Canada
is moving to get rid of products with a chemical common in plastic baby bottles,
the United States is expressing concern over its safety and some retailers are
planning to stop selling these items.
Quote:
"At
this point, the writing is on the wall for bisphenol A. Major
retailers and governments all across the country and the world are now recognizing
that this chemical is extremely toxic at very low levels of exposure,"
Michael Schade of the U.S. environmental group Center for Health, Environment
and Justice said in a telephone interview.
Quote:
On
Tuesday the National Toxicology Program, part of the U.S. government's National
Institutes of Health, issued a draft report expressing concern that BPA could
cause neural and behavioral problems
in fetuses, infants and children.
Relying
on the results of animal studies, it expressed concern about possible links between
BPA exposure and early puberty and prostate and breast cancer.
Dr.
Anila Jacob of the activist Environmental Working Group said using rodent studies
to assess toxicity is a well-established practice given that scientists cannot
expose humans to possible toxins in research for ethical reasons.
Canadian
Health Minister Tony Clement said on Friday his country intends to become the
first to ban the import and sale of some types of plastic baby bottles because
they contain BPA. He expressed concern
that overexposure at an early age could cause later behavioral and neurological
symptoms.
Global
Community Monitor's project: Pacific Steel Casting air pollution; want factory
relocation:
Quote:
Pacific
Steel Casting is showering West Berkeley's skies with toxic metal traces that
can cause cancer and neurological problems, according to a group of activists
who have been monitoring air around the plant since May. Global Community Monitor,
a non-profit environmental justice group based in San Francisco, started monitoring
the air with a $25,000 grant from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
The
group released preliminary data Tuesday from 12 air monitoring sites around Pacific
Steel Casting, which has been making steel parts such as fire hydrants, truck
parts and bridge pieces in Berkeley since 1934. It
found levels of manganese and nickel much higher than those deemed safe by the
World Health Organization and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The
group plans to continue monitoring through December, said director Denny Larson.
``We
knew there was a long list of complaints from the plant, but we didn't know if
people were being exposed to toxic levels of pollution, and now we have the data,''
said Peter Guerrero, a consultant working with Larson. ``The
state of California and the city should look at an industrial relocation plan
for them. Just because they have been here for decades doesn't excuse their behavior.''
Quote:
The
group said it found concentrations of manganese, which can cause neurological
problems similar to Parkinson's disease, and nickel, which can cause cancer, in
the air at five sites near the plant.
Those levels were
found in the air as far as six blocks from the plant at Second and Gilman streets.
Larson
said the group tested the air for metal traces Pacific Steel has admitted it releases
in its steel-making process. In a report
to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Pacific Steel said it released
529 pounds of manganese and 19 pounds of nickel into the air during a one-year
period in 2005 and 2006.
Pacific
Steel factory resistance:
Quote:
Pacific
Steel spokeswoman Elizabeth Jewel said closing the plant and moving out of Berkeley
is a ``completely unrealistic'' option. ``That would be a huge loss for the city
of Berkeley,'' Jewel said. ``Where would they like us to go?''
Quote:
``This
is a group of concerned citizens who are not scientists, with no scientific training,
who are coming to conclusions that can't be supported,'' Jewel said. ``They don't
follow any standard scientific methodology. They don't publish their methodology
or how they came to those numbers, there's no peer review and there's no way to
say definitively that the source is Pacific Steel.''
Belmont
City Council voted last night to approve one of the most toughest smoking bans
in the USA.
Quote:
Prohibitions
on smoking in parks and other public places will take effect in 30 days. The ordinance's
most hotly contested elements -- which ban smoking inside apartments and condominiums
-- won't be enforced for another 14 months.
Smoking
ban to get rid of second hand smoke exposure and save lives in Belmont:
Quote:
Belmont
is set to make history by becoming the first city in the nation to ban smoking
on its streets and almost everywhere else. The Belmont City Council voted
unanimously last night to pursue a strict law that will prohibit smoking anywhere
in the city except for single-family detached residences. Smoking on the street,
in a park and even in one’s car will become illegal and police would have
the option of handing out tickets if they catch someone.
Quote:
“We
have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law as we can,
I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What
if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one
little thing here at this level it will matter.”
Armed
with growing evidence that second-hand smoke causes negative health effects, the
council chose to pursue the strictest law possible and deal with any legal challenges
later. Last month, the council said it wanted to pursue a law similar to ones
passed in Dublin and the Southern California city of Calabasas. It took up the
cause after a citizen at a senior living facility requested smoke be declared
a public nuisance, allowing him to sue neighbors who smoke.
The
council was concerned about people smoking in multi-unit residences.
“I
would just like to say ‘no smoking’ and see what happens and if they
do smoke, [someone] has the right to have the police come and give them a ticket,”
said Councilwoman Coralin Feierbach.
Quote:
“You
can’t walk down the street with a beer, but you can have a cigarette,”
Warden said. “You shouldn’t be allowed to do that. I just think it shouldn’t
be allowed anywhere except in someone’s house. If you want to do that, that’s
fine.”
But
when members of the City Council consider approving the revised ordinance Sept.
11, they will still be voting on a novel idea: Restricting smoking in some private
homes.
According to a summary of the ordinance released
this week, the new measure would prohibit smoking in individual units and yard
areas of multi-unit residences that share a ceiling or floor with another unit.
The ordinance would also ban smoking in indoor or
outdoor workplaces; public places such as sports fields, parks or malls; common
areas of multi-family residences; and within 20 feet of any place where smoking
is not allowed.
Smoking would still be allowed in
detached single-family homes and in multifamily units without another tenant above
or below.
Mayor
Coralin Feierbach acknowledges that banning smoking in a condo or apartment is
"uncommon" for smoking ordinances. But a few weeks ago, while she was
watching her granddaughter and opened the windows to get some air, Feierbach said
she realized the importance of the ordinance.
She
thought about what would happen if there were smokers outside and she were in
an upstairs unit.
"What
if this were a condo? That little baby would be taking in smoke. It didn't crystallize
for me until it actually happened," she said.
Resistance
from San Mateo County Association of Realtors:
Quote:
"We
understand the city's desire to protect the health and safety of their community,"
said George Mozingo, director of government affairs for the organization. "Where
we do have a concern about is the regulation of a legal activity, in this case
smoking, within a private residence." ...As for filing a lawsuit challenging
the law, Mozingo said, "That's certainly not on the table. At this point,
the ordinance hasn't been passed and we're still discussing it with folks."
"The
city has garnered support from the local American Lung Association's chapter and
some residents. "