Lead, A Toxic Case Study

Lead is the most widely used heavy metal and a deadly toxin that has become widespread in our modern world. Lead is a neurotoxin with a long history of causing damage to the human brain, from Roman times due to lead (Pb –Latin name plumbum) in drinking vessels, through eighteenth century ‘Devonshire colic’ where cider was poisoned with lead in its manufacture, to present day occupational exposure in the lead additive and battery manufacturing industry. Some historians put the demise of the Roman empire down to the high levels of lead in the aristocracy of Rome which may have contributed to madness such as Nero playing the fiddle as Rome burnt. Before the Industrial Revolution lead poisoning commonly occurred due to adulterated food or wine, or from occupational hazards such as mining or smelting.

Naturally lead is slowly released into the environment through the weathering of rocks, igneous (volcanic) activity and through radioactive decay of naturally occurring radon gas to form the isotope 210Pb. It is a heavy pliable and resistant to corrosion and weathering. These characteristics, as well as its plentiful and accessible supply and ease to smelt, have enabled humans to use it for thousands of years. Some lead artifacts have been dated back to 6500 BC. The Romans produced approximately 80,000 tons of lead annually and were known to increase the environmental lead approximately five times the background level, and as far back as 4,500 years ago in South East Asia, when methods of smelting for lead sulphide ores and cupellation of silver were developed, widespread atmospheric lead contamination occurred.

Lead is the only heavy metal whose open-ocean concentration has been measurably influenced by civilisation. The lead content of the open ocean (Mediterranean and Pacific) has increased 3 to 5 times since the introduction of lead-based gasoline additives and 10 times since pre-industrial times. The significance of these increases in global lead concentration is very difficult to assess. There is a growing concentration of lead found in the tissues of fish, especially shell fish, and in other food, but the effect on global ecosystem processes would be nearly impossible to assess as there are huge problems in determining what is ‘normal’ when the global ecosystem is now relatively drenched in lead compared with pre-industrial times. The extent of global lead is best seen in the fact that an emission product has been diluted into the open oceans and increased in concentration dramatically, yet most lead emissions do not normally reach the oceans but are deposited on the land, particularly in cities where most of us live.

Traditional uses of lead have included building, plumbing, printing, fishing, shooting and uses as weights with the additional present day use in radiation and electrical insulation, battery manufacture with various compounds of lead being used in paints, plastics, ceramics, glass and unfortunately petrol. Historically there have been three major sources of exposure of large populations to lead. Lead paint in older homes, lead in products like jewelry and crystal and lead added to petrol.

While lead was slowly removed from petrol over 25 years, it will remain as an environmental contaminant in the form of fine dust for many more decades and the controversy around it will last even longer. Lead was added to petrol as tetra ethyl and tetra methyl lead (two highly toxic forms) primarily to boost octane ratings. Lead was emitted to the atmosphere from motor vehicle exhausts as volatile lead compounds, unburnt tetra-ethyl lead and as particulates such as lead oxide. Around 70% of these particles are less than 0.1 micron in size which are easily dispersed over large distances and the size most dangerous to human health. Particles below 0.1 micron in size can pass into the lower parts of the lungs where they do most damage.

Automotive exhausts were the major contributors to lead emissions in most cities around the world, although other sources include paint and factory emissions. In the USA it is estimated that between 90 and 98 per cent of total lead emissions are from car exhausts and in Australia it has been estimated that about 98% of lead emissions came from lead in petrol, though the lead added to petrol only represented 14% of total lead usage.

Australia was one of the last developed countries to remove lead from petrol (almost 20 years after the USA). This was despite the toxic effects of lead being known as far back as the 1950s. Leaded petrol was phased out in Australia between 1986 and 2002. Australia has an influential lead industry (the largest lead mines in the world) that fought tooth and nail alongside the petrol industry and certain government departments to keep the lead in petrol. Shamefully, the health of the average person is usually not a consideration when weighed against the “health” of the economy when large amounts of money are at stake. The result of this reluctance to act means that even still many more Australians now have elevated levels of lead in their bodies and many children have been unnecessarily exposed to this toxic metal.

Although the amount of lead has decreased in road dust and soil lead is still found as a contaminant in the dust in our homes, usually near the entrance where it is brought in on people’s shoes. This contaminated dust will accumulate in carpets, where the possibility of it being ingested or being transferred to the skin is increased, especially if the dust particles are stirred. When we studied the amounts of lead in carpets we found the highest levels near the front door. The closer the house was to a busy road or a petrol station, the higher the level of lead.

Lead can cause very serious health problems, including damage to the nervous system, leading to behavioural changes and a decreased mental ability, inhibition of enzymes, interference with the growing foetus, colic, anaemia and kidney damage. Infants and young children are the groups most susceptible to lead exposure. Even at low levels, lead poisoning in children can cause significant IQ deficiencies, reading and learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention spans and hyperactivity and other behaviour problems. A lot like ADHD symptoms. Pregnant women poisoned by lead can transfer lead to the developing foetus, resulting in adverse developmental effects including increased levels of spontaneous abortion and still-born babies. One study found a strong correlation with prenatal lead exposure and violent offences and arrests later in life and lead exposure in utero will result in poor intellect in children, especially when exposed around 28 weeks of gestation when development is most crucial.

Schizophrenia has also been associated with exposure to lead in the foetus. In one study mothers with high‑lead blood samples were more than twice as likely to have children who later became schizophrenic. As a result they estimate that up to a quarter of the schizophrenia that developed in American urban centres in the 1950s and 1960s could be traced to lead pollution in the womb. Maybe the levels in Australia were even higher as a result of our lax controls.

Another sensitive issue is what levels of lead in the body are safe for kids. According to the grandfather of lead research Dr Needleman, ‘none’. Needleman had done literally decades of work on the toxic effects of lead on kids and had concluded there is no safe level and children are the most vulnerable to its toxic effects. However, as a result of the powerful lead industry the levels of lead acceptable in the blood were around 35ug/dl of blood. In the mid 80’s it was reduced to 25, then to 10 and now levels of 5 ug/dl or above are considered not acceptable. In one situation I was involved in however, the government officials tried to argue the child did not have a problem because the levels were 4.9 ug/dl. Clearly they were very good at reading numbers but not at understanding the effects of toxic chemicals such as lead and how standards should be used including how lead levels fluctuate in the blood and the effects of lead accumulation in the body.

Dust from lead-based paints continues to pose a health problem. Although these paints were banned from indoor use decades ago, people with older homes are still being exposed to lead dust, another legacy of complacent governments. More than 80 percent of homes built before 1978 contain lead paint. It was the primary component (up to 40 percent) of white paint in Australia until the 1960s. In homes built before 1950, white lead-based paints were used as undercoats on interior and exterior timbers and walls and as a prime coat for troweled lath and plaster walls and cement rendered surfaces. One study estimated that 38 million houses in the US had lead-based paint on their walls. How many in Australia? Since then, modern paints have turned from using lead based to titanium dioxide and latex products. Unfortunately lead based paints are still used in many developing countries.

Small quantities of dust are continually produced from lead paint, settling on indoor surfaces. During periods of home renovation, there is an increase in the number of cases of lead poisoning reported. Researchers have found the household dust of recently renovated homes contains lead levels of 12,600 mg/m2. This is thousands of times higher than the normal background level. In a recent incident, a family keen to renovate an older house was assured that the old paint on the outside of their home was not lead based. At the end of the first day of paint stripping, there was a layer of fine paint dust inside the home and in the new baby’s room. Fortunately the mother listened to her intuition and had the dust tested. It was laden with lead. In this case the family acted quickly to avert potentially grave health problems. It is essential to have paint tested before you remove it if you think there may be any possibility of it being lead based. This is simple and inexpensive as the test kits are available from any reputable hardware or paint shop. Don’t assume it will be fine. It is essential to test it and be sure. The best thing to do with most lead painted surfaces is to just paint over it. It will not be released with a few extra coats of paint over it.

Another concern is the use of lead in common consumer items. In particular the use of lead paint or contamination of children’s products and toys with lead. There is growing evidence and concern over the unregulated products coming into Australia from Asia. Many are made from cheaper metals and paints and may be contaminated or even used heavy metals such as lead and cadmium in their production. I have found jewelry with high concentrations of both lead and cadmium.

Ironically we add lead oxide to the molten glass to form lead crystal. The lead leaches out into liquids fairly rapidly but increases with alcoholic content and acidity. The longer the wine or drink is left in the crystal the higher the concentrations but it only takes a few minutes for the lead to begin leaching into the crystal. Lead may also be a lesser component of pewter but the same principles will apply for it migrating into foods and drink as crystal.

Lead also makes its way into cosmetics, particularly, hair dyes, eye shadow and lipsticks. Metal salts dyes, most commonly lead and bismuth (another toxic metal) salts, are used to create a reaction to dye the hair. Metal salts gradually darken the hair over time and are used in black-brown colours. Strangely lead salts have been approved as safe for use as hair dyes in the low concentrations. Remember, there is no safe level of lead, but for beauty’s sake it seems ok?

Lead in drinking water is not a new phenomenon as lead was historically used to make water pipes and has even been contributed to be a factor of the Roman Empire's demise. Although lead pipes are no longer produced, some older homes may still contain lead pipes and thus contaminate the drinking water. Lead in tap water may also increase due to leaching of lead-bearing materials such as solders.

Lead has also been found to accumulate in the soil of orchards where crop sprays containing lead compounds have been used such as apple and pear orchards sprayed with lead arsenate. The concern here is the encroaching urban sprawl as we build new homes on old horticultural or old industrial areas without anyone being the wiser on what is in the soils.

Whilst we have become smarter when dealing with lead, and it no longer affects our IQ, the possibility of future contamination still lingers as long as we accept it in our products. No level of lead, mercury or cadmium is acceptable, and therefore the only acceptable solution is to remove them from all environmental, household and personal care products.

Chemicals, Kids and Cancer: Why kids are more vulnerable

There is little doubt that our kids have a greater susceptibility to toxic chemicals,. Everyday we expose our children to hundreds of different chemicals in an array of household products and yet remain puzzled as to why they get sick and why the rates of childhood asthma, allergies and cancer are higher than ever.

There are many contributing factors that increase rates of childhood disease: these include very important considerations such as diet, lifestyle and attitude, but I wish to draw your attention to your child's immediate environment , as it is the environment you provide in your home that will contribute greatly to either your child's enjoyment of good health or their development of disease. Over the last 40 to 50 years we have increased the number of synthetic chemicals we use with virtually no extra thought as to how vulnerable children are to these chemicals or how little we know about their subtle and accumulative toxic effects. We assume that because these chemicals are so easily purchased off the supermarket shelf, they must be safe to use. Wrong! Many of these chemicals are known to be toxic and few of them are extensively studied before they are put on the shelf, freely available to the general public. Furthermore, certain assumptions are made in the process of allowing these products to be generally available - one of these assumptions is that kids are just smaller versions of adults. Scientific and medical studies show that this is not the case and that children are much more vulnerable to chemical toxins and environmental pollutants.

The World Health Organisation has emphasized that infants and young children have different structural and functional characteristics from those of older children and adults. These characteristics are simply stages of normal growth and development but affect a child's vulnerability when exposed to chemicals. In March of this year (2005), the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) reiterated again that children are more vulnerable to gene-damaging chemicals than are adults. Kids are not simply smaller versions of adults, but this is how they're seen when it comes to developing regulations and safety standards.

For the first time the US EPA have tried to put a figure on how much more susceptible children are. They reported children two years old and younger might be 10 times more vulnerable than adults to certain chemicals and that children between the ages of two and 16 might be three times more vulnerable to certain chemicals. This means we need to make a huge shift in the way we regulate chemicals and may mean in some cases that the chemicals kids are exposed to in the home may be up to 10 times too high in concentration. Oops! Our regulators have made yet another mistake and while they will say there are no problems with the existing system and will defend it, along with the manufacturing industry, it will eventually be changed - it will just take 10 or 20 years for it to happen. I have seen this many times. It was argued for many decades that low levels of lead were not problem but in just two or three years all the regulations were changed in the reluctant recognition that even low levels were a major health concern for kids. The scientific proof of this was available 20-30 years earlier with the US removing lead from petrol in 1972. Australian authorities sat on their hands until 1986.

Kids are more vulnerable to toxic chemicals because of certain behavioural and physiological characteristics that multiply not only their exposures to environmental toxins but also increase the effects of these chemicals on them. Physiological characteristics include rapid rates of growth, immature body systems and physiology, such as enzyme systems, as well as underdeveloped barriers which prevent toxins from being absorbed. Kids are particularly vulnerable to toxins during rapid periods of growth such as those which occur in-utero, in the first 12 months of life and at puberty. A typical human infant increases in weight by about 200% and in length by 50% in his or her first 12 months. On average, the infant's brain is just over 30% of the weight of an adult brain at birth, their maximum number of neurons will be reached by age two but the brain will not structurally mature until four - six years of age. Their nervous system will not be fully developed until adolescence. The spinal cord and the peripheral nerves are protected by a fatty sheath called myelin, and the process of neural myelination is not complete until adolescence. As a result a child's nervous systems is at higher risk of damage from common household insecticides, heavy metals and solvents typically found in household products.

A child's brain is also more vulnerable because of the immaturity of the blood-brain-barrier, which is designed to protect it from toxins. Even in adults this barrier cannot protect the brain from many heavy metals and synthetic chemicals such as solvents and pesticides. In infants it is almost totally ineffective against most modern day chemicals. This dramatically increases the risk of both temporary and permanent damage to the brain. It's possible that early exposure to some chemicals may permanently reduce the effectiveness of the blood brain barrier, allowing increased passage of toxins to the brain, and increasing the person's vulnerability to certain chemicals throughout their life.

Children are also susceptible in other areas of their physiology. The many enzyme pathways that metabolise foreign compounds in the body take several years to develop and a child is at increased risk until they are fully matured. For example, infants have lower levels of the neurotransmitter cholinesterase which helps to maintain the balance in the nervous system's communication channels. Many of pesticides and the nicotine in tobacco smoke inactivate cholinesterases, allowing the stimulating neurotransmitter acetylcholine to remain and increase in concentration, causing over stimulation of the nervous system. Depressed levels of cholinesterase can cause irreversible damage. Chronic effects include weakness and malaise, headache and light-headedness and symptoms can mimic those of ADHD. While the pesticides may not accumulate to any significant degree, repeated exposures with the resultant cholinesterase-inhibiting effect, can be a significant problem. Don't expose your children (or yourselves) to pesticides - any of them. Even if claims are made as to their safety, they are not safe! The aerosol spraying method for household insect killing chemicals enables the toxins to penetrate deep into the lungs. You wouldn't expose your kids to tobacco smoke would you, so why pesticides? They are much more toxic.

A child's immature enzyme systems can also affect their ability to eliminate the environmental toxins to which they are exposed. The metabolic pathways and enzyme detoxification systems of infants and young children have reduced capacity for dealing with toxins as compared to adults. The major excretory organs in the human body (the liver and kidney) take some years to develop and become fully and efficiently functional. For example, the Phase I and II enzyme detoxification systems (stimulated in all the liver detox diets) are immature at birth and only develop gradually as an infant. The immaturity of an infant's capacity for detoxification and elimination usually produces higher blood levels of toxins for longer periods in comparison to an adult, meaning the toxic chemical hangs around a lot longer in your kids' bodies, doing more damage.

In general tissue and membrane barriers are more permeable in the early years of life to help with the demands of rapid development and growth. However, this also increases their capacity to absorb toxins. For example, absorption rates of heavy metals from the gastrointestinal tract in humans and other mammals are significantly higher in infancy compared to other ages. Lead is a well-known poison, causing irreversible neurological damage to the young, including a reduced IQ. Studies have shown that infants and young children absorb lead more efficiently than adults via the gastrointestinal tract. 40 - 90% of an oral dose is absorbed by a child less than 8 years of age, compared with 10% by an adult. Studies have also shown that retention of the absorbed dose is higher. While adults retain 10% of an ingested dose, 18% is retained by children and 32% retained by children less than 5 years of age. Absorption through the skin is also higher in children. Their skin is more permeable and they have a greater surface area relative to body weight.

Kid's are also at increased risk from environmental carcinogens. In infants and children cells are dividing more rapidly. There is a greater probability of DNA mutation and cancerous growth being initiated. Studies show that one day old rats exposed to vinyl chloride developed a much higher incidence of cancers than rats which were exposed at eleven weeks of age. Early exposure to carcinogens also means there's more time for cancer to develop over the person's lifetime. Many cancers which develop in adults are a result of exposure to carcinogens in childhood. Reducing childhood exposure to these toxic chemicals will reduce the potential for cancers later in life.

Kids' Behaviour

Aside from the physiological and biochemical reasons behind children's increased susceptibility to toxins, there are behavioural, cultural and sociological reasons as to why they are more at risk.

Increased exposure of infants and kids occurs through both their food consumption and respiration. Kilogram for kilogram of body weight, children drink more fluids, eat more food and breathe more air than adults. Children aged one to five years for example, eat three to four times more food per kilogram than the average adult. The types of food they eat also increase their exposure. In the first five to seven years of life, a child's diet is very limited. One study in the US estimated that children between one and five years of age consumed six times the amount of fruit consumed by women aged 22 - 30, and 18 times more apple and apple products, including juices and purees. More recent estimates from studies in the US suggest that the intake of apples by infants expressed as a ratio of body weight may be up to 20 times higher than that for adults. These consumption rates mean that young children face a greater risk from residues such as pesticides and fungicides in fresh produce than do adults. This highlights the need to feed our kids as much organic and biodynamic produce as possible.

Young children's play behaviour can be a potential source of exposure to toxic substances. Mouthing, whereby hands and objects are put into the mouth (an exploratory behaviour of the young called PICA), has been shown to lead to significant ingestion of soil and dust. One study found average daily estimates of soil consumed by kids ranged from 25.3 to 81.3 mg/day, and reported that this was consistent with results from other studies. This dramatically increases their risk of exposure to heavy metals and pesticides in the soil. This doesn't mean that you stop your children from playing outside. It does mean you shouldn't use any pesticides or toxic chemicals in the garden.

Other behaviour such as crawling and playing close to the ground can also contribute to higher exposure to many chemical as this is where many of the chemicals actually accumulate. Children's tendency to play around cars while the engine is running really highlights this. More than 4000 chemicals spew from the exhaust pipes of cars. I often see kids playing around the car while parents are saying their farewells. For kids, who are closer to exhaust pipe height, it's a toxic game.

Kids also don't have the experience or know how to reduce their exposure. Unlike adults who can relate a chemical smell to making them sick or causing an allergic reaction, young children have too little experienced to make the connection and often lack the necessary verbal skills. So they will continue to expose themselves to more of the toxin. We, as adults and parents, must provide the protection of a safe environment. And children are easily influenced by the conditioning of media advertising to use toxic chemicals such as deodorant spray cans or perfumes. Or to consume more junk foods with toxic food additives in them.

Research is proving the toxicity of these chemicals. Many studies, including some of our own research and other Australian studies, show that the higher the use of chemicals in the home, including cleaning chemicals, the use of spray cans and pesticides, the higher the incidence of childhood disease, such as asthma and allergies. In a few years when the research is complete, it will also show an increase in children's and adult's cancer rates.

It is also worth noting that thousands of kids are poisoned by domestic chemicals every year. Some of them are permanently damaged. Some children die. The fewer toxic chemicals you bring into the home the safer it is for your children and you.

What can YOU do?

Set a goal to reduce the amount of synthetic chemicals you have and use in the home by 50% over the next month. When you achieved this, review your chemical use again, and see if you can reduce it further.

Use safer more environmentally friendly chemicals

Use high quality, genuine fibre technology for cleaning.

Don’t use spray cans - they are major air pollutants. Just read the warning on the back of the can to see how toxic they are.

Use non toxic baits and traps for pests instead of toxic pesticides.

Do not believe the pest control company when they tell you their product is safe. They are not and they are actually not allowed to say they are safe.

Don't paint the new baby's room.

Don’t put child care centres on busy roads.

Do not believe the advertisements on TV that tell you will be better off using synthetic chemicals. You won't be. But they will make a lot of money out of you.

Ban spray cans from your child's school.

Don't allow people to smoke around children. Visit my website for a lot more information and more action you can take to protect your kids.

Asthma, a different perspective

Asthma is one of the most common respiratory diseases. In Australia, New Zealand, the UK, US, Canada, many European countries, and now in many Asian countries, asthma is on the increase and has reached proportions of one in four children and one in 10 adults. The asthma rates in these countries has doubled in the last two decades and fortunately they seem to be leveling off but as other countries become westernised the rates are quickly catching up to our levels.

Asthma is a potentially life threatening and debilitating respiratory disease. Not only do asthmatics have to face potentially fatal attacks, but they may also have to deal with headaches, depression, mood swings, hyperactivity, learning difficulties, chronic fatigue and allergy related afflictions such as allergic rhinitis and eczema.

It’s unlikely that the genetics of the population has had an influence in such a short period of time, but it is likely that a degree of genetic susceptibility is being triggered by a combination of modern factors, perhaps the epigenetics factor I wrote about a few months ago. The rise of modern, Western society has brought with it many changes. Many of these appear innocent when considered in isolation, but when contemplated in combination, they present a formidable threat to our health and the health of our children.

The most probable cause of asthma and many other modern child health problems is a combination of Diet, Environment, Attitude and Lifestyle (DEAL) factors. To wait for definitive scientific proof that may never come, is to put a growing number of kids at severe risk. Asthma is not just an inconvenience, it kills.

The ‘westernised’ diet seems to be a contributing factor. Because asthma involves an immune response to various trigger substances, decreases in the average weekly consumption of fresh fruit, green and mixed vegetables and an increase in the amount of processed foods has all been linked with increasing asthma rates. And nowhere is this more evident than in Asian countries where the diet is rapidly becoming westernised. The ‘new’ diet provides fewer antioxidants, fewer minerals such as magnesium, selenium and zinc, and fewer vitamins, including Vitamins A, B, C and E - all of which are considered to be necessary co-factors in the immune function. The modern diet is also very low in methyl donors such as folate and vitamin B6 which may be having an impact on how the genes for asthma are expressed.

A number of studies have shown decreased minerals such as selenium and zinc in subgroups of asthma sufferers. There is also evidence that people with reduced intake of fresh fruit and vegetables have lower ventilatory functions (they take in less air with each breath) and other studies which link diets low in fruit and vegetables with increased rates of asthma, and more severe symptoms. There’s growing evidence of the benefits of vitamin, mineral and antioxidant supplements on the severity of asthmatic symptoms. For example, the essential fatty acids (EFA’s), particularly an increase in omega 3 oils have been shown to reduce the incidence of asthma in children in some studies. In the old days parents used to feed their kids cod liver oil and kids would eat home grown vegetables and free range eggs, all of which are a source of EFAs.

A number of studies have also shown a relationship between asthma and the mother’s eating habits. Children born to women who supplement with omega 3 oils are less likely to develop asthma. Some studies have also found reduced symptoms and rates of asthma in children who were breast-fed for longer as infants. The precise reason for this is unknown, but is probably due to the protective effect of breast milk and the detrimental effects of cows’ milk. Apart from other essential nutrients in human milk, it’s a rich source of EFAs, choline and important immune factors. And there is growing evidence mounting over the use of cows milk and increasing allergies and food intolerances.

Some of the food colourings and other food additives that our kids consume in relatively large quantities are also linked with asthma attacks. Ones that are particularly relevant include the colours 102, 110, 127, the sulphur preservatives (220- 230, sulphur dioxide, sodium sulphite and bisulphite potassium bisulphite and sodium and potassium metabisulphite) and MSG (621).

Investigations throughout the world confirm a link between asthma and a person’s sensitisation to indoor allergens, such as dust mites, pet fur and feathers, insects and mould. Nevertheless, these allergens have probably always been present in houses although the quantities of allergens and degree of exposure may have increased in many homes.

We have made our buildings more airtight through changes in design, weatherproofing and the use of air conditioning. This traps allergens and chemicals inside buildings, whereas in older homes there is greater airflow. The constant temperature and humidity also produce ideal conditions for dust mite and fungal growth. These conditions are further exacerbated by the fact that many people keep all their doors and window closed and that we spend 90% of our time indoors.
A number of studies have found a strong relationship between house dampness, fungal growth and respiratory illness. This is not only from obvious dampness such as condensation on windowpanes but also the amount of time spent in the shower and bath. Mould and mould spores are a major problem for asthmatics. Mould can usually be controlled by increasing the ventilation in bathrooms and other wet areas. Fibre cleaning is very effective in contolling mould and doesn’t involve the use of toxic chemicals.

Allergen avoidance, particularly for mould, dust mite allergens and pollen, has been shown to reduce both the onset of asthma and asthmatic symptoms. This avoidance appears to be especially important during the first twelve months of life, when the immune system is maturing. Some research also suggests the avoidance of substances that may cause reactions, even though not related to immune function . This includes some biologically active chemicals and some medications such as aspirin, sulphur dioxide, metabisulphate, coal tar dyes and flavour enhancers, such as MSG.

By contrast, while many pets produce problematic allergens, there’s increasing evidence to show that having a pet may offer some protective effect. In fact living on a farm and close to animals generally confirs some protection against asthma
Probably of greater importance is that we have dramatically increased our use of synthetic chemicals, which at higher doses are linked with asthma and respiratory disease. More and more studies are showing this link with even lower levels of exposure to chemicals, such as those found in new or renovated homes. Cleaning chemicals, spray cans, deodorants and perfumes are all increasingly being linked with contributing to the cause of asthma and potential asthma attacks. The evidence is also mounting that these chemicals may be influencing our genetic expression through epigenetics. The overuse of these chemicals may also be contributing to what is called the “hygeine hypothesis” which is that we are not being exposed to enough microorganisms and therefore not stimulating the immune system at the right stages of growth.

Unflued gas heaters (the ones that don’t have a flue or chimney) and other appliances are linked with increased respiratory illness. Many countries and some states in Australia have banned these appliances. There are now dozens of studies showing associated health problems.

There is little doubt about the effect of direct smoking and passive smoking on asthma and a litany of other diseases. While more and more people go outside to smoke, there are others who still expose their children to this cocktail of very toxic substances. Many of the thousands of chemicals found in tobacco smoke are toxic. Even worse, parents who smoke are showing their kids through their actions that smoking is okay. If you smoke you are teaching your kids to do the same, despite what you might say to them. As the old adage says, “Actions speak louder than words”.

Attitude is important because not only is it likely to reduce the risk of illnesses, but determines what an individual will do to prevent or reduce illness. Attitude is closely linked with education, the willingness to learn more and the desire to look after yourself. This does not mean ignoring the medical system. In fact, it’s the complete opposite. It means working with your doctor and asking lots of questions. Remember asthma can be a life threatening illness, so you need to understand it and take it seriously.

Our lifestyle has changed enormously over the last four decades. The structure of the family unit and how families interact, our level of physical activity and our dependence upon the car, television and computers have brought different pressures and demands. Many of these factors have negative impacts on our health and our ability to deal with asthma. Physical activity, breath control and stress management are essential for an asthmatic’s development of a healthy lifestyle. I have seen many instances where implementation of these has not only improved how a person deals with asthma but also reduced the severity and frequency of symptoms. For a small number of asthmatics strenuous physical activity can initiate an asthma attack. Be active but also understand your limits.

Unfortunately, despite the growing scientific evidence, the medical paradigm tends to prevail in our society that we can’t do anything about asthma because we don’t have the definitive proof yet of the causes. Science on the other hand shows a different perspective, that there are probably many contributing factors that need to be addressed and all can help just a little. Apart from this also being a common sense approach it also helps with many other health issues not just asthma, so isn’t it worth trying?

Author of "The DEAL for Happier Healthier Kids, a Parents Guide to 21st Century Health"

Omega 3 and kid’s brains

A study out just this week in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.28549) found that supplementing healthy boys with DHA (one of the main omega 3s and the main one in the brain) led to an increase in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex part of the brain (the front part) - an area of the brain associated with working memory. Changes, measure by functional magnetic resonance imaging also occurred in other parts of the brain, including the occipital cortex (visual processing) and the cerebellar cortex (motor control). This builds on a huge amount of evidence on the benefits of DHA for healthy and not so healthy brain function in kids. Note the study above. There are literally hundreds of studies telling us it will help us and our kids. So why aren’t we all supplementing with fish oils? It should be a government education program and mandate. The evidence is overwhelming.

Additives in our Kids

My simple rule is the more additives in a product the less food there is and we cannot expect a child to function on products missing foods and filled with synthetic toxic chemicals.

It has been proposed for many years that food additives contribute to ADD/ADHD. While this is refuted by the food additive industry, there’s growing evidence that this is the case. It’s also becoming apparent that there are biochemical explanations as to why some foods and food additives, particularly the food colours, may be contributing factors. For example, salicylates inhibit the conversion of the EFAs to the protective prostaglandins, as mentioned earlier. Many foods that contain salicylates, including tomatoes and granny smith apples, as well as aspirin and the food colours like tartrazine (102), may exacerbate ADD/ADHD.

Food additives linked with ADD/ADHD can also deplete the body of vitamins and minerals. Tartrazine decreases blood levels of zinc and increases its excretion in the urine.

Food additives to avoid are 102, 107, 104, 110, 120, 122, 123, 124, 127, 129, 132, 133, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160b, 168, 173, 250, 251, 252, 282, 320, 321, 420, 421, 621 (MSG) 622, 624, 627,631, 635, 951 (Nutrasweet®, Aspartame®).

Academic performance and behavioural issues improve significantly when children are given optimal nutrition and nutritional supplements.

Then there is the processed meats such as salami, ham and bacon. They contain loads of additives including nitrates (249, 250, 251, 252), which form a group of cancer-causing chemicals called nitrosamines. High rates of nitrosamines can be found in pies, pasties, sausage rolls, frankfurters, salami, ham and bacon. This increases the risk of colon and stomach cancer and childhood leukemia. Just a few beef frankfurters a week will increase this risk for children.

Another additive in processed meats and many other processed foods is Monosodium Glutamate (MSG), which is well known for influencing severe attacks of ADHD and eczema-like rashes. MSG (621) is often added to processed foods because it increases hunger, which of course means that more food is eaten. It is easy to see how this leads to childhood obesity and diabetes. Many processed foods have MSG added to improve the flavour without adding more food. Please, read every label of every box, bag and carton you bring home from the grocery store, before you put that food on the table—or better, before you buy it!

For more information check out
www.additivealert.com.au