Tag: environmental testing

By Jordan Martinez.

As an intern at the Center for Health, Environment, and Justice, I have written several papers on the effects of different chemicals on the environment and on human health. The purpose of these articles is to provide information for chemically impacted communities throughout the country. I am working with community members in East Palestine, Ohio. Their questions led to me writing these papers, however these questions have applications beyond the community in East Palestine, and can be helpful to other chemically impacted communities around the world.

The first of these papers that I wrote was on the burning of lithium ion batteries. Lithium ion batteries, such as those in electric vehicles like Teslas, release several toxic gasses when they catch on fire. In this paper, I discussed what those gasses are, how they affect human health, and what makes them from more common chemicals used in everyday life, such as fluoride in toothpaste. This paper came from questions from residents in East Palestine, however the information shared in this paper represents helpful information for residents in other communities as well. Some communities may live near a facility that produces lithium batteries, where risk from these gasses may be higher during an accident. Some individuals may work with lithium ion batteries on a regular basis, such as  car mechanics. These papers serve to help individuals overall, and I’m glad to be making this information available to the public for free.

I’m currently writing about the use of the Affordable Care Act for chemically impacted communities. Within the law of the Affordable Care Act exists Section 1881A, which outlines the use of medicare benefits for individuals exposed to environmental health. I am investigating how this section of the ACA can be utilized for chemically impacted communities, and what the exact process is for utilizing medicare benefits for impacted individuals.

These papers highlight educational health and science information that may benefit communities, especially those working with CHEJ. It is my hope that scientific information can be easily accessible to communities in a digestible manner. Not everyone is a scientist, and for community leaders working to help their communities, they may not be able to read scientific papers. This may be due to not having the capabilities to read papers, since academic research papers are often filled with jargon that can be quite difficult to understand for non-scientists. Another reason is simply time. Reading papers is time consuming, and even if a community leader can read papers, there may be too many tasks that need to be done, limiting the absorption of scientific knowledge, therefore preventing the use of scientific information in helping to benefit communities. This is why it is crucial that we make inclusive science communication, so that community stakeholders can be involved in scientific knowledge without having to be scientists. I write these papers for CHEJ so I can help bridge the gaps between science and the community, and I am grateful for the work of others who do the same.

By Leila Waid.

Environmental justice is in a constant legal battle that, depending on the court’s philosophy, sometimes sees wins for public health safety and but other times faces significant setbacks. March saw a major regression for plastic pollution regulation and the ongoing fight to ban PFAS. On March 21, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals – a conservative-leaning court that has obstructed substantial progressive policies over the years – blocked EPA efforts to ban PFAS in plastic containers.

The company behind the lawsuit is Inhance Technology, who specializes in treating plastics. Some of their listed services include “barrier packaging” and “surface technologies,” which they use to make plastics stronger and more durable. Although not explicitly stated on their website, the process by which they treat these plastics includes PFOA, a type of PFAS. PFAS are used in various products for their ability to repel water and oil. These properties allow for the stronger and more durable plastics. However they do not disclose or make it clear to the consumer that they are using a controversial chemical that has been linked in many health studies to various diseases and even death. In fact, Inhance Technologies goes as far as to promote their company as being eco-friendly, stating on their website that they “want to make things better for the world” by reducing plastic. This and other similar statements on the company website make it seem like they are protecting the environment when, in reality, they are contributing to the plastic pollution that endangers everyone’s health – a clear example of greenwashing.

In December 2023, the EPA sent a notice to Inhance Technologies to stop using PFAS in their manufacturing process. In response, they sued the agency. The main debate in the case was if the EPA had the right to put a stop to the process since Inhance had been using PFAS for over 40 years. The EPA argued that it only discovered the usage in 2020 so it should be considered a new process. Ultimately The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Inhance, stating the EPA did not have the right to place a restriction since it was not a new process, even if the EPA just found out about it. However, what if a company never discloses the use of harmful chemicals to the EPA? Using the logic and reasoning of this case, the EPA would be unable to block that process because they didn’t catch it in time. Notedly, the court did not deny the dangers of PFAS to the human body; they only overturned the restriction because the process was not new to Inhance.

What is most frustrating about environmental justice setbacks such as these is that, while the litigation is ongoing, the PFAS, or forever chemicals continue to be manufactured and cause massive pollution. Inhance Technologies argued that they can’t be restricted by the EPA under Section 5 because they have been treating plastics with PFAS for forty years. How much pollution have they added to the environment? How much more will be added by organizations such as these that hide behind a façade of greenwashing and yet contribute to so much of the environmental and human health degradation faced today. 

Court cases can take years to win. And during those years, PFAS continues to bioaccumulate within our bodies and environment. So, while immense national-level policies, such as the PFAS ban that the EPA tried to put in place, are extremely important, we also need to focus on individual and local-level change. For example, we must educate ourselves and our communities about the dangers of PFAS and become informed consumers of what plastic-containing products we buy. If we know that a company uses PFAS in its manufacturing process or partners with companies that do, then we need to be mindful of that and boycott those products. 

By Stephen Lester.

It is well understood how dangerous lead is to everyone especially children who are still growing and thus more susceptible to its toxic effects. Scientists have continued to find adverse effects from exposure to lower and lower levels of lead, leading some people to say that there is no known safe level of exposure to lead, especially for children. This evidence continued to grow this month when researchers from Princeton University, the University of Michigan and from a private research group in Cambridge, MA reported that children exposed to lead during the Flint (MI) lead crisis “suffered significant negative effects” on their academic outcome. They further reported that “we find compelling evidence that the FWC [Flint Water Crisis] reduced student math achievement and increased the rate of social needs classification.” Students (over the age of 5) with low socioeconomic status experienced the largest effects on math achievement, with boys suffering the largest effects on special needs classification.

Numerous studies referenced in this report have documented the adverse health effects of lead on children including increased behavioral problems, decreased executive functioning, decreased academic achievement, decreased brain volume, higher rates of crime offending, decreased social mobility and increased anxiety. This study adds to this knowledge and understanding by providing strong evidence that the relatively short exposure to lead in drinking water – about a year and a half – during the Flint Water Crisis had a significant impact on the educational outcomes of school-aged children in Flint.

The authors also discussed the many ways that a crisis such as the FWC impacts a community  that goes beyond the chemical exposures. Specifically, they discussed persistent psychological distress and trauma referencing the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, the DC sniper attacks among others. They made a convincing argument that “one cannot treat these crises as strictly medical phenomena.” It’s much more complex than that.

Lastly, the authors point out that the societal costs of the Flint Water Crisis which have been estimated to range from 50 to 400 million dollars are based on only the effects of lead exposure. They do not take into effect the impact of the psychological distress and trauma that the community goes through. They conclude that “Our results point toward the broad negative effects of the crisis on children and suggest that existing estimates may substantially underestimate the overall societal cost of the crisis.” They expressed hope that understanding the true costs of events such as Flint Water Crisis might help prevent the kind of thinking that led to the Flint crisis in the first place, a decision to switch the source of the city’s drinking water in order to save money – just 5 to 7 million dollars.

¹ A. Reuben, M. L. Elliott, W. C. Abraham, J. Broadbent, R. M. Houts, D. Ireland, A. R. Knodt, R. Poulton, S. Ramrakha, A. R. Hariri, A. Caspi, T. E. Moffitt, Association of childhood lead exposure with MRI measurements of structural brain integrity in midlife. JAMA 324, 1970–1979 (2020).

By Jordan Martinez.

Since working with the Center for Health, Environment, and Justice, I have met and worked with Jami Wallace, President of the Unity Council for the East Palestine Train Derailment. I have found working with both Stephen Lester and Jami Wallace rewarding and impactful. As I got to learn about Jami, I also learned more about the tragic derailment and the health and policy issues her and her community have been facing, even a year after the event. I had heard about the EP train derailment in the news when it happened. However, after working with Jami, I’ve quickly realized the gravity of the situation and the prevalence of chemically impacted communities.

My interest in environmental health started from another one of my interests: neuroscience. I’m a student at Tufts University studying biopsychology, and the interactions between the brain and the environment are interesting to me. One week while participating in a journal club, I read a paper on Gulf War Illnesses, which are hypothesized to be caused by chemical exposure to sarin nerve gas on U.S. soldiers during the war. This got me interested in environmental causes of neurological disease. This interest was further fueled by Stephen Lester, after a visit to my university, where he talked about his experience working in Love Canal with Louis Gibbs. It’s a pleasure to now work alongside him.

In my work with Stephen, I create digestible science communication papers for residents in East Palestine, based on scientific research I find online. So far I have written about the environmental and health effects of burning lithium ion electric vehicle batteries, and I am currently writing about the effects of burning semolina, a type of wheat used to make pasta, couscous, and sweet puddings. Lithium batteries and semolina were purported to be in some of the train cars that caught on fire after the derailment, so writing these articles has helped answer questions for the residents of East Palestine about the toxic chemicals involved in their exposure.

For Jami and the residents of East Palestine, I’ve helped gather chemically impacted communities from around the country for the inaugural Chemically Impacted Communities’ Coalition meeting. I did research on chemically impacted communities worldwide, and from my research and reaching out to affected communities, I realized that two things each of these communities had in common was frustration due to a lack of being heard and exhaustion from the work they’ve been doing. After the first successful meeting, Jami, the Unity Council team and I have been working on a mission statement and getting the impacted communities together for a second meeting. However, while Jami seeks the support of other communities, she also fights a battle at home. She’s fighting a battle against corporate greed, which has influenced the government and politics of her area, minimized the real harm done to her community, and acted as a barrier to the work she’s doing for the community. It’s a challenge getting information out to government officials. When President Biden visited 2 weeks ago, even getting a letter out to him proved to be a challenge. But change is being made, even if it is a long process. And Jami and I have learned a lot from each other along the way.

By Leila Waid.

Planetary health is a term used to define how human activity impacts the environment and, in turn, how those environmental changes impact human health. Utilizing a planetary health framework is essential for environmental health organizing because it uses a holistic approach to understanding the world and our place within it. The Planetary Health approach showcases that protecting our environment is not something we should do because it is simply the right thing, but we need to do it for our preservation and well-being. 

The air we breathe is littered with pollution from fossil-fuel industries. Even antibiotic resistance, a major emerging public health threat, has connections to air pollution. For example, a study found that PM_2.5 (particulates in the air smaller than a strand of hair) contain antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Shockingly, the study found that “the magnitude of the contribution of PM_2.5 to aggregate antibiotic resistance is greater than that of antibiotic use.”

Our waterways are full of plastics and PFAS, a group of forever chemicals that bioaccumulate in the body. The fish we consume are saturated with methylmercury due to humanmade activity, such as coal mining that dumps excess mercury into the waterways. And we keep pumping greenhouse gases into the environment, which causes warming and a disbalance in our delicate climate system. Interestingly, even the knowledge that we are driving the deterioration of the natural world causes stress and other mental health issues – a phenomenon coined “eco-anxiety.” On the other hand, being in nature does wonders for our mental health, such as decreasing anxiety and depression. 

So, what can be done? How can we keep our quality of life, with all our modern conveniences, while understanding that profound changes must be made to preserve the ecological world and our health? Two public health experts, Tong and Bambrick, weigh in on this issue in a peer-reviewed article, in which they provide four suggestions.

According to Tong and Bambrick, we first need to address the root cause of climate change globally and utilize different approaches based on regional and national contexts. Second, we must address environmental justice at all levels, from international to hyper-local. Third, we must understand that the entire world is interconnected, and we live in a “global village.” Our air and waterways do not have national boundaries, and the air pollution on one side of the world can eventually reach your backyard. Nowhere was this more apparent than the summer of 2023 on the east coast of the U.S. when the Canadian wildfire plume traveled south and made the air unbearably smoggy. The fourth, and final, suggestion states that we must take collective action at an international level. After all, these are not issues that one individual or country can tackle. Instead, we need to reimagine our way of life that is focused on being connected to our environment, respecting our limited natural resources, and protecting human health.

Planetary health lays out the vicious cycle that modern humans face. We have built our way of life not in tandem with the natural world but in its exclusion. And as a result, we face the health consequences of those choices.