous chemicals are and if they should be regulated. They are usually done one compound at a time. However, most pesticide exposures in the natural world involve multiple chemicals that interact with each other and with living things.</p>
<p>In this study, scientists in Washington state looked at the effects of organophosphate and carbamate pesticides on juvenile coho salmon.</p>
<p>The fish were treated with several different combinations of the two pesticides. The activity of a brain enzyme called acetylcholine esterase (AChE) was measured to assess the total toxic effect.  Pesticides target this enzyme to cause neurological damage.</p>
<p>Many of the combinations caused greater toxicity than was predicted mathematically using data generated from individual chemical exposure tests.  Results like these with phthalates have just led the National Resesarch Council to recommend to the EPA that it change its risk assessment methods to reflect cumulative exposure to chemicals.</p>
<p>Agencies that develop regulations for pesticide use generally rely on data from studies using single chemicals.  The new data provide more evidence that standards that rely on results from single chemical tests may greatly underestimate the actual risk of exposure to multiple pesticide pollutants.</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/pesticide-mixes-when-1-1-does-not-equal-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Warning: this pesticide may be toxic to children and fish</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/warning-this-pesticide-may-be-toxic-to-children-and-fish/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/warning-this-pesticide-may-be-toxic-to-children-and-fish/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/?p=97</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This fall, EPA approved re-registration of antibacterial soap ingredient triclosan for yet another five years of use in consumer products, potentially leaving human and environmental health at great risk. Read More&#8230;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This fall, EPA approved re-registration of antibacterial soap ingredient triclosan for yet another five years of use in consumer products, potentially leaving human and environmental health at great risk.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.enviroblog.org/2008/12/toxic-to-children-and-fish.html"><em>Read More&#8230;</em></a></p>
<p><!--<br />
Throughout 2008, EWG and many other health advocacy groups brought public and media attention to triclosan, a potent pesticide that has found its way into most Americans' homes. EWG research identified triclosan in more than 140 types of consumer products, ranging from HVAC systems and cutting boards to toothbrushes, hand soaps and anti-perspirants. However, due to lack of ingredient disclosure by the manufacturers, most consumers are not aware how frequently they may be exposed to triclosan.</p>
<p>Triclosan production is estimated to be between 1 and 10 million pounds per year in the U.S. alone, and a study by the Centers for Disease Control found that 75% of Americans have detectable concentrations of triclosan in their body, indicating daily contact with this chemical. In a recent EWG study of cosmetics use by teenage girls, 100% of study participants, young girls aged 14 to 19, had triclosan in their bodies. Triclosan has also been detected in breast milk, indicating that a mother exposed to triclosan in personal care products can pass this chemical on to her newborn child. These findings are very worrisome because triclosan can potentially disrupt thyroid function and affect reproductive hormones.</p>
<p>Equally disconcerting is the fact that EPA's assessment of triclosan has completely failed to fullfill the Agency's mission to protect the environment. Due to wastewater effluent pollution, triclosan contaminates 57.6% of streams sampled by the US Geological Survey nationwide; it has been already detected in drinking water sources in 10 different states. Triclosan-containing household cleaners and personal care products are the main source of environmental triclosan contamination, posing dangers to algae, invertebrates and fish who live downstream. EPA review completely disregarded these major sources of environmental triclosan exposure, created an illusion of safety that is simply not there.</p>
<p>Why couldn't EPA do a better job in reviewing environmental impact of triclosan? Regulatory separation between EPA- and FDA-regulated uses of triclosan is the key problem that, if left unaddressed, would continue undermining EPA's efforts to protect the health of humans and the environment from this potent antimicrobial pesticide. No scientific rationale exists that would justify this separation. The current jurisdictional distinction between the two Agencies has made EPA, the primary regulator of triclosan manufacturing, unable to do anything about the widespread triclosan contamination of water and possibly soils and wildlife.</p>
<p>This week, EWG wrote to EPA, indicating numerous shortcomings in EPA's risk assessment for triclosan and urging the Agency to do a comprehensive review of the effects of triclosan exposure on human and environmental health, taking into account the latest scientific research. To see EWG letter to EPA, click here.</p>
<p>One certainly hopes that this glaring problem would be addressed under the new administration and the new leadership at EPA. Meanwhile, what can consumers do? First and foremost - skip antibacterial hand soaps and detergents. They are absolutely unnecessary, they do not provide any additional health protection, and they pose grave risks to aquatic life. Sounds like a good New Year resolution - starting 2009 in an environmentally-friendly fashion!</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/warning-this-pesticide-may-be-toxic-to-children-and-fish/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Working with pesticides impacts women&#8217;s fertility</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/working-with-pesticides-impacts-womens-fertility/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/working-with-pesticides-impacts-womens-fertility/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/working-with-pesticides-impacts-womens-fertility/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Women with potential exposure to pesticides at work or at home took longer to get pregnant than women without pesticide connections. Pregnant women living in a migrant, farmworker community in California participated in the study. Although all women were pregnant, women who worked in agriculture, lived within 200 feet of agriculture fields or used pesticides [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Women with potential exposure to pesticides at work <b>or at home</b> took longer to get pregnant than women without pesticide connections. </p>
<p>Pregnant women living in a migrant, farmworker community in California participated in the study. Although all women were pregnant, women who worked in agriculture, lived within 200 feet of agriculture fields or used pesticides in their home took significantly longer to conceive than those who did not have these pesticide exposures.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/pesticide-exposure-may-impact-female-fertility"><i>Read More&#8230;</i></a></p>
<p><!--</p>
<p>The findings agree with past studies and add more evidence to this sometimes confusing mix of research outcomes. Many studies have found a relationship between pesticides and male fertility, including effects on sperm health and longer time to pregnancy. However, few studies have examined how pesticide exposure might affect women's ability to get pregnant. In this study, researchers looked at two types of pesticides: those like DDT that were banned in the 1970s and those currently used in agriculture today.  DDT was measured in the women's blood, but was not associated with women's ability to conceive. DDT levels were quite high because most of the women were Mexican immigrants and DDT was used in Mexico until the year 2000.<br />
However, women who reported occupational exposure to currently-used pesticides were 30 percent less likely to conceive in any given month than women without occupational exposure. Women who reported that pesticides were used in their homes were also less likely to conceive each month compared to those who did not use pesticides. The predominantly low-income, Latina women participating in the study were very similar except for their pesticide exposures. Nonetheless, the study controlled for other factors that might contribute to these differences in conception, including maternal age, immigration status and history of gynecologic condition.The researchers asked 402 women about their and their partner's home and work pesticide exposure. They also reported how long it took them to get pregnant. Only maternal pesticide exposure was associated with longer time to pregnancy; paternal occupational exposure was not associated with fertility. The authors point out that they only interviewed women who were already pregnant. If infertile couples were included in the study, an even stronger effect of pesticides might be seen.</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/working-with-pesticides-impacts-womens-fertility/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Toxic contamination starts at home</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/toxic-contamination-starts-at-home/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/toxic-contamination-starts-at-home/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/toxic-contamination-starts-at-home/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When women from 120 middle-class homes learned their bodies contained low levels of toxic chemicals, most of them blamed chemical spills, waste dumping or secret military experiments. They were stunned to learn the truth was closer to home. Most of their exposure came from harmless-looking plastics, flame-retardant clothing, beauty products and household cleaners. Read More&#8230;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When women from 120 middle-class homes learned their bodies contained low levels of toxic chemicals, most of them blamed chemical spills, waste dumping or secret military experiments.</p>
<p>They were stunned to learn the truth was closer to home. Most of their exposure came from harmless-looking plastics, flame-retardant clothing, beauty products and household cleaners.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=980710"><i>Read More&#8230;</i></a></p>
<p><!--<br />
A new study says we tend to put too much blame on environmental disasters that don't actually affect us.</p>
<p>"It's the consumer products" that bring chemicals into our bodies, says Kathleen Cooper, a researcher for the Canadian Environmental Law Association.</p>
<p>And while a study in the Journal of Health and Social Behavior was done in Cape Cod, she says exactly the same mindset prevails here. Canadians "are surprised when we talk about consumer products as a key source."</p>
<p>"People have this assumption that a product is on a shelf, and someone has made sure that it's safe, nothing toxic in it. And that is a false assumption."</p>
<p>Outdoor air pollution still matters, she noted, "but the area that is coming forward as very important is indoor exposure. We spend 80 per cent of our time indoors."</p>
<p>"Pollution at home has been a blind spot for society," said Rebecca Altman, a Brown University sociologist who surveyed women in Cape Cod.</p>
<p>The women had volunteered urine samples for a 2003 study on chemical exposure. The survey found their bodies - and also household dust - contained cancer-causing compounds and chemicals that upset human hormone systems.</p>
<p>"An important shift occurs in how people understand environmental pollution, its sources and possible solutions, as they learn about chemicals from everyday products that are detectable in urine samples and the household dust collecting under the sofa," she said.</p>
<p>These included phthalates (common plastic ingredients used in varnishes, perfumes, cosmetics and detergents); anthracenes (from paving materials and diesel); solvents (paints, varnishes, some ink); flame retardants from upholstered furniture; parabens (an anti-microbial agent in everything from jam to cosmetics); and a host of "breakdown products" left over when the body metabolizes pollutants.</p>
<p>The study was funded by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Science Foundation.</p>
<p>The 2003 tests on urine and household dust focused on Cape Cod because the area is known to have a higher than average rate of breast cancer.</p>
<p>The women were aware of some high-profile chemicals, such as bisphenol A (BPA) in some plastic bottles. But the study adds that "women do not readily connect typical household products with personal chemical exposure and related adverse health effects."<br />
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service<br />
--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/toxic-contamination-starts-at-home/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US Biologists Say 3 Common Pesticides Harm Salmon</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/us-biologists-say-3-common-pesticides-harm-salmon/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/us-biologists-say-3-common-pesticides-harm-salmon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:40:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/us-biologists-say-3-common-pesticides-harm-salmon/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Farms and orchards that continue to use three pesticides that harm salmon will have to greatly expand buffer zones around their fields so the chemicals don&#8217;t reach streams, federal biologists ruled Tuesday. Read More&#8230;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Farms and orchards that continue to use three pesticides that harm salmon will have to greatly expand buffer zones around their fields so the chemicals don&#8217;t reach streams, federal biologists ruled Tuesday.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.iptv.org/mtom/bazaar.cfm?Bid=1332"><i>Read More&#8230;</i></a></p>
<p><!--</p>
<p>GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) - Farms and orchards that continue to use three pesticides that harm salmon will have to greatly expand buffer zones around their fields so the chemicals don't reach streams, federal biologists ruled Tuesday.</p>
<p>Acting under terms of a lawsuit brought by anti-pesticide groups and salmon fishermen, NOAA Fisheries Service issued findings under the Endangered Species Act that chemicals malathion, diazinon and chlorpyrifos jeopardize the survival of all 28 species of Pacific salmon listed as threatened or endangered in the West.</p>
<p>"These measures will help keep these organophospates out of the water," said Josh Osborne-Klein, an attorney for Earthjustice, the public interest law firm that brought the case. "That is not only good for salmon and good for wildlife, but good for people, because these pesticides have been detected in drinking water."</p>
<p>The chemicals, found by the U.S. Geological survey to contaminate rivers throughout the West, interfere with salmon's sense of smell, making it harder to avoid predators, locate food and even find their native spawning streams and reproduce. At higher concentrations, they kill fish outright.</p>
<p>"It makes no sense to allow uses of pesticides that poison salmon while we are trying so hard to save them," said Glen Spain of Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, a plaintiff in the case.</p>
<p>Banned from many household uses, tens of millions of pounds of the chemicals are still used throughout the range of Pacific salmon on fruits, vegetables, forage crops, cotton, fence posts and livestock to control mosquitoes, flies, termites, boll weevils and other pests, according to NOAA Fisheries.</p>
<p>The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has a year to implement the findings.</p>
<p>Buffer zones imposed by a federal judge in the case are expanded to 1,000 feet from streams for aerial spraying, 500 feet for ground spraying, plus a 20-foot strip of grass or brush. The chemicals cannot be sprayed when the wind is blowing or when a major storm might wash them into the water.</p>
<p>The old buffers were 300 feet for aerial spraying and 60 feet for ground spraying, with no vegetation strip required.</p>
<p>"This is a step forward, I think an important step forward, but there is lots more to do," said Jim Lecky, director of protected species for NOAA Fisheries. "It's one of a gazillion things we need to work on. I think it's important to clean up waterways to optimize their reproductive capacity."</p>
<p>Plaintiffs in the case hope the expanded buffers will convince farmers and growers to drop use of the chemicals entirely and turn to alternatives or even organic farming, Osborne-Klein said.</p>
<p>That would be a hardship for growers, particularly apple and cherry growers, said Heather Hansen of Washington Friends of Farms and Forests. Without them, apple growers that get coddling moths and cherry growers that get cherry fruit flies could be quarantined and unable to sell their fruit.</p>
<p>She added that organophosphate use has been declining in recent years, with water samples by the state of Washington showing cleaner water.</p>
<p>"The way they are using these products today, nobody has shown evidence of harm to fish," she said. "This is really about paperwork - government agencies not doing paperwork and not communicating well with each other."</p>
<p>The chemicals are the first of 37 that NOAA Fisheries and EPA must evaluate by 2012 under terms of a settlement reached in a lawsuit brought by Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, Washington Toxics Coalition and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, which represents California commercial salmon fishermen.</p>
<p>A total of 28 species of Pacific salmon are classified as threatened or endangered from overfishing, dams, logging, grazing, urban development, pollution, irrigation, misguided hatchery practices and other threats.</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/us-biologists-say-3-common-pesticides-harm-salmon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Breast Cancer Risk in Hawaii Linked to Pesticides in Drinking Water and Indoor Air</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/breast-cancer-risk-in-hawaii-linked-to-pesticides-in-drinking-water-and-indoor-air/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/breast-cancer-risk-in-hawaii-linked-to-pesticides-in-drinking-water-and-indoor-air/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/breast-cancer-risk-in-hawaii-linked-to-pesticides-in-drinking-water-and-indoor-air/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pesticides leach into the Hawaii ground water system and end up in our drinking water. The warm tropical sun causes the pesticides to evaporate and enter the building through gaps in the foundation and infect breathing spaces inside the homes and schools and office buildings. Not only cancer but many respiratory diseases are caused by [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pesticides leach into the Hawaii ground water system and end up in our drinking water. The warm tropical sun causes the pesticides to evaporate and enter the building through gaps in the foundation and infect breathing spaces inside the homes and schools and office buildings. Not only cancer but many respiratory diseases are caused by pesticides. Controlling insects with pesticides is a huge risk to drinking water and indoor air quality in Hawaii, and ultimately to matters of life and death to the public in Hawaii.</p>
<p><a href="http://honolulu.injuryboard.com/toxic-substances/breast-cancer-risk-in-hawaii-linked-to-pesticides-in-drinking-water-and-indoor-air.aspx?googleid=252040"><i>Read More&#8230;</i></a></p>
<p><!--</p>
<p>Pesticides leach into the Hawaii ground water system and end up in our drinking water. The warm tropical sun causes the pesticides to evaporate and enter the building through gaps in the foundation and infect breathing spaces inside the homes and schools and office buildings. Not only cancer but many respiratory diseases are caused by pesticides. Controlling insects with pesticides is a huge risk to drinking water and indoor air quality in Hawaii, and ultimately to matters of life and death to the public in Hawaii.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the diseases manifest themselves years after exposure and no immediate symptoms appear. And when a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer it is impossible to determine the cause. It isn't that the cause isn't known. It is just that businesses make more money if they can use chemicals in construction and since you can't prove that your breast cancer came from the pesticides that were used under your house or in your public school, these unscrupulous businesses continue to poison the community. If I sound a little angry about this I don't apologize. My wife died of cancer this year and I am committed to saving others from what she went through.</p>
<p>Chlordane was taken off the market in 1988 because it causes cancer. Dursban was taken off the market in 2000 because it causes cancer. The announcement from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2000 made it clear the seriousness of pesticides</p>
<p>    Today, the Clinton-Gore Administration is announcing a major step to improve safety for all Americans from the health risks posed by pesticides. We are eliminating virtually all home and garden uses of Dursban - the most widely used household pesticide in the United States.</p>
<p>    This action comes after completing the most extensive scientific review of the potential hazards from a pesticide ever conducted. This action - the result of an agreement with the manufacturers - will significantly minimize potential health risks from exposure to Dursban, also called chlorpyrifos, for all Americans, especially children.</p>
<p>Hawaii children and families were heavily exposed to first Chlordane and then Dursban over a period of 50 years in all of the building of homes and schools and government buildings.</p>
<p>Do you, like me, wonder why companies like Dow AgroSciences and DuPont complain that too much government regulation is making it hard for them to bring new pesticides, fungicides and herbicides to the market, when their products routinely are removed from wide use in public places because they cause cancer and other serious illnesses? Why do Hawaii housing developers like Gentry, Castle &#038; Cooke, Haseko and others continue to use pesticides on their projects? The only reason is that they make more more profits by using a cheap pesticide rather than other available methods. They know that the pesticides are invisible and that homeowners don't realize what they are being exposed to these health risks in their indoor air, their kids playing in the yard or their drinking water. They put profits ahead of people.</p>
<p>We are all concerned about the melt down in our financial institutions. But isn't our health even more important? Both crises are caused by lax regulation of big corporations. Both involve greed. And in both situations the public is paying dearly: in dollars with the banks and with our health and our lives with pesticides in our air and drinking water.</p>
<p>Is this new? No. In a 1997 study, Breast Cancer and Pesticides in Hawaii: The Need for Further Study, by Ruth H. Allen, Michelle Gottlieb, Eve Clute, Montira J. Pongsiri, Janette Sherman and G. Iris Obrams © 1997, Published by: The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), the link between the widespread use of pesticides and breast cancer in Hawaii have been made:</p>
<p>    Only 30% of all breast cancer can be explained by known risk factors. Increases in breast cancer incidence rates in Hawaii over the past few decades cannot be attributed solely to improvements in screening and detection. Avoidable environmental factors may contribute to a proportion of the unexplained cases. Emerging evidence on endocrine disruption suggests that environmental chemicals may play a role in the development of breast cancer. Agricultural chemicals, including endocrine disruptors, have been used intensively in Hawaii's island ecosystem over the past 40 years leaching into groundwater, and leading to unusually widespread occupational and general population exposures.</p>
<p>They studied documented episodes of exposure to two endocrine-disrupting chemicals, chlordane/heptachlor and 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), and recommend that further studies be conducted to warn Hawaii residents of other risks due to the continued use of pesticides in the Hawaii construction industry both public and private.</p>
<p>Interestingly the huge companies that have won billion dollar contracts for the massive military privatization housing projects now being constructed in Hawaii are using pesticides under and around all of the new homes where young military families will be living. Alternatives exist but the decision-makers for Actus Lend Lease and other of the privatization companies continue applying chemical pesticides despite the fact that they brag publicly about environmental and green building. each of the homes that will house young military families for the next 50 years will be be treated with pesticides to control pests, further endangering the air, soil and drinking water. They know about the health risks they are exposing the young military families to because they have encountered soil poisoned with Chlordane in the initial construction. Unless the public speaks up or Hawaii elected politicians take a stand, the women who contract breast cancer in the future from exposure to pesticides in Hawaii will die for a few dollars of profit for a huge corporation.</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/breast-cancer-risk-in-hawaii-linked-to-pesticides-in-drinking-water-and-indoor-air/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pollution comes home and gets personal: Women&#8217;s experience of household chemical exposure</title>
		<link>http://bushkillfarms.com/pollution-comes-home-and-gets-personal-womens-experience-of-household-chemical-exposure/</link>
		<comments>http://bushkillfarms.com/pollution-comes-home-and-gets-personal-womens-experience-of-household-chemical-exposure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:34:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pesticide News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bushkillfarms.com/pollution-comes-home-and-gets-personal-womens-experience-of-household-chemical-exposure/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although Americans are becoming increasingly aware of toxic chemical exposure from everyday household products like bisphenol A in some baby bottles and lead in some toys, women do not readily connect typical household products with personal chemical exposure and related adverse health effects, according to research from the December issue of the Journal of Health [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although Americans are becoming increasingly aware of toxic chemical exposure from everyday household products like bisphenol A in some baby bottles and lead in some toys, women do not readily connect typical household products with personal chemical exposure and related adverse health effects, according to research from the December issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.news-medical.net/?id=43297"><i>Read More&#8230;</i></a></p>
<p><!--</p>
<p>Although Americans are becoming increasingly aware of toxic chemical exposure from everyday household products like bisphenol A in some baby bottles and lead in some toys, women do not readily connect typical household products with personal chemical exposure and related adverse health effects, according to research from the December issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior.</p>
<p>"People more readily equate pollution with large-scale contamination and environmental disasters, yet the products and activities that form the backdrop to our everyday lives - electronics, cleaners, beauty products, food packaging - are a significant source of daily personal chemical exposure that accumulates over time," said sociologist Rebecca Gasior Altman, the lead author of the study, "Pollution Comes Home and Gets Personal: Women's Experience of Household Chemical Exposure."</p>
<p>Altman and her team examined how women interpreted and reacted to information about chemical contamination in their homes and bodies. After reviewing their personal chemical exposure data, most women were surprised and puzzled at the number of contaminants detected. They initially had difficulty relating the chemical results for their homes, located in rural and suburban communities, with their images of environmental problems, which they associated with toxic contamination originating outside the home from military or industrial activities, accidents or dumping.</p>
<p>"This research illustrates how science is beginning to play a paramount role in discovering and redefining environmental problems that are not immediately perceptible through direct experience," Altman said. "Pollution at home has been a blind spot for society. The study documents that an important shift occurs in how people understand environmental pollution, its sources and possible solutions as they learn about chemicals from everyday products that are detectable in urine samples and the household dust collecting under the sofa."</p>
<p>Though some scientists and government officials worry such information will provoke fears, instead the interdisciplinary team discovered that people who learned about chemicals in their homes and bodies were not alarmed, but eager for more, not less, information about how typical household products can expose them to chemicals that may affect health.</p>
<p>The researchers interviewed 25 women, all of whom had participated in an earlier study, the Silent Spring Institute's Household Exposure Study (HES), which tested for 89 environmental pollutants in air, dust and urine samples from 120 Cape Cod households. The study found about 20 target chemicals per home on average, including pesticides and compounds from plastics, cleaners, furniture, cosmetics and other products. Nearly all participants in the HES chose to learn their personal results, and the 25 selected for the current research were interviewed about their experiences learning the results for their home and the study as a whole.</p>
<p>This new study is among the first to apply the tools and perspectives of sociology to biomonitoring and exposure assessment research, and is the first to investigate the experience of personal results-reporting in a study of a wide range of contaminants. The Household Exposure Study has set an example that is shifting scientific practice, as it is among the first to adopt a right-to-know framework for reporting all results to interested participants.</p>
<p>http://www.asanet.org/</p>
<p>--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bushkillfarms.com/pollution-comes-home-and-gets-personal-womens-experience-of-household-chemical-exposure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
