During the last quarter of 2015 CHE surveyed our listserv participants about the value of each listserv in their personal and professional lives, also asking for suggestions for improving each listserv. We were pleased to receive many positive comments about the value of CHE listservs, and we were grateful as well for the feedback about how we might improve this core CHE service. Following CHE’s core values of civility and transparency, we share the survey results as of mid December in a spreadsheet. We did not edit typographical errors, but we did remove names of respondents and people identified in comments (other than a few references to group coordinators). Where appropriate, CHE staff have added a few preliminary responses to comments.
In the coming weeks and months we will be evaluating the feedback we received. As we decide on changes or refinements to the listservs we will be communicating with our partners. Additionally, we invite further comments on this post and survey results.
We thank all those CHE Partners who completed the surveys (some of you who are subscribed to several listservs even completed several of them—thank you!). We value your feedback.
In gratitude for your continued collaboration with CHE, and all your efforts to make this world a healthier place for all,
The CHE team
See the survey results.
Dear CHE Partners,
We want your ideas! We’re in the process of evaluating various aspects of CHE’s services and initiatives and generating potential new ones. Given we are indeed a collaborative partnership, your innovative suggestions as to what CHE might do (within our mission, below) to address gaps or needs you see in the environmental health field would be genuinely welcome.
To facilitate this, we’re opening this Partner Idea Forum, a platform where you can offer your ideas. This one is interactive in that you can see, respond to and build on other partners’ suggestions.
written by Elise Miller, MEd
We all know there are multiple contributors to health and disease, but let’s say you want to figure out what the latest science says on environmental links to, say, asthma? Or learning disabilities? Or childhood leukemia? Pretty daunting, isn’t it? Which websites have the most evidence-based science? Which articles are accessible without paying a subscription or membership fee? What do those research findings mean for your patients, your family, and community? And many other pressing questions. Most health care professionals can’t begin to keep up with the emerging scientific literature, much less the rest of us.
Fortunately, A Story of Health is a brilliant, innovative new resource that can help you find out how various environments interact with our genes to influence health across the lifespan. Based on the latest peer-reviewed research, it’s more than a bunch of scientific facts thrown together with fancy graphics. It’s a story, or really—multiple, interactive, and interconnected stories that touch us and teach us not only about risk factors for disease, but how to prevent disease and promote health and resilience.
Coordinator of CHE’s Diabetes-Obesity Spectrum Working Group
In a recent review, published in the leading diabetes journal Diabetologia, Hectors et al. (2011) describe how numerous environmental chemicals affect the insulin-producing beta cells of the pancreas. These effects, the authors argue, may be significant in the development of type 2 diabetes. Chemicals like bisphenol A, PCBs, dioxin, organophosphorous pesticides, arsenic, heavy metals, and others, can all affect how the beta cells function, and can interfere with their capacity to secrete insulin.
In type 2 diabetes, both insulin resistance—the body’s inability to respond correctly to insulin—and beta cell malfunction contribute to the disease. The inability of the beta cells to produce enough insulin leads to high blood glucose levels, and eventually diabetes (in many people with type 2, insulin production is higher than normal, to compensate for the insulin resistance—but it is still inadequate to bring blood glucose under control).
Reps. Doyle and Murphy are well positioned to help protect us
CHE Partner and Director of the Healthy Children Project for the Learning Disabilities Association of America
This letter was originally published in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. It’s republished here with the author’s permission.
Imagine all the chemicals used in televisions, computers, upholstery, car seats, building materials, even children’s pajamas. Imagine that some of these chemicals migrate from products into dust and dirt, and build up in our bodies. They are found in the cord blood of newborns and in breast milk. Imagine that these chemicals are similar in structure to the notorious PCBs – carcinogens banned from use in the late 1970s.
Now wouldn’t you also imagine that these chemicals were tested and found to be safe to human health before they were allowed into our products and homes?
Unfortunately, that is not the case.
Polybrominated diphyenyl ethers are flame retardant chemicals that persist in the environment and build up in the food chain and in people. Laboratory studies link exposure to PBDEs with lowered IQ and attention problems. This summer, a study of pregnant women found that those with higher levels of PBDEs had reduced levels of thyroid hormone, which is essential to a baby’s brain development.
But despite growing scientific evidence linking toxic chemical exposures to serious disease and disability, our government does not require that PBDEs – or any of the other 80,000 chemicals on the market – be tested for effects on human health.
That could be about to change, and two Pittsburgh members of Congress are in key positions to help make it happen.
Stelios A Zinelis
The Interphone Study Group (2010)1 conducted a study on mobile telephone use has made this conclusion:
“Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with the use of mobile phones. There were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma at the highest exposure levels, but biases and errors prevent a causal interpretation.”
This study was completed in 2004, but for unknown reasons, the results were published six years later, upon demand by scientific organisations such as the European Environment Agency and the European Union (2009)2 (which partially funded the study, along with the International Union against Cancer [Mobile Manufacturers Forum and GSM Association]), who were concerned about the effects of mobile phone use on public health.
This letter is reprinted with permission from the Environmental Working Group, a CHE partner. See the original letter with full science analysis on EWG’s website.
Dr. Timothy Buckley, Chair
Dioxin Review Panel
Science Advisory Board
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Dear Dr. Buckley,
Twenty-five years after publishing its first assessment of dioxin, a common industrial pollutant and food contaminant, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has yet to establish a safe daily dose for human exposure to this potent chemical.
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, also known as 2,3,7,8-TCDD, or TCDD) may well be one of the most-studied of all chemical pollutants. The U.S. National Toxicology Program has listed dioxin as a known human carcinogen since 2001 (NTP 2005), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed to do the same (EPA 2010a). There is a large and persuasive body of research dating from the 1950s showing that dioxin undermines fetal development, damages the reproductive and immune systems and causes severe skin ailments and other disorders.
As U.S. industrial data demonstrate, dioxin is released from municipal waste incinerators; industrial and military hazardous waste treatment facilities; pesticide manufacturing and paper bleaching plants; and a wide range of other industrial processes. In the 1970s, dioxin was identified as a contaminant in Agent Orange, the notorious defoliant deployed by the U.S. during the Vietnam War and blamed for diabetes and other diseases among exposed personnel (Chamie 2008; Cranmer 2000; Gupta 2006).