|
IN THIS ISSUE:
In February EPA issued “American’s Children and the Environment:
Measures of Contaminants, Body Burdens, and Illnesses.” The report
documents trends in children’s environmental health from exposure
to pesticides, air pollutants, and land and drinking water contaminants
that contribute to cancer, neurodevelopmental disorders, and asthma and
other respiratory illnesses. The report notes continued reductions in
children’s blood lead levels as identified by CDC’s Second
National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals and modest
reductions in exposure to air pollutants and drinking water contaminants.
A special feature on lead in California schools noted that 32% of public
elementary schools contained lead hazards from deteriorated lead-based
paint. Drinking water tests in schools indicated elevated lead levels
ranging between 6.5% to 15%, and 7% of schools had hazardous levels of
lead in soil.
In 2001, almost 9% of children (6.3 million) were reported to have asthma
and about 6% had experienced an asthma attack in the previous 12 months.
The percentage of children with asthma doubled between 1980 and 1995 from
3.6% to 7.5%. African-American children living below the poverty level
experience a higher number of asthma attacks, when compared with both
White and Hispanic children. Asthma and other respiratory illnesses contributed
to 369 per 10,000 emergency room visits by children in 1992 and 379 per
10,000 in 1999.
Food samples with detectable pesticide residue ranged between 19% and
29% between 1994 and 2001, with the lowest rate occurring in 2001. Rates
of childhood cancers were reported as remaining stable since 1990. During
1975-1998, childhood death from cancer decreased from 51 to 28 deaths
per million children. Visit EPA’s website at www.epa.gov/envirohealth/children
to obtain a copy of the report or call 1-800-490-9198 or (513) 489-8190.
CDC announced on March 7 that Dr. Mary Jean Brown will become the chief
of their Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch this June. The CDC announcement
noted that “Dr. Brown brings with her a wealth of experience in
the field of maternal and child health and is a nationally renowned expert
in the field of childhood lead poisoning and its prevention.” From
1982 to 1989, Dr. Brown was the Public Health Nursing Coordinator for
the Massachusetts Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program and from
1990 to 1996 she was Assistant Director of the Massachusetts Program.
Currently, she is Assistant Professor, Department of Maternal and Child
Health at Harvard University School of Public Health. She also is a member
of the Board of Directors of the National Center for Healthy Housing and
serves on the Massachusetts Governor's Committee for Childhood Lead Poisoning.
Dr. Brown has published several articles on childhood lead poisoning,
including a 2001 report entitled “Small Area Analysis of Risk for
Childhood Lead Poisoning” (see www.afhh.org/res/res_pubs/saa.pdf).
On March 13, Common Cause New York and lead poisoning prevention advocates
in New York City released a report documenting $161,560 in campaign contributions
since 1996 to members of the New York City Council from members of real
estate trade associations that oppose a pending lead poisoning prevention
bill. The report documented that contributions were skewed heavily toward
17 of the 19 Council members who were not sponsors of the bill, known
as Intro 101. After the report was released, two more Council members
joined 34 previously declared co-sponsors, creating a veto-proof majority
in support of the bill. Also following the release of the report, the
Council Speaker scheduled the first public hearing on the bill for June
23 after failing to do so for a year. The report noted that the Speaker,
who was not a sponsor of the bill, had received $35,950 from the trade
groups plus another $67,000 from others connected to the industry.
Intro 101 would define lead contaminated dust as a hazard; require worker
safety, training, and certification when lead paint hazards are corrected;
provide financial assistance to help small landlords identify and correct
lead paint hazards before children are exposed; and require the city’s
Housing Department to identify and inspect buildings where children are
at risk because of a landlord's record of poor maintenance. The report
is available at www.commoncause.org/states/newyork/03_leadreport.pdf.
For more information, contact Matthew Chachere of Northern Manhattan Improvement
Association, MatthewChachere@nmic.org.
Rhode Island’s new lead law, which was passed in June 2002, tasked
the Rhode Island Housing Resources Commission (HRC) with developing a
four year Comprehensive Strategic Plan as a roadmap for implementation
in six areas: lead education, lead programs, financing of lead mitigation
and abatement, enforcement, coordination of efforts, and assessing the
availability of lead liability insurance. To assist in plan development,
HRC contracted with the National Center for Healthy Housing. Over the
past two months, the Center has worked closely with HRC to interview stakeholders
and develop a draft plan. On March 18, various stakeholders provided feedback
on the draft plan at an all day workshop in Providence. The Center and
HRC’s Strategic Plan Committee are working on the final plan, which
will be completed by the end of April 2003. This plan may provide a helpful
template for other states that are developing strategic plans.
On March 28, the Chicago Department of Public Health convened its first
ever Citywide Summit To End Childhood Lead Poisoning. More than 150 individuals
participated, representing a broad spectrum of government agencies, private
sector interests, public health experts and advocates, and community organizations.
This Summit was a major step towards developing a blueprint for ending
lead poisoning in Chicago, which has more lead poisoning cases than any
other city. Staff from Loyola University of Chicago’s ChildLaw Center
provided support in developing briefing papers and facilitating breakout
sessions, which tackled policy and program issues in four areas: Leveraging
Dollars for Making Housing Lead-Safe; Fostering Compliance with Lead-Safe
Housing Practices; Increasing Identification of Children with Elevated
Blood Lead Levels; and Putting Childhood Lead Poisoning on Decisionmakers’
Radar Screen. As it takes shape, Chicago’s plan may offer a helpful
template for other cities and states that are developing strategic plans.
The Alliance and the National Center are organizing a strategic planning
workshop for state and local agency leaders and local advocates on Thursday
morning, May 15, as part of the Indoor Environmental Health and Technology
Conference in New Orleans. Representatives from Rhode Island and Chicago
will be participating in this panel to share their experiences and insights.
For conference registration information, visit www.leadmoldconferences.com.
In this year’s FY 2003 childhood lead poisoning prevention grants
announcement, CDC established requirements for all lead poisoning prevention
grantees to develop a strategic plan outlining efforts to eliminate childhood
lead poisoning in their respective jurisdictions or states. Strategic
plans must be submitted to CDC by June 2004. Drawing on the experience
of jurisdictions across the country, the Alliance has developed a paper
for health department staff and advocates. “Making Lead-Safe Housing
the Central Focus of Strategic Plans to Eliminate Childhood Lead Poisoning”
is intended to assist in the development of ambitious yet realistic plans
that build new constituencies for prevention. The Alliance believes that
developing a strategic plan offers jurisdictions the opportunity to target
highest risk neighborhoods and properties, apply lessons learned from
other cities, build political will for primary prevention, and develop
innovative financing sources. The guidance is available on the Alliance’s
website at www.afhh.org/res/res_pubs/Strategic%20Planning%20Guidance%20Final.pdf.
On April 4, EPA’s New England regional office announced the availability
of funding for the Healthy Communities Grant Program, a new initiative
to improve environmental health. Projects must impact at least one of
the four Target Investment Areas (environmental justice areas of potential
concern, places with high risk from toxic air pollution, urban areas,
and/or sensitive populations) and “achieve measurable environmental
and public health results in one or more of the eight Target Program Areas.”
The target program areas are asthma, capacity-building on environmental
and public health issues, community air toxics, healthy indoor environments,
healthy schools, preserving and restoring urban natural resources and
Open/green space, urban development and redevelopment, and urban transportation
and mobility. Grant amounts range from $5,000 to $30,000 for one to two
year periods, starting on October 1, 2003. Non-profit organizations, government
agencies, K-12 schools and school districts, and tribes throughout New
England are eligible to apply. Applications from colleges and universities
will be considered only if they support “substantial community involvement.”
A one-page summary of the proposed project is required no later than April
25, 2003. If selected, a full application will be invited. Telephone information
sessions will be held on April 14 and 15 from 9-11 a.m. and 1-3 p.m. Advance
registration is required for telephone sessions. For the grant announcement
visit www.epa.gov/region1/grants/healthycommunities.html
or contact Sandra Padula, 617-918-1797.
The Community Environmental Health Resource Center (CEHRC) has made
available more Spanish language materials via its website (www.cehrc.org).
Newly translated materials include a Resident Agreement and factsheets
available in the section “Exposing Health Hazards in Housing.”
Also available are Spanish translations of more hazard assessment tools
including sampling instructions, checklists, and reports for lead, cockroaches,
radon, visual survey, and the sampling results report. These materials,
developed with community groups and residents of high-risk communities
interested in sampling for environmental hazards in their homes, can be
found in “Tools for Detecting Hazards.” Feedback on CEHRC’s
materials and translations is always welcomed (cehrc@afhh.org).
An article published in the February 2003 issue of Environmental Health
Perspectives documents the high cost of environmental clean-up of lead
hazards after improper paint removal. “The High Cost of Improper
Removal of Lead-Based Paint from Housing: A Case Report,” (Vol.
111, No. 2) by David E. Jacobs, Howard Mielke, and Nancy Pavur “highlights
the need to incorporate lead safe work practices into routine repainting,
remodeling, and other renovation and maintenance jobs that may disturb
lead-based paint.” The article discusses a 2001 case of clean-up
from uncontained exterior power sanding of a New Orleans home built in
1925. The power sanding occurred over a period of six weeks and produced
interior and exterior dust wipe samples 5-10 times higher than the established
federal guideline for hazardous levels of lead in paint, dust and soil.
The family’s three children were hospitalized and their Labrador
retriever died due a blood lead level of 177 µg/dL. The family completed
much of the clean-up work themselves and spent over $195,000 in out-of-pocket
expenses, including medical expenses. A new contractor was hired to complete
the work in a lead-safe manner, after the previous painting contractor
abandoned the job. The article’s abstract is available at http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2003/5761/abstract.html.
A recent study authored by Ellen R. Tohn, Sherry L. Dixon, Jonathan
W. Wilson, and Warren A. Galke evaluated the efficacy of a one-time professional
cleaning in reducing hazards from deteriorated lead-based paint and dust
in residential homes. “An Evaluation of One-Time Professional Cleaning
in Homes with Lead-Based Paint Hazards,” measured dust lead loadings
in 37 units with deteriorated lead-based paint and dust lead hazards prior
to and immediately after a one-time professional cleaning and again in
six-months, and at one-, two- and three-years. The cleaning was found
to effectively reduce the presence of lead hazards on floors, windowsills,
and window troughs in the units when measured immediately after the cleaning.
When dust lead loadings were measured again in six months and at 1 year
following the cleaning, the reduction in hazards did not persist. In both
cases, dust lead loading levels returned to post intervention levels.
The study published in the Journal of Applied and Occupational Hygiene
(Vol. 18, No. 2, 138-143) concluded that a single professional cleaning,
without hazard remediation, is not effective in eliminating lead hazards.
The article notes that specialized cleaning for lead dust offers immediate
benefits as a short-term emergency response. An abstract for the study
is available online at http://www.centerforhealthyhousing.org/html/evaluation_of_one-time_profess.htm.
A study in the March 26, 2003 issue of the Journal of the American Medical
Association (Vol. 289, No. 12) evaluates the link between lead exposure
and increased hypertension in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.
“Blood Lead, Blood Pressure, and Hypertension in Perimenopausal
and Postmenopausal Women,” by Denis Nash, et al. concluded that
increased blood lead levels were associated with increased blood pressure
and hypertension in women aged 40 to 59 years. This occurrence was strongest
in postmenopausal women. The study evaluated the blood lead levels and
blood pressure rates of 2,165 women aged 40 to 59 years who had taken
part in NHANES III during the years 1988-1994. An abstract for the article
is available online at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/12/1523.
|
