Dioxin levels and EPA recommendations

[Guest guest]

To my fellow listers. . . (sorry, it's long).

Once again, the government is aware, but not taking correct action.

Their solution is to tell women not to eat the food, while not

providing alternatives; and not addressing the true problem. This is

Public Health Education right out of Harry Potter (where's Creech??). I

find it truly fun to be enjoying the benefits of a broad, reasoned

approach and experiencing the benefit of animal fats FROM HEALTHY

SOURCES. ( & passing it on)

A similar issue is taking place here in Durham, though on a much

smaller scale. There is a local, exceedingly well meaning citizen

action group working to reduce lead levels in kids (a laudable

intention). No one has asked how much the addition of adequate levels

of Vitamin D from healthy animal fats would address the problem, as

most of these kids with symptoms have very low levels of lead, but seem

to be unable to detox.

Ken

Kaisernetwork.org: Young Women, Children Should Eat Foods Lower in

Animal-Fat Dioxins, IOM Study Says

From:

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=18582

Young Women, Children Should Eat Foods Lower in Animal-Fat Dioxins, IOM

Study Says

The government should encourage everyone -- especially young women and

children --- to reduce the amount of dioxins in their diet by

decreasing their consumption of meat, whole milk and other foods high

in animal fat, according to an Institute of Medicine report released

today, the Los Angeles Times reports (Gest, Los Angeles Times, 7/2).

Dioxins, which are harmful residues of natural and industrial

combustion, have been linked to cancer and other health problems, and

can be passed through the placenta to fetuses and through breastmilk to

infants, according to the New York Times (Olson, New York Times, 7/2).

The IOM panel that wrote the report said, " Since fetuses and infants

are especially sensitive to the effects of toxic compounds, one part of

the government's action plan should be an effort to reduce girls' and

women's exposure to dioxins in foods during the years well before

childbearing, so that less of these compounds accumulate in their

bodies and are passed through the placenta and breastmilk " (Washington

Post, 7/2). The report also found that Environmental Protection Agency

regulations set in the 1970s have reduced by 76% the level of dioxins

in the environment (Weise, USA Today, 7/2). However, the EPA reported

Monday that dioxin levels increased to 328 pounds in 2001, from 220

pounds in 2000, the AP/Newport News Daily Press reports.

Recommendations

The report recommends that the government partner with food makers and

farmers to create a plan to reduce dioxins in food, reduce the amount

of dioxins in animal feed and grasses, establish a database to track

dioxin exposure and research the effects of dioxins on fetuses and

breastfeeding infants (Gersema, AP/Newport News Daily Press, 7/1). The

report also recommends that the National School Lunch Program and the

Special Supplement Food Program for Women, Infants and Children should

" increase the availability of foods low in animal fat " ; however, this

recommendation excludes children younger than two years old. Dr.

Lawrence, associate dean of s Hopkins University Bloomberg

School of Public Health and chair of the IOM panel, said that the panel

did not recommend a particular level for dioxin intake in part because

the current test's cost makes it too expensive to measure dioxin levels

in food, the New York Times reports (New York Times, 7/2). Lawrence

also said that the group " did not want to get ahead of the federal

agencies that would have to implement " regulations, the Los Angeles

Times reports. , a member of the IOM panel, said that the

next step would be a risk-assessment process created by the EPA, which

has regulatory responsibility for dioxins (Los Angeles Times, 7/2).

said, " We're trying to walk a fine, balanced line. It's worth

reducing exposure for a lot of reasons, but we don't want to scare

mothers into not breastfeeding " (USA Today, 7/2).

[Guest guest]

>>>>To my fellow listers. . . (sorry, it's long).

Once again, the government is aware, but not taking correct action.

Their solution is to tell women not to eat the food, while not

providing alternatives; and not addressing the true problem. This is

Public Health Education right out of Harry Potter (where's Creech??).

----->ken, my mom clipped an editorial from a local newspaper about this

report and its recommendations. she made a similar point...the government

now wants us to reduce our consumption of foods that are contaminated with

pollutants that they continue to allow to be pumped into the environment,

instead of eliminating the pollution! taking that approach to it's extreme,

we might as well just stop *eating*.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/11/03 8:34:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

s.fisher22@... writes:

> ----->ken, my mom clipped an editorial from a local newspaper about this

> report and its recommendations. she made a similar point...the government

> now wants us to reduce our consumption of foods that are contaminated with

> pollutants that they continue to allow to be pumped into the environment,

> instead of eliminating the pollution! taking that approach to it's extreme,

> we might as well just stop *eating*.

This is just like the issue of trans fats. Someone else pointed out on the

list that they admit there's *no* safe level, yet they are not banned! They

couldn't get the NAS to reccomend *any* safe level because they said they have

adverse effects at every possible dose. With heavy metals and other pollutants

there are maximum levels established, and no food manufacture would get away

with adding lead to give a pastry body.

Yet they want to say to limit your intake.

Chris