With the death eight years ago of Stephanie C. Davis, healthcare waste reduction and pollution prevention in healthcare lost a great and tireless champion. With the invaluable support of Health Care Without Harm, Stephanie’s colleagues, friends and family have established this Award and Scholarship for CleanMed – to recognize and support those in health care organizations who struggle to “green” healthcare.

Winners of the Stephanie Davis Award and Scholarship for 2010 will receive a $500 travel stipend; a full registration fee waiver for the conference and any pre-conference events; and 2 nights (room and tax only) at one of the CleanMed hotels adjacent to the Convention.  Applications are due March 26.

Please see the application form at www.cleanmed.org

About Stephanie Davis

Stephanie had a passion for the environment and she directed that passion to waste reduction in healthcare. At the start of her career, Stephanie worked as a garbage and recycling guru for the New York Sanitation bureau. Around the same time, she forged a partnership with the Brooklyn Botanical Garden, initiating a Garlic Day and causing the New York Times to dub her New York’s garlic queen! Stephanie created her own consulting firm – Waste Reduction Remedies. She worked for several hospitals, including Alta Bates-Summit Medical Center and Sutter Antioch Hospital – both in Northern California. Shortly before she became sick, Stephanie landed a dream job – working with the San Francisco Department of the Environment on healthcare pollution prevention. But Stephanie’s energies could not be contained by a mere job. She published articles on waste reduction in both the peer-reviewed and the popular press; she volunteered to run conferences, speak at workshops and help her community. Stephanie also believed in CleanMed – and would be delighted to know that this award and scholarship are supporting healthcare staff committed to her passion: greening the healthcare system and safeguarding the public’s health.

http://www.toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/text_version/chemicals.php?id=67

This resource provides a brief summary of nanotechnology and has links to additional resources.

The summary can also be found in Spanish at Nanopartículas http://www.toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/espanol/chemicals.php?id=68.

Nanotechnology uses matter at sizes between approximately 1 and 100 nanometers. Nanotechnology involves imaging, measuring, modeling, and working with matter at this scale. Nanomaterials have unique optical, electrical, and magnetic properties. The small size of these materials makes them promising and challenging to work with. However, their characteristics may be different from those of larger particles with the same chemical composition.

There is concern about the interaction of nanoparticles with human health and their effects on the environment. The risk of pollution from nanoparticles and associated health problems to those involved in manufacturing these materials as well as to consumers using these products is unknown.

Here is a list of open government websites that are relevant in some way to our work:

EPA     http://www.epa.gov/open/
HHS    http://www.hhs.gov/open/
DHS    http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/open-government.shtm
USDA  http://www.usda.gov/open
NSF     http://www.nsf.gov/open/
DoD     http://www.defense.gov/open/
Labor   http://www.dol.gov/open/
Energy  http://www.energy.gov/open/
White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/open/
Interior http://www.doi.gov//open/
NRC    http://www.nrc.gov/open/

Help your kids and students get ready by checking out Kids for Saving Earth.

Use this windy month to show your students how wind becomes renewable energy that will help protect our planet. Check out News That Will Blow You Away!

Thanks as always for all you do to help kids help the Earth.

The first will take place on Thursday, March 4th from 1:00-2:00 PM EST.
To register, please visit:
https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/842157923

The second will take place on Thursday, March 4th from 2:30-3:30 PM EST.
To register, please visit:
https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/378511331

Additionally, if you would like to download the report, it is available
at:
http://healthyhomestraining.org/IPM/NCHH_Bed_Bug_Control_2-12-10.pdf or
http://tinyurl.com/yfjnsup

Overall findings

• Almost all of the chemicals we tested for did show up in the bodies of the six participants and were present at levels suspected of causing health problems.
• We found 3 of the four categories of toxic chemicals tested in the bodies of every participant in the study.
• Of the 6 subjects we tested, every one of them had a minimum of 35 of the chemicals for which we tested in their bodies
• Participants had an average of 40 of the chemicals tested in their bodies
• Thirty of the chemicals tested for were found in all of the participants.

Full report: BodyBurdenReport

This is a great opportunity for graduate and undergraduate students to get some hands on experience working directly with workers. Now in its 7th year, the program is designed as a field-based learning experience in occupational safety and health. Students work with labor unions or community-based organizations on a variety of issues of major importance to workers and the occupational safety and health professionals.  We are particularly looking for students from minority or immigrant backgrounds, to both increase diversity in our profession and to have the necessary language skills to work on project in the low wage and immigrant workforce.  Students can apply to work in any of the following cities, regardless of where they now reside: New York City, Berkeley/Oakland, Los Angeles, and San Diego.  The deadline to apply is April 1.

The program is open both to undergraduates (3rd and 4th year) and graduate students with an interest in occupational health or related fields. A stipend is provided for the 8-week experience ($500/week for undergraduates, $650/week for graduates.  (No housing allowance but we can assist those relocating for the summer to find temporary housing.)

More information can be obtained at the OHIP website at www.aoec.org/ohip.

Thanks.  Feel free to contact Ingrid Denis the AOEC Coordinator at idenis@aoec.org or the OHIP National Coordinator Sarah Jacobs at sjacobs@irle.ucla.edu if you have any questions.  Potential applicants can also call Ingrid Denis at the AOEC office at 888-347-2632.

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, February 23, 2010; A01

Major U.S. foodmakers are quietly investigating how to rid their containers of Bisphenol A, a chemical under scrutiny by federal regulators concerned about links to a range of health problems, including reproductive disorders and cancer.

But they are discovering how complicated it is to remove the chemical, which is in the epoxy linings of nearly every metal can on supermarket shelves and leaches into foods such as soup, liquid baby formula and soda. It is a goal that is taking years to reach, costing millions and proving surprisingly elusive.

Randy Hartnell, whose company, Vital Choice, sells products aimed at health-conscious consumers, switched last year to can linings made without BPA. It was a costly move that he figured would resonate in the niche market that buys his canned wild salmon and low-mercury tuna.

But a recent Consumers Union test detected small amounts of BPA in Vital Choice tuna, raising questions about whether it is possible to clean the food supply of the ubiquitous chemical. The consumer group also found trace amounts of BPA in baked beans made by Eden Foods, the only other U.S. company that says it has switched to BPA-free cans.

“What we’re hearing is, the stuff is just omnipresent,” said Hartnell, whose Washington state company has spent as much as $10,000 on lab tests trying to pinpoint the source of BPA in its canned tuna. “Is it in the cutting board? The gloves that people wear who are working on the fish? Is it in the tuna itself? We don’t know. We’re trying to figure it out.”

The food industry’s efforts began even before the FDA announced last month that it had reversed its position and is concerned about the safety of BPA, which is used in thousands of consumer goods, including compact discs, dental sealants and credit card and ATM receipts. Government studies estimate that the chemical has been found in the urine of more than 90 percent of the population.

Foodmakers started looking for alternatives in 2008, after public pressure spurred manufacturers of plastic baby bottles to voluntarily rid their products of BPA. Several municipalities, Minnesota and Canada banned BPA from baby bottles. And Congress is considering a bill filed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) that would ban BPA from baby bottles, sports water bottles, reusable food containers, infant formula liners and food can liners.

But foodmakers say they aren’t waiting for legislation or regulation.

“It doesn’t matter what FDA says. If consumers decide they don’t want BPA, you don’t want to be in a can that consumers don’t want to buy,” said one source at a major U.S. food company who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Major food companies declined to talk publicly about their efforts to find a replacement for BPA linings. “We don’t have a safe, effective alternative, and that’s an unhappy place to be,” the source said. “No one wants to talk about that.”

Heinz, for instance, says it has switched to BPA-free cans for some products but will not identify them or say what substitute it is using. General Mills, which owns the Progresso and Muir Glen lines of canned products, said it is testing BPA-free cans but would not elaborate. “We are optimistic that safe and viable alternatives will be identified in time,” said Thomas Forsythe, a company spokesman.

The Environmental Protection Agency has declared the daily safe BPA exposure limit at 50 mg per kilogram of body weight, a level set in the 1980s. A growing body of peer-reviewed research in the past decade has suggested that very low levels — below the federal threshold — might be responsible for health problems. BPA is a synthetic version of estrogen, and scientists disagree about whether it causes lasting effects by triggering subtle cellular changes.

John M. Rost, chairman of the North American Metal Packaging Alliance, which represents the canned food and beverage industry, said BPA has been “used safely in metal food packaging for decades. They have been deemed safe by regulatory agencies around the world.” He also said there hasn’t been a case of food-borne illness resulting from a failure of metal packaging since the industry began using BPA in its linings more than 30 years ago.

Commercial uses of BPA exploded in the 1950s after scientists discovered its ability to make plastics more durable and shatterproof. By 1963, scientists were using it to create epoxy linings for steel cans, which held up under heat and other extreme conditions. Because the BPA linings extended the shelf life of canned goods, did not affect taste, prevented bacterial contamination and were relatively cheap, they became the industry standard by the 1970s.

The FDA does not know which companies use BPA, how much they use or how it is applied, because manufacturers are not required to disclose that information.

Some companies have had trouble finding out whether their cans contain BPA.

Michael Potter, chief executive of Eden Foods, which makes canned organic products, began asking suppliers about his can linings after reading German research about BPA. “Trying to determine what was in the can linings that I was purchasing to put food in was a daunting task,” he said. “Inevitably, you end up speaking to a large law firm inside the Beltway that says you don’t have the right to know.”

It took two years, but in 1999, Potter prompted one supplier, the Ball Corp., to switch to a can lined with oleoresin, a mixture of oil and a resin extracted from plants such as pine.

The new cans are 14 percent more expensive, about 2.2 additional cents per can, Potter said. “It went into our costing, and we passed it onto our customers,” he said.

But oleoresin deteriorates in contact with acidic food, forcing Eden Foods to use BPA in its linings for canned tomatoes. Potter said that was why trace amounts of BPA — one part per billion — were detected by Consumers Union in Eden Foods’ baked beans. The beans were made with tomato puree that had been stored in a can with a BPA lining.

The EPA and the FDA, which oversees the use of BPA in food and beverage containers, are reviewing the chemical in light of new research. Last month, the FDA said it would launch fast-track studies to clarify the research on BPA. It is also encouraging manufacturers to migrate away from the chemical.

But the process is slow, because testing must take into account a shelf life of two to five years for most canned foods. “You don’t want to find out that you made a switch based on six months of data but by 18 months the lining breaks down and people are eating it,” an industry source said.

Makers of plastic bottles found a quick and relatively simple BPA substitute, polypropylene, but canned-food makers are having considerably more trouble.

Foodmakers say that some alternative linings disintegrate, reducing a product’s shelf life. Other linings can’t withstand the high heat applied to certain canned products to kill bacteria. Still others interfere with taste.

Consumer concerns led Japanese manufacturers to voluntarily reduce the use of BPA between 1998 and 2003. But because cans were primarily used for drinks, they could use a relatively simple polyester substitute. The Japanese also got rid of tableware containing BPA used for school lunches. After the change, Japanese scientists documented a significant drop in BPA levels in research subjects’ blood.

Aaron L. Brody, a food packaging expert who teaches at the University of Georgia, said that even if health concerns are not valid, “if they had an economic can coating that could be applied to food and/or beverage cans today, the coatings industry, the canning industry, would have applied it instantly to get this monkey off their back.”