NIH, EPA Launch Competition for Personal Air Pollution and Health Sensors

Signs of life at the NIH from www.nih.gov.

A competition to create a personal sensor system that measures air pollution and a persons physiological response to it will offer cash awards to finalists, federal officials announced today. The goal is to help researchers, communities, and physicians better understand the connection between air quality and health.

The My Air, My Health Challenge is sponsored by the National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Details of the competition, developed in conjunction with crowdsourcing firm InnoCentive, are available here.

Competitors will propose designs for sensors that can be easily worn or carried. In addition to gathering data on chemical and/or particulate air pollutants, these sensors will measure health parameters, such as heart rate and breathing. The proposals should also address how to make a wide array of collected data available to a broad spectrum of researchers, public health institutions, and other interested parties.

Read more about the personal air pollution sensor challenge.

The Link Between One Type of Birth Control Pill and Breast Cancer Risk

From The National Cancer Institute at www.cancer.gov

A number of studies suggest that current use of oral contraceptives (birth control pills) appears to slightly increase the risk of breast cancer, especially among younger women. However, the risk level goes back to normal 10 years or more after discontinuing oral contraceptive use.

A recent analysis of data from the Nurses’ Health Study, which has been following more than 116,000 female nurses who were 24 to 43 years old when they enrolled in the study in 1989 (3), found that the participants who used oral contraceptives had a slight increase in breast cancer risk. However,

nearly all of the increased risk was seen among women who took a specific type of oral contraceptive, a “triphasic” pill, in which the dose of hormones is changed in three stages over the course of a woman’s monthly cycle.

Because the association with the triphasic formulation was unexpected, more research will be needed to confirm the findings from the Nurses’ Health Study.

A 1996 analysis of epidemiologic data from more than 50 studies worldwide by the Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer found that women who were current or recent users of birth control pills had a slightly higher risk of developing breast cancer than women who had never used the pill (2). The risk was highest for women who started using oral contraceptives as teenagers. However, 10 or more years after women stopped using oral contraceptives, their risk of developing breast cancer had returned to the same level as if they had never used birth control pills, regardless of family history of breast cancer, reproductive history, geographic area of residence, ethnic background, differences in study design, dose and type of hormone(s) used, or duration of use. In addition, breast cancersdiagnosed in women who had stopped using oral contraceptives for 10 or more years were less advanced than breast cancers diagnosed in women who had never used oral contraceptives.

To read more on oral contraceptives and breast cancer, click here.

Chest Radiation for Girls Is Linked to Breast Cancer Later

From WSJ.com

CHICAGO—Women who were exposed to chest radiation to treat cancer during childhood have a risk of developing breast cancer as adults that is comparable to that of women with a high genetic risk of the disease, according to a study being presented Monday.

Read more about chest-radiation related breast cancer.

FDA Cites Lack of Data in Declining to Ban BPA

from wsj.com

The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it lacks the scientific information to ban the chemical bisphenol A from being used in food containers.

The chemical, known as BPA, has been linked to possible health problems of the brain, breast and prostate. It is commonly used in can linings and plastic containers to help prevent the growth of germs, and to make plastics more impervious to damage.

The environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council asked the FDA in 2008 to ban BPA, contending in a petition to the agency that the chemical "causes serious adverse health effects." A consent agreement in an NRDC lawsuit against the agency required the FDA to decide on a ban by Saturday.

The FDA stressed that its answer Friday was by no means a final one, and that it hoped to issue a more definitive ruling on BPA later this year.

Rising public concern has prompted most makers of baby bottles and cups for infants and toddlers to phase out BPA in recent years. But the inside lining of most metal cans on supermarket shelves is still made with a BPA-based epoxy resin.

More than 90% of the roughly 130 billion cans produced in the U.S. yearly are coated with BPA-based epoxy, according to the North American Metal Packaging Alliance, an industry group representing can makers. The group said the chemical is safe and the best option to keep canned foods free of threats like botulism.

Last year, the American Medical Association recognized BPA as an "endocrine-disrupting agent" and urged that "BPA-containing products with the potential for human exposure be clearly identified."

Linda Birnbaum, director of the government's National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program, said that while some research suggests there are safety risks associated with BPA, "we don't have all the answers yet." Government officials said the U.S. has $30 million in studies under way on BPA.

read the story at wsj.com

Scientists Warn EPA Over Monsanto's GMO Crop Problems

from nationofchange.org

A group of scientists is calling for major federal action in order to deal with the threat posed by Monsanto’s GMO crops, now petitioning the EPA to address the issue head on.  The groups of 22 academic corn experts are drawing attention to the immense failure of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, which is developing mutated and resistant insects as a result of its widespread usage.  Corn is critical not only as a food staple, but is heavily used in ethanol production, animal feed, and much more.  As GM corn becomes the norm, currently taking over 94 percent of the supply, these scientists are seriously concerned about the future of corn production.

Joseph Spencer is one outspoken member of the group, a corn entomologist with the Illinois Natural History Survey, part of the University of Illinois.  Spencer states that what is happening is no surprise, instead it is something that needs to be addressed.  Warning the EPA over the dangers, the experts sent a letter on March 5th to the agency explaining their worries regarding long-term corn production prospects in light of GMO crops failures.  Specifically, the experts are worried about the lack of protection presented by GMO crops against rootworms.

The EPA has already acknowledged that Monsanto’s GMO crops are creating resistant rootworms, which are now ravaging the GMO crops as they mutate to the bio pesticide used known as Bacillus thuringiensis (BT).  The EPA found that the resistant rootworms, which are evolving to resist the insecticide,  are currently found Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, and Nebraska.  After the EPA evaluated documented cases of severe crop damage as well as reports from entomologists, the EPA stated “Monsanto’s program for monitoring suspected cases of resistance is ‘inadequate’”.

read the rest of the story at nationofchange.org