FAO Book Released: Indigenous Peoples' Food Systems & Well-being

Recently the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), a United Nations organization that focues on "rais[ing] levels of nutrition, improv[ing] agricultural productivity, better[ing] the lives of rural populations and contribut[ing] to the growth of the world economy" released a report titled, Indigenous Peoples' Food Systems & Well-being (2013). The 437-page book available here, discusses the following:

[i]ndigenous Peoples in cultural homelands of the most rural areas of developing regions experience challenges in using their traditional food systems and to ensure food security and health despite the treasures of food biodiversity that could support well-being. This book is the third in a series promoting use of local food systems by Indigenous Peoples; the first defines the process to document local food resources, and the second describes food systems in 12 diverse rural areas of different parts of the world. Here we describe processes and findings from more than 40 interdisciplinary collaborators who created health promotion interventions for communities using local food systems. Included are participatory processes using local knowledge and activities specifically for local food; global overviews of Indigenous Peoples' health circumstances, environmental concerns, and infant and child feeding practices; and nine specific case examples from Canada, Japan, Peru, India, Colombia, Thailand and the Federated States of Micronesia. Common themes of successful interventions and evaluations are given along with chapters on human rights issues and implications for policies and strategies. Throughout the 10 years of this research we have shown the strength and promise of local traditional food systems to improve health and well-being. This work is in context of the second United Nations' International Decade of the World's Indigenous Peoples and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

American Lung Association Released State of the Air Report for 2013

Recently, the American Lung Association, a non-profit organization dedicated to "improving lung health and preventing lung disease through Education, Advocacy and Research," released its State of the Air Report for 2013. According to the press release for the 179-page report, available here, 

significant progress [has been made] in the reduction of year-round particle pollution (soot) across the nation, but many cities that ranked among the most polluted had more unhealthy days of high ozone (smog) and short-term particle pollution than in the 2012 report. Despite that uptick, “State of the Air 2013” shows that the air quality nationwide continues the long-term trend to much healthier air.

Key “State of the Air 2013” findings include:

• More than 131.8 million people in the United States, which equates to 42 percent of the U.S. population, live in counties that have unhealthy levels of either ozone or particle pollution.
• Nearly 24.8 million people (8 percent) in the United States live in counties that have unhealthy levels of all three: ozone and short-term and year-round particle pollution.
• Eighteen cities had lower year-round levels of particle pollution, including 16 cities with their lowest levels recorded.

 

A State of the Aid Phone App is available here.

Prior versions of the Report are available below:
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000

National Academies Report Released: U.S. Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health

Recently, the National Academies Press (NAP) released a report edited by Steven H. Woolf and Laudan Aron and produced by the Panel on Understanding Cross-National Health Differences Among High-Income Countries; Committee on Population; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Research Council; Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice; and the Institute of Medicine titled, U.S. Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health (2013). The 424-page pre-publication report available free for download (with registration) discusses how,

The United States is among the wealthiest nations in the world, but it is far from the healthiest. Although life expectancy and survival rates in the United States have improved dramatically over the past century, Americans live shorter lives and experience more injuries and illnesses than people in other high-income countries. The U.S. health disadvantage cannot be attributed solely to the adverse health status of racial or ethnic minorities or poor people: even highly advantaged Americans are in worse health than their counterparts in other, "peer" countries.

In light of the new and growing evidence about the U.S. health disadvantage, the National Institutes of Health asked the National Research Council (NRC) and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to convene a panel of experts to study the issue. The Panel on Understanding Cross-National Health Differences Among High-Income Countries examined whether the U.S. health disadvantage exists across the life span, considered potential explanations, and assessed the larger implications of the findings.

U.S. Health in International Perspective presents detailed evidence on the issue, explores the possible explanations for the shorter and less healthy lives of Americans than those of people in comparable countries, and recommends actions by both government and nongovernment agencies and organizations to address the U.S. health disadvantage.

National Academies Report Released: Exploring Health and Environmental Costs of Food: Workshop Summary

Recently, the National Academies Press (NAP) released a report authored by Leslie Pray, Laura Pillsbury, and Maria Oria, Rapporteurs; Food and Nutrition Board; Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources; Institute of Medicine; and the National Research Council titled, Exploring Health and Environmental Costs of Food: Workshop Summary (2012). The 106-page report is available free with a one-time registration. According to the summary, the focus of the report

was on the environmental and health impacts of food, using externalities as a basis for discussion and animal products as a case study (i.e., specifically beef, poultry, pork, and dairy). The intention was not to quantify costs or benefits, rather lay the groundwork for doing so. A major goal of the workshop was to identify information sources and methodologies required to recognize and estimate the costs and benefits of environmental and public health consequences associated with the U.S. food system . . .  It was anticipated that the workshop would provide the basis for a follow-up consensus study of the subject and that a central task of the consensus study will be to develop a framework for a fullscale accounting of the environmental and public health effects for all food products of the U.S.food system.

 

Earthworks Report Released: Gas Patch Roulette: How Shale Gas Development Risks Public Health in Pennsylvania

Recently, Earthworks a pro-environmental "nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking sustainable solutions," released a report titled, Gas Patch Roulette: How Shale Gas Development Risks Public Health in Pennsylvania (2012). The 51-page report available here is alleged to be "[t]he largest health survey to-date of Marcellus Shale residents living near oil and gas development . . . [as the report] surveyed 108 residents in 14 Pennsylvania counties, and conducted air and water tests at more than half of the households were surveys were completed."  According to the website the main conclusions of the report are as follows;

1. Contaminants associated with oil and gas development are present in air and water in many communities where development is occurring.

2. Many residents have developed health symptoms that they did not have before—indicating the strong possibility that they are occurring because of gas development.

3. By permitting widespread gas development without fully understanding its impacts to public health—and using that lack of knowledge to justify regulatory inaction—Pennsylvania and other states are risking the public’s health.

GAO Reports Released on the Environmental and Public Health Risks of Oil and Gas Shale Development

Today, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released two reports related to hydrofracking and shale development in the U.S..  While neither report makes any recommendations, both have been released in a timely manner as states such as New York are currently weighing the environmental and public health risks associated with the development of shale resources.  

• Unconventional Oil and Gas Development: Key Environmental and Public Health Requirements, GAO-12-874 (Sept. 5, 2012). In the 241-page report available here, the  

  GAO was asked to review environmental and public health requirements for unconventional oil and gas development and (1) describe federal requirements; (2) describe state requirements; (3) describe additional requirements that apply on federal lands; and (4) identify challenges, if any, that federal and state agencies reported facing in regulating oil and gas development from unconventional reservoirs. GAO identified and analyzed federal laws, state laws in six selected states (Colorado, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wyoming), and interviewed federal and state officials and representatives from industry, environmental, and public health organizations.

• Oil and Gas: Information on Shale Resources, Development, and Environmental and Public Health Risks, GAO 12-732 (Sept. 5, 2012).  In the 70-page report available here, the 

  GAO was asked to determine what is known about the (1) size of shale oil and gas resources and the amount produced from 2007 through 2011 and (2) environmental and public health risks associated with the development of shale oil and gas. GAO reviewed estimates and data from federal and nongovernmental organizations on the size and production of shale oil and gas resources. GAO also interviewed federal and state regulatory officials, representatives from industry and environmental organizations, oil and gas operators, and researchers from academic institutions.

China Is Set to Lose 2% of GDP Cleaning Up Decades of Pollution -- Bloomberg

This report from Bloomberg finds that "China, the world’s worst polluter, needs to spend at least 2 percent of gross domestic product a year -- 680 billion yuan at 2009 figures -- to clean up 30 years of industrial waste, said He Ping, chairman of the Washington-based International Fund for China’s Environment. Mun Sing Ho, a senior economist at Dale W. Jorgenson Associates and a visiting scholar at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, put the range at 2 percent to 4 percent of GDP.

Failure to spend that much -- equivalent to the annual GDP of Vietnam -- may cost the Chinese economy half as much again in blighted crops, health costs and pollution-related expenses, He said: “The cleanup can’t catch up with the speed of pollution” if spending is less.

A double-edged approach by China to undo previous contamination and enforce stricter laws against new pollution would raise costs for companies in metals smelting, such as Hunan-based Zhuzhou Smelter Group Co. and Henan Yuguang Gold & Lead Co. in Henan. It would also benefit companies involved in environmental control, like Beijing Originwater Technology Co. and Shenzhen Green Eco-manufacture Hi-tech Co., said Chen Junpeng, an analyst at Donghai Securities Co. in Shanghai."

Health Effects of the Gulf Oil Spill

This article from the Journal of the American Medical Association reports that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico poses direct threats to human health from inhalation or dermal contact with the oil and dispersant chemicals, and indirect threats to seafood safety and mental health. Physicians should be familiar with health effects from oil spills to appropriately advise, diagnose, and treat patients who live and work along the Gulf Coast or wherever a major oil spill occurs.