Welcome February 26, 2010Posted by Nancy Hepp in Uncategorized.
Tags: chemical contaminants, dialogue, ecological paradigm, policy, science
add a comment
At the heart of CHE’s work is what Ted Schettler calls the ecological paradigm of human health. This paradigm of human health has ancient roots — many indigenous peoples believed in the essential Oneness of all creation. Taoism could be said to reflect an ecological concept of human health. Ralph Waldo Emerson shared this same Taoist conception of the interconnectedness of all thing.
What has changed is that we are able to measure more and more of these profound interconnections. Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are one of the best examples. Some EDCs can have life-long impacts on human health at exposure levels of parts per billion during fetal development.
But CHE is interested in more than chemical contaminants and health. We are interested in that great interface where chemicals, radiation, infectious vectors, nutrition, stress, income disparities, EMF, psychogenic stressors and untold other variables meet. We are interested in policies that protect human health in the face of this drastic revision of how we traditionally thought about such policies.
We are also deeply interested in what contributes to resilience in the face of this brave new world of ancient and modern stress factors. We often forget how many dimensions of modernity have improved health, and the power of the evidence of life expectancy that in many respects those improvements of health continue.
Finally, we are committed to science and civility in exploring these questions together. The focus on science — whichever way it points — keeps us grounded. And civility makes it safe for each of us to have our say. Welcome to the CHE blog.
CHE’s Letter to President-Elect Obama November 14, 2008Posted by Nancy Hepp in Letters.
Tags: chemical contaminants, climate change, dialogue, disease, environmental health, epidemic, health care system, health outcomes, health policy, stress, toxics
1 comment so far
Dear President-Elect Obama:
We write as Partners in the Collaborative on Health and the Environment, a national and international partnership dedicated to protecting the health of our families and communities. Our 3000 Partners include patient group representatives, health professionals, scientists, government officials, environmental health advocates, and citizens from over 48 states and 45 countries.
We provide a respected nonpartisan forum where informed, thoughtful, civil dialogue on health and the environment takes place. We share your dedication to civility and to listening to each other. By our founding mandate, we are prohibited from speaking for all CHE Partners. But we are permitted to convey the shared understanding that has emerged for many of us from six years of intensive dialogue on the implications of the revolution in environmental health sciences for safeguarding human health.
Mr. President, there has been a revolution in environmental health sciences over the past decade. New technologies, new scientific research, and new paradigms of human health and disease have revolutionized our understanding of human health. Indisputably, we face an epidemic of chronic diseases and disorders. Cancer, heart disease, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, obesity, asthma, allergies, learning and developmental disabilities, infertility, neurodegenerative diseases, autoimmune diseases, and many other serious diseases and disorders are epidemic in our time.
There are three core insights from the revolution in environmental health sciences. First, most of these diseases are multifactorial in origin. Second, many begin during fetal and early childhood development. And third, most include among their causes exposures to chemical contaminants, particularly those that persist and bioaccumulate. These contaminants interact with genetic inheritance, gene expression, nutrition, stress, socioeconomic status, and much, much more. We call this the complexity model, or ecological model, of human health. You can call it a multifactorial model just as well. Whatever we call it, few scientists disagree with its main outlines.
The implications of these three core insights from the environmental health science revolution are profound. They bear directly on your administration’s plans for health care reform.
Mr. President, you know our health care system is broken. You want to fix it. You have spoken eloquently of the need to prevent disease. The question we face is HOW to prevent the diseases that are bankrupting our health care system and imposing enormous costs on our economy — to say nothing of their cost in human suffering.
Mr. President, the simple truth is that REAL health promotion and disease prevention requires a national commitment to making our inner and outer environments less toxic and stressful — and richer in nutrients and resilience factors. That is what the multifactorial or ecological model of human health ineluctably implies. What this means is that most of the major policy issues you face — the economy, climate change, health care reform, school reform, food and agriculture and much more — are ultimately your real health promotion and disease prevention policies.
You know that the global financial crisis is unquestionably the single greatest immediate stressor on human health. But to what degree do you recognize how important it is that your policies reduce income disparities, which are the single strongest predictor of disparities in health outcomes? If you want to reduce health care costs, the single most powerful lever to do that is to reduce income disparities and enhance buffers against the stresses of income disparities. The MacArthur Network on Socioeconomic Status and Health is a respected source on this point.
Likewise, you know that climate change is a potentially overwhelming stressor on human health. So your green energy program is not only an economic, national security and environmental priority, as you have said. It is also one of your most important health programs. But to what degree do you recognize that green energy must be accompanied by a commitment to green chemistry and green materials?
Mr. President, it is vital to understand that your chemical management policy will have a profound impact on our health. This is the area in which CHE Partners have the greatest expertise. Chemical contaminants are major contributors to many of the chronic disease epidemics we face. Green energy is necessary but not sufficient to sustaining our health. Green energy, green chemistry, and green materials are all vital components of a health policy that recognizes the implications of the environmental health science revolution and the ecological or multifactorial model of human health.
Beyond green energy, green chemistry and green materials, many of us also share a view that your administration needs to be aware of the health threats of new and emerging technologies. There is increasing concern about the health effects of disrupted electromagnetic fields, biotechnologies and nanotechnologies. Again and again, we have failed to test new technologies for health and safety adequately before loosing them on our citizens and the world.
We cannot expect you to address all of these questions at once, Mr. President. So let us leave you with this summary. Universal health care will fail — it will be far too expensive to sustain — if it is not accompanied by a commitment to real health promotion and disease prevention. The green economy you are committed to creating can only be truly green if it includes green energy, green chemistry, and green materials. That is the path to a just and sustainable country and a just and sustainable world.
Thank you for listening, Mr. President. We wish you well,
Michael Lerner, PhD
Founding CHE Partner
Steve Heilig, MPH
Director of Public Health and Education, San Francisco Medical Society
Génon K. Jensen, MA
Executive Director, Health & Environment Alliance
Philip R. Lee, MD
Professor and Chancellor Emeritus, University of California, San Francisco
Professor of Medicine Emeritus, Stanford University
Former United States Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services
Elise Miller, MEd
Executive Director, Institute for Children’s Environmental Health
Ted Schettler, MD, MPH
Science Director, Science and Environmental Health Network
Lisette van Vliet, PhD
Toxics Policy Advisor, Health & Environment Alliance