Posts

Showing posts from September, 2018

M5.7: Sewage Facilities

After some research on the City of Morgan Hill website, I found that there is no sewage treatment facility in my community. Instead, the wastewater treatment plant is located in Gilroy which is 2 cities south of Morgan Hill. The sewage from the collection system is transported via an interceptor to the Wastewater Treatment Plant which is then treated and discharged. The plant is owned and operated by the South County Regional Wastewater Authority under a Joint Power agreement with Morgan Hill and Gilroy. The interceptor aspect is intended to change. I found an news article from the Morgan Hill Times that says by 2019 that the current pipeline will be upgraded to be a newer, larger pipeline to reduce waste spillover that are caused from storms and flooding. It is a bit concerning that my community doesn't have a plant in the community to deal with the sewage and instead transports the waste to another community. From the news article, it appears that Morgan Hill has had a lot of sp...

M5.5: Campaign for Tap Water

Given that there is a history of some cities not having clean, drinkable water, it would make it rather difficult to make a national campaign to move from drinking water bottles to tap water. One of these examples is Flint, Michigan where their water crisis is still occurring. In an ideal world, where all the water is drinkable, the slogan I would use would be:  "Tap water means more money in your pocket, cleaner environments, and a healthier life for you & your family!" I would use the truth "more money in your pocket" roughly $30-70 a month (depending on consumption); "cleaner environments" there would be no hazardous chemicals in the creation and/or disposal of bottles; "healthier life for you and your family" would be true because plastics wouldn't be in the ground for the next 1000 years indicating that your family will live in a healthier environment and there is reduced risk of BPA consumption if there is no water bottle bei...

M5.4: Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR) and Water Quality

I live in the City of Morgan Hill which is located in South Santa Clara County between the Coyote and Llagas underground aquifers. Both of these aquifers are the source of Morgan Hill's water supply. Morgan Hill operated 15 active and 2 standby groundwater wells throughout the city. I was surprised to learn that in 2017, the wells provided 2,312 million gallons of water to 14,080 active water connections. One of the chemicals found in the wells is sodium hypochlorite which is used as a disinfectant to protect against microbial contaminants. Morgan Hill strives to meet or exceed the state and federal requirements and were successful without a violation. A few of the contaminants that are looked at are E. coli, lead, copper, aluminum, and nitrate. Copper and nitrate were the two of most concern given that having too much can cause nausea, diarrhea, kidney damage, liver damage, and blood problems. However, all of the aforementioned contaminants were below the threshold -- meeting safe...

M5.2: Public Health Importance of Safe Drinking Water

The Clean Water Act of 1972 is of great public health importance. It holds the government accountable for maintaining clean bodies of water for consumption and overall healthy living. It also holds people, such as ourselves, to take care of the water supply given that we are in limited supply of drinking water. It is to prevent companies (agricultural, oil, industries, etc) from polluting the water supply. Having the Clean Water Act in effect allows the EPA to regulate permits and oversee/supervise water systems. Water is vital for our survival -- our bodies are 70% made up of water. Thus, ensuring we have quality water allows for better thriving communities and overall economy and optimal health.

M4.6: Radon

Most people are unaware of the radon exposure in their homes. I think education, accessibility, and affordability are factors that affect how many people do radon tests on their homes. If I were to develop a national awareness campaign, I would have three major stakeholders: 1. EPA The EPA already provides a U.S. map with the zone of radon for each county. Any county with 2pCi/L (picoCuries) or more are identified as orange and red - meaning moderate to high levels of radon. The EPA would be responsible in updating this map and having money set aside for people to buy / order / mail their radon kits via their website. Potentially the EPA could provide the CalEPA with an incentive to reduce radon levels at home through a subsidy or money for other environmental concerns like lead.  2. Hardware stores Most people can find a radon test in their hardware store. If hardware stores could have a sale or a subsidy from the EPA for to assist people who can't afford to pay for the...

M4.5: Think about it / Group Exercise

Overall, our blog group was in agreement that policies need to be changed to protect consumers rather than the companies who sell harmful chemicals. Kera mentioned that fragrance industries rely on the "proprietary information" excuse as their way to not disclose ingredients of their product. I think that the information might not need to be given to the public, but should be given to the U.S. EPA (or in our case, CalEPA) for review before the fragrance is put on the market. It would force accountability from both companies and the government to ensure safe products sold to consumers. Marisa and Carmen both mentioned how there can be alternatives such as essential oils and herbs. This idea is great in terms of a fragrance policy because it is attempting to use organic, safer components to create products with less toxic chemicals. Lastly, it was mentioned that a fragrance-free policy would be beneficial in hospitals and medical office buildings to reduce the amount of fragran...

M4.2: National Library ToxNet

Viewing enviRN-Evidence was very helpful in identifying health effect associated with exposures to urea formaldehyde and bleach. It was interesting to see the toxicity effect for specific organisms. For example, inhalation and oral consumption of this chemical lead to behavioral aggression and gastrointestinal problems/vomiting, respective to its route of consumption. There is also skin, eye, and respiratory irritations that can arise from chemical exposure. There has been some evidence for carcinogenicity which result in certain type of leukemias and gastrointestinal tumors in rats. In some cases, death resulted from the exposure to urea formaldehyde. Overall, urea formaldehyde is considered a probable carcinogen. As for bleach, which is a regular cleaning product used in our homes, there were varied results. Bleach is also known as chlorine, but in the liquid form rather than gas form.  One shocking piece of information I found is that in in in-vitro experiments on ...

M3.5: Transportation

Transportation is a love-hate relationship. I used to walk to school and take public transportation until I was about 18 years old. I would love taking public transportation because I could go to bed earlier and work on my homework on the train or bus. I wouldn't like taking the bus and/or train because of the reduced frequency at certain times and I would have to endure 2-3 hour rides for one way just to get home. The people on public transportation never bothered me. As someone who rode on the buses to go to dentist and medical appointments, I was used to seeing new faces.  Now, I use my own car to commute. There are a number of reasons I need to commute with my car such as: working at multiple sites in a day, having work and school on the same day, and limited public transportation options when I'm on different sides of the Bay Area. I drive roughly 8-12 hours a week with my car - pretty much another part-time job. I understand there are health implications not only for m...

M3.4: Air Pollution

Zip Code :  95037 - Santa Clara County Who and what are the top polluters in your zip code? The top 3 polluters are Owens Corning Corporation (180,227 pounds), Hanson Permanente Cement (36,138 pounds), and Strongwell Corporation (22,775 pounds).  The top four pollutants are ammonia (130,175 pounds), formaldehyde (54,992 pounds), and hydrochloric acid (36,542 pounds) and styrene (32,188 pounds).  Interestingly, the polluters don't create the top three pollutants. Instead they create lead, chromium & mercury for Owens and Hanson, respectively. Only the fourth pollutant of styrene is in the top pollutants which is mostly created by the Strongwell Corporation. What percent of homes in your zip code have lead-based paint? Only 1% of homes have lead-based paint in Santa Clara County, however there are 3,600 housing units with high risk of lead hazards making Santa Clara County land in the 90-100% percentile with the high hazard indicator. Therefore, it...

M3.3 Environmental Justice

The US EPA (2017) defined environmental justice as: "...the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. EPA has this goal for all communities and persons across this Nation. It will be achieved when everyone enjoys the same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards and equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, learn, and work.” Environmental justice exemplifies characteristics of Public Health in many aspects. Public Health is protecting and promoting the health of populations in all avenues. In learning about environmental health, there are strategic elements such as: policy development, dissemination, education, training, research, data collection, analysis, utilization, and services that are part of the environmental justice st...

M3.2 Vulnerable Populations

Everyone is vulnerable - however, people of color, lower income, women, children, infants, elderly are populations who face the worst exposure and outcomes. There are a number of exposures we face from the moment we begin growing in the womb until the day we die.  From embryonic development, we start absorbing chemicals via our mothers through the products they use. The fetus is at its most vulnerable in just the few days of life. If a fetus happens to be born "healthy," the baby has already been exposed to more than 200 chemicals. Once the child grows into adolescence  and adulthood, the exposures to these chemicals and our "natural" environment can affect reproductive systems. I can think mostly air and water quality, if you're exposed to asbestos, lead, mercury, etc., there are a multitude of negative health outcomes that can arise such as asthma, lead poisoning, and cancer. We can't escape these exposures, they are found in our food, storage containe...

M3.1 Biomonitoring

Upon getting the lab result news, I would have many thoughts - more questions than anything. Initially, I would think that there are a lot of chemicals in my body. I would question what items I'm using that contain these harmful chemicals. I would wonder how many additional chemicals I have that were not detected in the body burden blood test as they only study 250 chemicals (and we know there are more than that). I would feel fear  because there are consequences towards having these chemicals at unsafe levels. Two of my main concerns would be cancer and infertility. My family has a history of cancer, thus I would feel worrisome that I am making decisions that could initiate this disease. In addition, I love children and it would break my heart if I would not be able to bear any children, and give my mom grandchildren. I would also be upset at the companies who make harmful products. However, I would be mostly mad at myself for not having changed my lifestyle that would result i...

M2.4: EWG Personal Care Products

After watching Ken Cook speak about the findings in the 10 Americans, I found it rather surprising to know that on average 287 chemicals out of 413 chemicals were detected in the blood samples. The fact that 212 industrial chemicals and pesticides that were banned more than 30 years ago were present in the blood samples indicate how the chemicals impact our bodies in the short- and long-term.  T he Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 hadn't been updated for 30 years - presuming that 62,000 chemicals were safe. This law did not require health or safety studies before a new chemical was allowed on the market. After some research, it appears the Kids-Safe Chemicals Act of 2008 was never passed. In 2016, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (similar to this chemical act) was passed by the Senate and signed by President Barack Obama, which revised the TSCA to give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authority  to regulate chemicals used c...

M2.3: Household Products

The following household products are items I use on a regular basis, which I researched on the National Library of Medicine's Household Products Database. Clorox Bleach, Concentrated, Regular (For laundry) The health rating for clorox was 3 (serious). I am not surprised by this rating because I understand it to be a chemical that is for disinfecting and used to turn dirty whites to clean whites. However, the one health risk that was surprising for me was to find out that one of the components (sodium hypochlorite) is a group 3 carcinogen - meaning it was not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans. This brings up whether there is a slight possibility that clorox could be a carcinogen. There are a number of negative effects if exposed to clorox such as corrosion, severe irritation, and gastrointestinal burn. I'm surprised that a product can do that much harm considering I have been using the product without the precautions suggested (like gloves) and I have not exp...

M2.2: Personal Care Products

The following are two personal care products that I use on a regular basis and researched on the Safe Cosmetics Database. Kiss Premium Eyelash Adhesive Clear Health risks in this product are irritants (high), organ system toxicity (moderate), cancer & ecotoxicity (low). As someone who uses this product, I know it can cause eye irritation because I have experienced that effect from using the product. The eyes generally have a negative reaction when something is coming close or into the eye. I found that the ecological impact for this glue was present and rated low. Overall, the product was rated with a score of 2 indicating it as a low hazard. The biggest concern are the allergens in the product which can cause  organ system toxicity. I did not expect that much of an impact from a product where you only use about 2 drops of glue for each eye. However, it depends on the individual's body. Luckily for me I don't have an allergic reaction from this product. Aquafresh T...