In Canada There Is More Autism Where Vaccine Coverage Is Highest

Rates of autism continue to increase worldwide. An estimated 1 in 66 children are in the spectrum (0.0151515152%). Canada reported in March of this year that autism as of 2015 affect 1.52% of youth, putting Canada among the “top ten” for autism among developed nations.

The World Mercury Project reports that there is more autism in regions where vaccine coverage is most prevalent.

What might explain the variation in ASD prevalence within Canada’s borders? … autism prevalence is highest in the Canadian provinces that also have the highest vaccination coverage.”

ASD prevalence by province and territory

NASS gathers data from the health, education, and social services sectors for youth aged 5-17 years who have a confirmed autism spectrum disorder (ASD) diagnosis. Six provinces (British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Quebec) and one territory (Yukon) provided the data for 2015. ASD prevalence in 2015 was highest in Newfoundland and Labrador (1 in 57), Prince Edward Island (1 in 59) and Quebec (1 in 65). Prevalence was lower in the Yukon territory (1 in 125). See chart:

Autism prevalence is highest in the Canadian provinces that have the highest vaccination coverage. A 2013 survey, also done by the Public Health Agency of Canada, examined vaccine coverage by province/territory and type of vaccine. Newfoundland/Labrador and Quebec had five to fifteen percent higher vaccination rates than in Yukon.

For more on this check out Official Canadian Data Show That There Is More Autism in Regions Where Vaccine Coverage Is Highest

Recommended:
Sources:


Hawaii Approves Bill Banning Sunscreen That Harm Coral Reefs

Hawaii just became the first state to pass a bill banning the sale of sunscreen containing the chemicals oxybenzone and octinoxate, which scientists say harm coral reefs. The Hawaiian Coral Reef stretches for more than 2000 kilometers in the Central Pacific and is a major part of Hawaii’s tourism economy. It also accounts for nearly 85 percent of all coral reefs in the United States. Scientists have found that sunscreens with these chemicals cause coral bleaching when washed off in the ocean, and make the reefs more susceptible to viral infections. The chemicals are not biodegradable, so they remain in the water long after the coral has died.

The Hawaii sunscreen bill now awaits the signature of the governor. If signed, the new rules should go into effect Jan. 1, 2021.

Amazingly, this is a first-in-the-world law. So, Hawaii is definitely on the cutting edge by banning these dangerous chemicals in sunscreens.” – State Sen. Mike Gabbard, who introduced the bill

Craig Downs is a scientist who wrote a 2015 peer-examined study which concluded that oxybenzone threatened coral reefs. He estimated that 14,000 tons of sunscreen is rinsed off into the in oceans every year, with the greatest damage found in reef areas in Hawaii and the Caribbean islands. Downs stated,

We have lost at least 80 percent of the coral reefs in the Caribbean. Any small effort to reduce oxybenzone pollution could mean that a coral reef survives a long, hot summer, or that a degraded area recovers. Everyone wants to build coral nurseries for reef restoration, but this will achieve little if the factors that originally killed off the reef remain or intensify in the environment.”

Downs also said,

Hawaii’s reefs have been slowly dying over the past 20 years, and that death spiral has been accelerating with the impact of an El Niño-induced mass bleaching events and increased local pollution impacts from both tourism and development. Everyone has come together to support this legislation, from local nurses and doctors, to resorts and airlines, as well as the entrepreneurial spirit of new sunscreen companies to supply reef-safer products.”

Sunscreen manufacturers already sell “reef-friendly” sunscreen, and companies have plenty if time to sell products that contain the two chemicals since the ban will not take effect until January 2021.

Of course, many sunscreen manufacturers, including Bayer, the maker of Coppertone, and the state’s major doctors group, feel the ban goes too far. Many are calling for more studies to be done. The American Chemistry Council also opposed the bill. Sharon Har was one of four Hawaiian lawmakers who voted against the bill. She stated,

It’s a feel good measure. Yes, we must protect the environment — it is our number one resource — but at the end of the day, studies have pointed to global warming, human contact, coastal development” as other significant threats to coral.

She’s right about other factors being an issue. Sunscreen isn’t the only enemy of coral reefs. Other pollutants known to be causing harm to the reefs include agricultural runoff and sewage dumping. Global warming is also causing reef degradation. But we feel, and many environmentalist groups agree, this is at least a step in the right direction.

Reef-safe sunscreen alternatives like TropicSport and Raw Elements use zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. These ingredients are “non-nano” in size, and many are believed to be healthier for the environment and for us humans as well. If they are below nano-particles, smaller than 100 nanometers, the creams can are ingested by the corals.

Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide sunscreens are still thought to generate free radicals when exposed to sunlight, which can attack the nuclei of skin cells and cause mutations, i.e. cancer. Check out Sunscreen Danders and Natural, Safe Sunscreen Options with Homemade Sunscreen Recipe for more information.

Recommended:
Sources:


Latex For Less Mattress Review

My wife and I sleep on a king size Zinus Responsive Memory Foam Mattress. It was cheap. After nearly one year the mattress has held up pretty well for the price we paid, a very reasonable $237.15. Today’s price is $374.99 at the time of this writing. It’s got a little bit of a ridge in the middle, a little bit of a dip on my side from supporting my 225-pound frame, with a much smaller dip on my wife’s side.

When we first got the mattress I noticed the smell. It wasn’t bad, but it did smell a little bit like chemicals. It could have been worse, but it certainly isn’t what I would call a healthy mattress.

I’m not complaining mind you. It was a great deal, and I think it’s going to last at least another two years before the dips become too deep. It’s certainly not a ten-year mattress, at my size, but I think most lighter humans would be very happy with such a purchase.

Our kids slept on a very old full-size mattress that we got for free. I won’t say how; let me just say that we cleaned it well, and it was old enough that it had done its off-gassing long ago. But the springs were starting to poke out, and our kids deserve better.

I wanted to get them a good mattress. I didn’t want to get them a new mattress made with all the toxic components that mattresses were made from, but we couldn’t afford the ones we have on Green Lifestyle Market. Yes, I own the store, but still, they’re expensive. They’re amazing, and we’ve had nothing but very happy customers, but we’re not well off. A full-size latex mattress at full price would be $2,602.00.

When I got an email from Patrick Gunther, Latex For Less Marketing Director, asking us if we’d like to try out a mattress, and keep it free of charge, I jumped at the chance. When he asked me what size I wanted, I must admit I tried really hard to justify giving the kids our mattress and ordering a new king for ourselves. As I pondered this possibility that night the dip in my mattress felt more like a ravine. But in the end, I decided to do the right thing. The king wouldn’t have even fit in our kids’ room. I ordered the full size.

We got the Latex For Less mattress. When the mattress arrived, it was in a huge box much like how our previous foam mattress had arrived, but with one massive difference. This thing was heavy! It took me a lot of effort getting it up the stairs! It’s a two person job for most. But even better than our foam mattress, when released from its cocoon it took perfect shape in moments as if it had never been wrapped as it were. And so I laid down. I kid you not, this is the nicest mattress I have ever laid down on. And I have tried a lot, including a latex one.

No odor. Perfect support. High-quality construction. It really is a great mattress. Normally my wife and I have very different taste in mattresses and what constitutes the right amount of give. But with this mattress, it feels like it supports me the exact right amount, and my two kids and my wife feel the same.

I take naps now.

In an effort to give a fair review, I took a nap in my kids’ room. I slept a little too well. And I am struggling not to make a habit out of it. I’m a busy guy, but that mattress calls to me!

The mattresses are made with 100% natural latex, 100% organic cotton, and 100% pure natural wool. They are made in America and they are affordably priced. At a little over a grand, my wife and I are saving for our own king-sized.

Our 100% all-natural latex mattress is 100% natural, botanical latex that is sustainably harvested from the Hevea Brasiliensis tree. It contains no chemicals and provides a buoyant, cloud-like sensation for the ultimate sleep experience.

They are made in America, and the mattress is reversible, “medium on one side and medium-firm on the other side.” We picked the firm side.

Flame retardants are a big problem with the mattress industry, but this company uses wool, a natural flame retardant, for the fire barrier. They offer a 120 day trial,

Unwind after a long day at work, or sleep in late on a lazy Saturday morning – enjoy full 90 days to experience the unsurpassed comfort of all-natural latex. And if you don’t absolutely love your Latex For Less mattress, we’ll pick it up and give you a full refund – no hassles.

I asked about the wool, and they said “Our 100% pure natural wool comes from the Woolgatherer Carding Mill in sunny California.

Woolgatherer follows wool through every stage from the pastures to the finished product. Their staff is meticulous about creating the best product possible and following industry-leading principles for sustainability and quality. In addition, they use high standards for purity and manage their flocks in a humane, chemical-free, and environmentally safe manner.

I will look into getting these mattresses in Green Lifestyle Market. In the meantime, check out Latex For Less.



Neonicotinoids Affect Hormone Production in Humans

Neonicotinoid pesticides are known worldwide for their negative effects on bee populations, but a new study finds that this popular agricultural chemical may also be responsible for elevated levels of a key enzyme in estrogen production. This is big and scary news, as these chemicals are in a huge portion of the food supply. Nearly a quarter of insecticides sold are neonicotinoids. The majority of corn grown in the United States is treated with these chemicals, and a third of all soybean fields have been treated with them. Neonicotinoids are causing serious health issues in bees and other pollinator populations, and research is confirming that what’s bad for the bees and birds is bad for us – in more ways than we had previously confirmed.

Pesticides, Estrogen, and Cancer

This new study focuses on an important enzyme in estrogen production, aromatase (also referred to as CYP19), and how the hormone process is influenced by neonicotinoids, specifically thiacloprid and imidacloprid (both manufactured by Bayer CropScience). Previous research has shown that neonicotinoids act as estrogen disruptors in newly emerged bees and winter bees. There hasn’t been much research exploring the link between these pesticides and human health, but Professor Sanderson and Ph.D. student Élyse Caron-Beaudoin from Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique in Quebec have now identified it as an endocrine disruptor. Discussing the study’s findings, Caron-Beaudoin says, “Endocrine disrupters are natural or synthetic molecules that can alter hormone function…They affect the synthesis, action, or elimination of natural hormones, which can lead to a wide variety of health effects.”

The enzyme in question, aromatase, turns androgens into estrogens. Aromatase levels are susceptible to environmental influences, and higher levels of the enzyme have been linked to unusually early puberty in girls and endocrine disorders boys. Increased aromatase has also been linked to cancer, and this is where Sanderson and Caron-Beaudoin make their most significant conclusion.

We demonstrated in vitro that neonicotinoids may stimulate a change in CYP19 promoter usage similar to that observed in patients with hormone-dependent breast cancer.”

Neonocontinoid Regulation Worldwide

The European Union is doing something about the harm caused by neonicotinoids, banning the use of the insecticide outside in the next six months. This is a more stringent ban than the previous measure, which prohibited the use of neonicotinoids on flowering crops that attract bees. It’s a step in the right direction and good news for European people and pollinators.

On the other side of the pond, the Environmental Protection Agency plans to wrap up an official review of the risk neonicotinoids pose to pollinators by the end of 2018. Studies suggesting the link between the insecticides and bee decline have been available since the 1990s, and evidence linking the two has only grown since then. Despite this, the current EPA is unlikely to find in favor of the bees. In contrast to the European ban on neonicotinoids, Americans will have to wait until the lobbies for almonds and other heavily bee-dependent crops are willing to spend more than Bayer.

A Complete Lack of Surprise

Hindsight can be frustrating, even to the point of rage sometimes. The EPA knew the decline of the bee population was a definite possibility, thanks to neonicotinoids. Yet they allowed the pesticides to move forward with no special dispensation. The current EPA, while extremely terrible, is of our own making. Big agricultural companies have set the stage for this, and they continue to call the shots. We know that these things are bad for us, but they are accepted as a cost of doing business. Well, guess what…the price keeps increasing. At point will we be unable to pay it?

Sources:


Massive Beef Recall for Plastic Contamination, Including Kroger Stores

More than 35,000 pounds of ground beef sold by North Carolina food processor JBS USA has been recalled after a consumer found hard, blue pieces of plastic in a package. The ground beef is in a variety of packages and distributed through Kroger locations in North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, Illinois and eastern West Virginia as well as Food 4 Less and Jay C stores located in the Midwest. Kroger spokeswoman Kristal Howard addressed the recall, saying that Kroger “verified that none of these products are in our stores today…We encourage customers to check their freezers for the potentially affected products and not to consume them but throw them away or return them to their place of purchase for a full refund.”

Related: Drinking Bottled Water Means Drinking Microplastics, According To Daming New Study

Meat Recalls in the U.S.

This is by no means the largest recall of meat with plastic bits this year.  In addition to the current recall, 60 tons of beef and 67 tons of Salisbury steak were recalled earlier in the month of April for plastic fragments and pieces of bone, respectively. The past two years, 2016 and 2017, saw the highest numbers of meat recalled for extraneous materials like plastics in the past decade. While those numbers can be partially attributed to massive single occurrence recalls, the fact remains that we are finding more plastic than ever in our food.

Related: How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors

Plastics Everywhere

This recall, coupled with the ongoing Romaine lettuce scare, make it seem like our food system is headed for an unpleasant awakening. The United States Department of Agriculture doesn’t even keep track of microplastics, a growing issue for seafood. Water is a fundamental part of our food chain, and discoveries of microplastics in bottled water will translate to an agricultural setting if they haven’t already.

Related: Many Hand-me-down Plastic Toys Are Toxic for Kids
Sources


Less Opioid Prescriptions Where Marijuana Is Legal

Two papers published in April in JAMA Internal Medicine that analyzed more than five years of Medicare Part D and Medicaid prescription data found that when states allow for the use of marijuana the number of opioid prescribed, and the daily usage of opioids, reduced significantly. What we don’t know is if patients are gravitating towards weed or if doctors are the driving force.

In this time when we are so concerned—rightly so—about opiate misuse and abuse and the mortality that’s occurring, we need to be clear-eyed and use evidence to drive our policies. If you’re interested in giving people options for pain management that don’t bring the particular risks that opiates do, states should contemplate turning on dispensary-based cannabis policies.” – W. David Bradford, an economist at the University of Georgia, author of one of the studies.

We have seen this correlation in other research but the new research includes much larger datasets.

One of the new studies stated that people on Medicare filled 14 percent fewer prescriptions for opioids after medical marijuana laws were passed in their states. The second study found that Medicaid enrollees filled nearly 40 fewer opioid prescriptions per 1,000 people each year after their state passed any law making cannabis accessible—with greater drops seen in states that legalized both medical and recreational marijuana.” – Scientific America

A recent Pew survey states 61 percent of Americans now favor legalizing marijuana. Currently, there are nine states that allow marijuana use with no restrictions, and 20 other U.S. states allow for medicinal marijuana. The states with medical marijuana laws vary in how restrictive marijuana use is. States that have marijuana dispensaries had the greatest decrease in opioid prescriptions. States that allow for medical marijuana but do not have active dispensaries did not realize the same dramatic decline, but opioid use was still down for those more restrictive states.

That makes sense, Bradford noted. There’s a big difference between telling someone they can pick up a prescription at a local pharmacy and telling someone they should go pick up some plants and grow them at home for a few months, often with little help or support.” – Discovery Campus

Recommended:

 



Seventy Percent of Reusable Medical Scopes Test Positive for Bacteria in New Study from California

A new paper published in the American Journal of Infection Control examined reusable endoscopes cleared for patient use at three separate hospitals in California and found that sanitation procedures are lacking. At the best performing hospital, 62 percent of scopes had positive results for bacteria and potential pathogens. The other two had even higher percentages of bacteria with 85 and 92 percent. While researchers confirmed the lack of antibiotic-resistant superbugs on the scopes, that prospect is a when not an if.

What Is an Endoscope?

An endoscope is a thin, flexible tube with a light and a camera at the end, usually inserted into the body through the mouth or the anus. They are commonly used to navigate the colon, stomach, and esophagus, although they’ve also gained popularity as a way to examine the ears, throat, heart, nose, abdomen, urinary tract, and joints. Most of the people who experience endoscopy suffer from gastroesophageal reflux disease, GERD. According to the American Hospitals Association, the lifespans of endoscopes like gastroscopes and colonoscopes range from five to ten years.

Recommended: Best Supplements To Kill Candida and Everything Else You Ever Wanted To Know About Fungal Infections

Why it’s Problematic

Not to activate your inner germaphobe, but this should make you wary of medical procedures where they insert something into you to figure out what’s going on. Doctors from the American College of Physicians reporting in the Annals of Internal Medicine found that the “Overuse of upper endoscopy contributes to higher health care costs without improving patient outcomes…” Numbers vary, but as many as forty percent of endoscopies don’t do anything to improve patient health. Is figuring out exactly what’s wrong with you worth inserting years of hospital bacteria into your system?

Not the First Warning

“Sadly, in the 10 years since we’ve been looking into the quality of endoscope reprocessing, we haven’t seen improvement in the field,” said Cori Ofstead, the study’s lead author and an epidemiologist in St. Paul, Minn., referring to how the devices are prepared for reuse.

Recommended: How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors

The issue of properly sterilizing this equipment has been and will continue to be a point of contention for hospitals and regulators. Researchers reported that the two hospitals that showed incredibly high numbers of bacteria reused towels when cleaning scopes, left the devices wet in dirty cabinets, and skipped necessary equipment washing procedures to save time. And they knew they were being watched.

No Quick Fix

There is no such thing a benign medical intervention. Being in the same room as someone who has taken antibiotics can affect your own microbiota, and a hospital is a fertile breeding grounds for hardy and potentially harmful pathogens like C. diff. A bacteria prone to antibiotic resistance, studies have shown rates of C.diff are greatly decreased in facilities that take sanitation seriously. This study found that the best of hospitals only eliminate less than half of bacteria left on reusable medical devices. Something to think about before you schedule your next colonoscopy, perhaps…

Sources