Filed under: Environmental Issues
National Geographic- SODIS Solution Posted: 13 May 2010 01:00 PM PDTSo, I’m a total nerd. Every year for Christmas the only gift I request of my husband is to renew my subscription to National Geographic.While finding clean water to support the population of Sub-Saharan Africa is an ongoing problem, in 2006 Ibelatha Mhelela, the principal at a primary school in Tanzania, implemented a simple solution.Turns out, even if people live nowhere near a clean source of water, as long as they have plastic bottles they can CREATE clean water. It’s known as the SODIS program. Basically, you peel the label off any plastic water bottle and fill it with standing water, as long as the water isn’t completely brown. Then place the bottle on top of a metal surface (for better heat conductivity) and leave it alone. Within six hours, the UVA radiation will kill parasites, bacteria and other harmful elements in the water, making it safe to drink.And don’t worry, Snopes assures me that it perfectly safe to drink water from bottles that have been left in the sun.
Filed under: Food and it's Impact on Our Health
ScienceDaily (May 12, 2010) — Is breast milk so different from infant formula? The ability to track which genes are operating in an infant’s intestine has allowed University of Illinois scientists to compare the early development of breast-fed and formula-fed babies. They say the difference is very real.
Breast milk induces genetic pathways that are quite different from those in formula-fed infants, new research has found. (Credit: iStockphoto/Oleg Kozlov)
"For the first time, we can see that breast milk induces genetic pathways that are quite different from those in formula-fed infants. Although formula makers have tried to develop a product that’s as much like breast milk as possible, hundreds of genes were expressed differently in the breast-fed and formula-fed groups," said Sharon Donovan, a U of I professor of nutrition.
Although both breast-fed and formula-fed babies gain weight and seem to develop similarly, scientists have known for a long time that breast milk contains immune-protective components that make a breast-fed infant’s risk lower for all kinds of illnesses, she said.
"The intestinal tract of the newborn undergoes marked changes in response to feeding. And the response to human milk exceeds that of formula, suggesting that the bioactive components in breast milk are important in this response," she noted.
"What we haven’t known is how breast milk protects the infant and particularly how it regulates the development of the intestine," she said.
Understanding those differences should help formula makers develop a product that is more like the real thing, she said. The scientists hope to develop a signature gene or group of genes to use as a biomarker for breast-fed infants.
Many of the differences found by the scientists were in fundamental genes that regulate the development of the intestine and provide immune defense for the infant.
In this small proof-of-concept study, Donovan used a new technique patented by Texas A&M colleague Robert Chapkin to examine intestinal gene expression in 22 healthy infants — 12 breast-fed, 10 formula-fed.
The technique involved isolating intestinal cells shed in the infants’ stools, then comparing the expression of different genes between the two groups. Mothers in the study collected fecal samples from their babies at one, two, and three months of age. Scientists were then able to isolate high-quality genetic material, focusing on the RNA to get a gene expression or signature.
Donovan said that intestinal cells turn over completely every three days as billions of cells are made, perform their function, and are exfoliated. Examining the shed cells is a noninvasive way to examine intestinal health and see how nutrition affects intestinal development in infants.
Understanding early intestinal development is important for many reasons, she said.
"An infant’s gut has to adapt very quickly. A new baby is coming out of a sterile environment, having received all its nutrients intravenously through the placenta. At that point, babies obviously must begin eating, either mother’s milk or formula.
"They also start to become colonized with bacteria, so it’s very important that the gut learns what’s good and what’s bad. The baby’s body needs to be able to recognize a bad bacteria or a bad virus and fight it, but it also needs to recognize that even though a food protein is foreign, that protein is okay and the body doesn’t want to develop an immune response to it," she said.
If anything goes wrong at this stage, babies can develop food allergies, inflammatory bowel disease, and even asthma. "We’re very interested in frequent sampling at this early period of development," she added.
Donovan also would like to learn how bacteria in the gut differ in formula- and breast-fed babies, and this technique should make that possible. "Now we’ll be able to get a complete picture of what’s happening in an infant — from the composition of the diet to the microbes in the gut and the genes that are activated along the way."
Of potential clinical importance: The gene expressed most often in breast-fed infants is involved in the cell’s response to oxygen deprivation. Lack of oxygen is a factor in the development of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), a kind of gangrene of the intestine that can be fatal in premature babies. NEC is a leading cause of disease and death in neonatal intensive care units, with a reported 2,500 cases occurring annually in the United States and a mortality rate of 26 percent.
The study will appear in the June 2010 issue of the American Journal of Physiology, Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology. Co-authors are Robert S. Chapkin, Chen Zhao, Ivan Ivanov, Laurie A. Davidson, Jennifer S. Goldsby, Joanne R. Lupton, and Edward R. Dougherty, all of Texas A&M University, Rose Ann Mathai and Marcia H. Monaco of the U of I, and Deshanie Rai and W. Michael Russell of Mead Johnson Nutrition. The study was funded by Mead Johnson Nutrition.
Filed under: Food and it's Impact on Our Health, Non-Toxic Choices, Nourishment
Hoo boy. The American Beverage Association isn’t going to like this news one bit. Food companies now add significant amounts of phosphates to soda and other processed foods. And now researchers have found evidence that phosphates may accelerate aging (via Science Daily):
High phosphate levels may also increase the prevalence and severity of age-related complications, such as chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular calcification, and can also induce severe muscle and skin atrophy.
"Humans need a healthy diet and keeping the balance of phosphate in the diet may be important for a healthy life and longevity," said M. Shawkat Razzaque, M.D., Ph.D., from the Department of Medicine, Infection and Immunity at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine. "Avoid phosphate toxicity and enjoy a healthy life."
"Soda is the caffeine delivery vehicle of choice for millions of people worldwide, but comes with phosphorous as a passenger" said Gerald Weissmann, M.D., Editor-in-Chief of the FASEB Journal. "This research suggests that our phosphorous balance influences the aging process, so don’t tip it."
This has nothing to do with sweeteners, food coloring or any other previously established badness associated with soda and processed food — it’s a "new and improved" risk.
And what, pray tell, are these phosphates doing there in the first place? According to other scientists, food companies starting adding them at high levels only in the last 20 years:
…[W]hile a moderate level of phosphate plays an essential role in living organisms, the rapidly increasing use of phosphates as a food additive has resulted in significantly higher levels in average daily diets. Phosphates are added to many food products to increase water retention and improve food texture.
"In the 1990s, phosphorous-containing food additives contributed an estimated 470 mg per day to the average daily adult diet," he said. "However, phosphates are currently being added much more frequently to a large number of processed foods, including meats, cheeses, beverages, and bakery products. As a result, depending on individual food choices, phosphorous intake could be increased by as much as 1000 mg per day."
"Increase water retention and improve food texture"?! That’s worth shaving years off our lives for sure! We’re all lab rats now.
The Design of Everyday Life > Allison Arieff on April 29, 2010 at 5:00 am PDT
Between the economic meltdown and the push for green buildings, saving energy, water and money in your home is more popular than ever. Fortunately, greening your home doesn’t have to be time consuming or expensive. We caught up with Eric Corey Freed, principal of Organic Architect, and author of the new book, Green$ense for the Home. Here’s his list of nine simple things anyone—renters and homeowners alike—can do in their homes today.
1. Change your light bulbs already! How many environmentalists does it take to change a light bulb? There are several answers to this joke (none of them that funny), but the real answer is: “all of them.” In your home, lighting accounts for nearly 30 percent of all electricity use. By using compact fluorescent bulbs, you can cut lighting costs by 30 to 60 percent, while improving the quality of the light and reducing environmental impact at the same time.
2. Convince your toilet to use less water. More water is consumed per person in the United States than in any other country. More than a quarter of all of the water used inside the home is flushed down the toilet, which is, literally, a waste. The toilet is the single largest user of clean drinking water inside the home, and it is also the easiest place to conserve water. Before you run out and replace your existing toilets, there are simple and effective things you can do to trick your old toilet to use less water, from flush adapters to flusher adjustments and tank tricks. And when the time comes to replace your working toilets, make sure you buy a low-flow or dual-flush model.
3. Use less water in the shower. Showers add up to nearly 20 percent of all indoor water usage and are the largest users of hot water. By simply installing a low-flow showerhead, you can save up to 4,000 gallons of water annually, and for every gallon of hot water you save, that’s gas or electricity you don’t need to use to heat it. If your average shower is 10 minutes long, upgrading your old showerheads to a low-flow model will save 25 to 55 gallons of water for every shower you take, and potentially shave 30 percent off utility bills!
4. Keep vampires at bay. In the average home, 75 percent of the electricity used to power home electronics—cable boxes, DVD players, video games, stereos—is consumed while the products are turned off. That’s money that could stay in your pocket. If something is plugged into the wall—a TV, a cellphone charger, an appliance- even if it’s not on, it draws electricity. We call this demand of energy “phantom loads” or, more appropriately, “vampire loads,” since they suck energy. While the amount of power used is relatively small, they can add up to more than 10 percent of your electricity bill.
There are several simple ways to slay vampire loads: Unplug any appliance with a standby light. Get a power strip for appliances, and flip the switch off when not needed. Or, consider Smart Strips, which sense when power is being drawn and shut off automatically—as simple to install as a regular strip, and you don’t need to worry about vampire loads ever again.
5. Install a programmable thermostat. A programmable thermostat operates only during the times you set. For example, a programmable thermostat could lower the heat at 10 p.m. every night, when you’re bundled under the covers in bed. It could also be programmed to return the room to a more comfortable temperature 30 minutes before you wake up. The average household spends more than $2,000 a year on energy bills—nearly half of which goes to heating and cooling. You can save $150 a year just by properly setting a programmable thermostat. Once set correctly, a programmable thermostat can cut your heating and cooling bills by 20 percent to 30 percent annually.
6. Put a coat on your hot water heater. If your home is like most, hot water is produced in a hot water heater. This large tank usually sits in a garage, closet, or basement and slowly heats up a vat of water, and keeps it hot all day and night. Nearly 20 percent of all of the energy used in the home goes just to the water heater, making it the second-largest energy user in homes after heating and cooling. Insulating a water heater tank reduces the heat losses by 25 percent to 45 percent. This translates into as much as a 9 percent savings in total energy usage. If everyone in the U.S. insulated their hot water heaters, nearly 11 billion kilowatt-hours of that energy would be saved—enough to power 11.9 million homes in a year.
7. Weatherize windows. The largest source of energy loss in your home is your windows. If you add up the area of all of the cracks and leaks around the windows of your home, it would total about the size of an entire window. Installing new windows can solve much of this problem, but that can be a big job. Simply weatherizing—sealing the cracks and leaks around your windows and exterior doors—can have an immediate impact on your energy savings and can be completed in an afternoon.
Purchase only caulking with low or zero Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). Figure that six to eight tubes at a total cost of no more than $65 should be enough to seal a 3,000-square-foot house with 15 to 20 windows.
8. Install a solar powered clothes dryer: a clothesline. Today, 80 percent of households have a washer and dryer, but this convenience comes at a price. Electric clothes dryers eat up 10 percent of a home’s energy. Each load of laundry gives off around 5.6 pounds of carbon dioxide per load. That adds up to more than 2,000 pounds of CO2 a year just from drying clothes. A solar-powered clothes dryer is a smart and highly energy efficient way to dry your clothes. Also known as a “clothesline,” this idea has been around for centuries and provides an affordable, easy alternative to the high cost of clothes-drying convenience.
9. Compost and recycle. The average American produces 4.6 pounds of trash a day, which totals up to 251.3 million tons a year. Landfills pollute our water, take up enormous amounts of space, and (surprise) no one wants to live near them. Most people don’t realize the biggest problem with landfills is the emissions they generate, namely methane and carbon dioxide gas, which contribute to global warming. By composting and recycling, we can reduce the trash in landfills and do long-lasting good for our environment.
Recycling and composting require nothing except the desire to do it. Contact your local trash pickup company and request a free recycling bin (you may also be able to get a free compost bin). While not every town recycles, many do and will have specific rules for how to separate the items.
Each of these steps will pay for themselves in less than a year. Plus you’ll rest easy knowing you are doing your part for our environment.
This post originally appeared on www.refresheverything.
Post from Grist.
