GMOs aren’t the same as clones, and they’re not plants or animals whose traits have been “directed” through selective breeding. Such breeding to produce or enhance desired characteristics has taken place in animal and crop species for thousands of years. Cloning, on the other hand, is the process of creating identical copies of a species, but does not introduce new genes into an organism. GMOs have had specific genes — generally from bacteria, other plants, or other animals — added into their genome to produce traits that the organisms can’t produce on their own. The resulting transgenic organisms therefore express both their own normal proteins and those of other organisms.

Concerns with plant GMOs

While proponents of GMO crops and food tout the benefits, including faster growing times, increased yields, and crop resistance to pests and pesticides, opponents cite a number of concerns. Among these is concern for the environment. Some of the most widespread of the GMO crops are “Roundup Ready,” meaning they’re resistant to the herbicide glyphosate, which is commonly used on crop fields to prevent weeds. Glyphosate kills plants by interfering with the synthesis of three amino acids: phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan. Glyposate resistance comes from a modified gene — 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS), isolated from a bacterial strain resistant to glyphosate — that is inserted into the crop genome.

From an agricultural standpoint, a Roundup Ready crop seems like a wonderful thing, since it allows the farmer to spray crops with Roundup herbicide, thus reducing weeds and increasing crop yields, without risking the crops themselves. There are a number of problems with the technology, however. The first of these is that glyphosate is toxic (especially in the quantities currently being used), and is also very affordable. The assurance of a glyphosate-resistant crop plant means that the easiest way to ensure a weed-free crop is to use very large amounts of glyphosate. The excess herbicide then sinks into the ground and may percolate into the groundwater, or washes out of the field with irrigation, and ends up in the waterways. Both cases represent a risk to the environment and to humans. Further, it’s possible for plants to transfer genes between species. This means that glyphosate-resistant crops can confer resistance to weeds — such glyphosate-resistant “superweeds” have already been identified — which necessitates the use of larger and larger quantities of glyphosate and/or other, more toxic herbicides to control weed propagation. This amplifies the environmental threat.

Furthermore, humans are exposed to glyphosate residue on glyphosate-resistant GMO crops that are consumed as food, which represents an additional route of exposure to the toxin. An article in the International Journal of Biological Science reports finding significant health effects associated with mammalian consumption of GMO corn [2]. One of the three varieties tested was a glyphosate-resistant species. The other two were so-called “Bt corn,” which contains a gene from the bacterial species Bacillus thuringiensis. The inserted gene codes for production of a pesticide inside the corn plant itself, which helps to protect the crop from insect predation. Humans or animals eating the crop, then, consume the pesticide. All three GMOs included in the study resulted in negative health effects on rats over a period of 90 days, though the effects of glyphosate-resistant corn were the most significant. These effects included damage to the liver, kidneys, adrenal glands, heart, spleen, and blood-forming tissues and cells.

Another issue is that GMOs express proteins — and therefore potential allergens — that aren’t native to the non-modified organism. With allergies on the rise in industrialized nations, this is a serious concern. Researchers reported finding an allergen from the Brazil nut in certain GMO soy [2]. The Brazil nut gene was introduced into the soy in order to cause the beans to produce more methionine, an amino acid in which they are otherwise quite low. The idea was to increase the nutrient value of the soy.

The problem here is that if a GMO (such as the methionine-enriched soy) expresses allergens from other organisms (such as the Brazil nut), it increases the likelihood of serious allergic reactions to the GMO. While the Brazil nut/soy GMO was abandoned and is not being grown, it nevertheless exemplifies the potential for increased allergic potential of GMOs as compared to non-GMO food. This problem is amplified by the fact that currently, the FDA does not require labeling of GMOs and GMO-containing products, though there is a campaign to change that policy.

Animal GMOs possess additional concerns

Some of the concerns associated with GMO crops, such as herbicide use and pesticide production, don’t apply to animal GMO species such as the AquAdvantage salmon. However, animal GMOs raise additional issues. The AquAdvantage salmon is an Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) with inserted genes from the Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and another fish called a pout (Macrozoarces americanus). The inserted genes help the AquAdvantage salmon to produce growth hormone year-round, resulting in much faster growth. Farmed AquAdvantage salmon would reach market weight faster and could provide an abundant food source. The genetics of the AquAdvantage salmon render them all female, and most (approximately 98%) are sterile. They’re intended for farming, not for release into the wild. However, one of the concerns expressed by environmental organizations is whether they could escape into the wild, and whether the small percentage of non-sterile individuals could breed with wild salmon. There is very little existing information on what impact that could have upon the environment. Further, salmon farming has a significant and negative environmental impact in its own right, and farmed Atlantic salmon are listed by the Environmental Defense Fund as a “Worst [Food] Choice” with regard to environmental concerns. The farming process also means farmed salmon are high in polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which are toxic industrial compounds. As such, the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch suggests avoiding farmed Atlantic salmon. Furthermore, the diet farmed salmon are fed changes their nutritional profile. While wild salmon are high in heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids, farmed salmon have lower levels of these, and instead have high levels of omega-6 fatty acids, which are much less healthy. The environmental and health impact of a transgenic Atlantic salmon would, at the very least, be as detrimental as that of a non-GMO Atlantic salmon, with the additional concern that GMOs are developed to be produced in great abundance, multiplying the environmental and health impact.

Known environmental and health effects of farmed Atlantic salmon aside, perhaps the most major consideration with regard to the AquAdvantage salmon is simply that there’s very little information available on the long-term ramifications and effects of a transgenic food animal. As the potential first such animal, the AquAdvantage salmon is in a position to set precedent that other GMOs will surely follow. The Union of Concerned Scientists has expressed that the FDA is poised to set the bar quite low.

References

1. Genetically Modified Crops: Soybean, Maize, Rapeseed, Cotton. GMO Compass. Accessed 2011 Oct 23.
2. Spiroux de Vendomois et al. A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health. Int J Biol Sci. 2009 Dec 10;5(7):706-26.
   View abstract
3. Nordlee et al. Identification of a Brazil-Nut Allergen in Transgenic Soybeans. N Engl J Med. 1996 Mar 14;334(11):688-92.
   View abstract

Primatene Mist contains epinephrine, also called adrenaline, which stimulates the sympathetic branch of the body’s autonomic nervous system.

The adrenal glands, which are situated on top of each kidney, produce epinephrine and release it in response to a real or perceived threat. Epinephrine can also be administered as a medication, either through injection or inhalation, and has the same effects as the natively-produced hormone. Effects of epinephrine include an increase in heart rate and respiration rate, altered distribution of blood flow, and relaxation of the muscles in the small airways. This last effect is the one relevant to asthmatics, who experience constriction of the small airways in response to environmental or emotional triggers, resulting in decreased air flow. There are many different prescription therapies for asthma, including short-acting bronchodilators (so-called “rescue” inhalers), long-acting bronchodilators, steroids and leukotriene inhibitors. Of all the options available for treating asthma by prescription, albuterol — a short-acting bronchodilator — is the closest to epinephrine from a pharmacological standpoint; it is fast-acting and helps to relax the muscles of the small airways.

The removal of Primatene Mist from drugstore shelves has nothing to do with the active ingredient in the medication; instead, the FDA is responding to the Montreal Protocol, a universally ratified treaty designed to protect the Earth’s ozone layer, the thin layer of O₃ gas in the stratosphere that reacts with, and thereby helps to shield Earth’s inhabitants from, ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun. Overexposure to UV radiation damages biomolecules, including DNA, and leads to a variety of negative outcomes including skin cancer.

CFCs, while completely non-toxic, react with ozone molecules in the upper atmosphere, resulting in the catalytic destruction of ozone (meaning that each molecule of CFC can react with and destroy hundreds of thousands of ozone molecules).

Among the stipulations of the Montreal Protocol is a mandated phase-out of CFCs, and their replacement with alternative, non-ozone-depleting substances. Many different asthma inhalers depend upon propellants to help aerosolize and deliver medication. Albuterol was among the prescription asthma treatment drugs affected by an earlier FDA mandate that pharmaceutical companies had to replace CFCs with alternative propellants in prescription inhalers by December 31, 2008. Primatene Mist, because it is an over-the-counter medication, was subject to a slightly later phase-out date. The replacement propellants used in prescription inhalers are hydrofluoroalkanes (HFAs), which don’t have the ozone-depleting potential that CFCs do. Unfortunately, however, HFAs are significantly more expensive to produce than CFCs, which has made HFA-propelled asthma inhalers more expensive than their CFC predecessors. Compared to CFC-propelled inhalers, HFA-propelled inhalers release medication at lower temperature, and less forcefully [2]. However, the inhalers are just as effective at delivering the appropriate dose. While it would be possible to replace the propellant in Primatene mist with an HFA, so far, the company has announced no plans to do so.

The FDA advises asthmatics who rely upon Primatene Mist as a rescue inhaler to see a physician for prescription asthma medication, but recognizes that this may represent a financial hardship for those without health insurance, owing to the greater cost of prescription inhalers as compared to Primatene Mist. Patients without health insurance or prescription coverage may be eligible for assistance through federally funded health care centers.

References

1. Primatene Mist With Chlorofluorocarbons No Longer Available After Dec. 31, 2011. U.S. Food and Drug Administration consumer update. Accessed 2011 Sep 29.
2. HFA Inhalers — Physician Information. Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America. Accessed 2011 Sep 29.

Most people throw out of their unused, unneeded or expired medicines by flushing or pouring them down the drain. Since wastewater treatment facilities aren’t designed to remove pharmaceuticals, the disposed compounds end up in our lakes and streams, and ultimately in our drinking water. Indeed, a 2002 U.S. Geological Survey identified a broad rand of chemicals, including antibiotics and non-prescription drugs, at low concentrations downstream from areas of intense urbanization and animal production [1].

Active pharmaceutical ingredients, from both prescription and over-the-counter medications, can enter the waterways by several different routes [2]:

1. bodily excretion of unmetabolized active pharmaceutical incredients
2. release from the skin during washing or bathing
3. disposal to sewage or trash of medications

To minimize environmental contamination resulting from disposal of prescription and over-the-counter drugs, most medications should not be flushed down the toilet or poured down the drain.

Follow these guidelines to dispose of drugs properly and safely [2]:

Don’t flush prescription drugs down the toilet or drain unless the label or accompanying patient information specifically instructs you to do so. For information on drugs that should be flushed, visit the FDA page on safe disposal of medicines.

To dispose of prescription drugs not labeled to be flushed, you may be able to take advantage of community drug take-back programs or household hazardous waste collection events, which collect drugs at a central location for proper disposal. Check with your pharmacy and/or call your local government’s household trash and recycling service and ask if a drug take”back program is available in your community.

If a drug take-back or collection program is not available in your area, follow these steps to ensure the proper and safe disposal of medicines:

1. Remove medication from its original container.
2. Mix the drugs with an undesirable substance, such as used coffee grounds.
   IMPORTANT: Don’t crush tablets, open capsules or add water to dissolve. These actions pose added risks for those in proximity and for the environment, since the extended release design of the drug is defeated, making its entire contents immediately bioavailable [3].
3. Hide the mixture in a disposable container with a lid, such as an empty margarine tub or a ziplock bag to prevent discovery and removal from the trash.
4. Remove all identifying personal information, including Rx number, on the empty medication container. Hint: conceal with black permanent marker.
5. Place the sealed container with the mixture, and the empty medication container, in the trash.
6. Boxed prescription or over-the-counter medications that are foil wrapped should not be removed. Instead, hide the foil-wrapped medications inside a disposable container such as an empty box and discard in the trash.

For more information on pharmaceuticals in the environment, check out SMARxT Disposal: A Prescription for a Healthy Planet.

References

1. Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and Other Organic Wastewater Contaminants in U.S. Streams. U.S. Geological Survey. 2002 June.
2. Proper Disposal of Prescription Drugs. Office of National Drug Control Policy. 2009 Oct.
3. Daughton and Ruhoy. Environmental footprint of pharmaceuticals: the significance of factors beyond direct excretion to sewers. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2009 Dec;28(12):2495-521. Epub 2009 Apr 21.
   View abstract

Want to reduce your stress level, spend less money at the pump and do your part to help save the planet? Here’s one of the most simple yet effective tips that will accomplish all three: Slow Down.

Improve Your Financial Health: Use Less Gas

At highway speeds, wind resistance increases exponentially and fuel economy is reduced by approximately 4 miles per gallon for every 10 mile per hour increase [1]. Thus, the faster you drive, the more it will cost you. Consider this [1].

In a typical family sedan, every 10 miles per hour you drive over 60 is like the price of gasoline going up about 54 cents a gallon. That figure will be even higher for less fuel-efficient vehicles that go fewer miles on a gallon to start with.

That’s based on a $3.25 price per gallon, which is less than the current price of gas. So we’re talking more than 54 cents a gallon.

Additionally, if you do the math, speeding doesn’t save you anywhere near the time you might think it does. An average 30 mile commute traveling at 65 miles/hour takes 28 minutes, while that same trip at 80 miles/hour takes 23 minutes. You save a whole 5 minutes by driving 15 MPH faster.

How much money is that 5 minutes worth?

Reduce Stress and Stay Safe

Moderate levels of stress from a variety of sources, including other motorists, traffic congestion and roadway conditions, are common in everyday driving. However, driver stress has been shown to also be influenced by a combination of situational and personal factors, including factors external to the driving context [2].

Not surprisingly, studies have found that life stress is associated with higher rates of accidents and disease [3]. It’s been estimated that drivers who have experienced a recent stressful event are five times more likely to cause fatal accidents than unstressed drivers [4].

If you’re running late, remember that no matter how fast you drive, you’re still going to be late. If you’re under a great deal of personal stress, it’s probably best to avoid driving altogether.

Statistically, people who drive too fast cause or contribute to almost one-third of all fatal crashes. In 2006,13,543 lives were lost in speeding-related crashes [5]. Excessive speed does a number of things:

• it increases the distance a vehicle travels when a driver reacts to a dangerous situation
• it reduces a driver’s ability to steer safely around objects in the road
• it extends the distance necessary to stop

Want to reduce your stress level, spend less money on gas and do your part to help save the planet?

Just Slow Down!

David over at The Good Human has some additional tips on saving money, saving fuel and saving the environment.

References

1. Slow down a little, save a lot of gas. Issue #1: America’s Money. CNN Money. 2008 Mar 27.
2. Hennessy et al. The Influence of Traffic Congestion, Daily Hassles, and Trait Stress Susceptibility on State Driver Stress: An Interactive Perspective. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research 5(2);162-179
   doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9861.2000.tb00072.x
3. Stuart and Brown. The relationship of stress and coping ability to incidence of diseases and accidents. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 25(4), 255-260. 1981.
   View abstract
4. Brenner and Selzer. Risk of causing a fatal accident associated with alcoholism, psychopathology, and stress: further analysis of previous data. Behav Sci. 1969 Nov;14(6):490-5.
   View abstract
5. Traffic Safety Facts 2006 Data. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration National Center for Statistics and Analysis. 2006.

Enriquez predicts that shifting the mapping of the human genome from the world of science to the world of commerce will reshape vast sectors of the world economy and blur the boundaries between businesses – agribusiness and chemicals to healthcare and pharmaceuticals to energy and computing [1]. Almost 10 years ago, he suggested that energy companies may eventually engineer energy sources from plants rather than resorting to fossil fuels [2].

What does all this have to do with health? Imagine a world where energy is extracted from coal, not by burning it, but by having something process it in a biological fashion. Coal-burning power plants are the single largest industrial source of air pollution [3]. Imagine the impact not burning coal would have on the air we breathe.

In his TED talk, Enriquez advances that:

Bioenergy is … beginning to understand the transition that occurred in agriculture from brute force into biological force …

His lecture is a facscinating look at how a number of very smart people are thinking of how to apply biological principles to grow our own energy as efficiently as we grow wheat.

References

1. Enriquez and Goldberg. “Transforming Life, Transforming Business: The Life Science Revolution.” In The Digital Enterprise: How To Reshape Your Business For A Connected World, edited by Nicholas G. Carr. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School, 2001.
2. Enriquez J. Genomics and the world’s economy. Science. 1998 Aug 14;281(5379):925-6.
   View abstract
3. Power Plants, Your Health and the Environment. Clear the Air, a joint project of the Clean Air Task Force, U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund and the National Environmental Trust. 2002, Aug 21.

Drug delivery

Last month, we discussed how green chemistry was recently used by two research groups to mimic the cellular process of drug synthesis, imitating complex biosynthetic processes outside the cell to create antibiotics. Green chemistry attempts to reduce or eliminate the generation and use of hazardous substances in the design and development of chemical products and processes, minimizing its impact on patients and the environment.

Now chemists at the University of Nottingham are using green chemistry to develop new methods for coating drugs in plastics [1]. While conventional methods use high temperatures and volitile solvents such as benzene and chloroform, green chemistry techniques allow for the coating of drugs without damaging or degrading the active ingredients. This means the drugs are free of toxic chemical residues and are more effective.

The Clean Technology Group at Nottingham is exploiting the use of supercritical carbon dioxide, which under high pressure at room temperature is a solvent that can use biodegradable plastics to make polymer drug coatings [2]. The polymer (meaning a material composed of molecules with repeating structural units that form a long chain) is used to encapsulate a drug prior to injection in the body and is based on lactic acid, a compound normally produced in the body, and is thus able to be excreted naturally. The coating is designed for controlled release over a period of time, reducing the number of injections required and maximizing the therapeutic benefit.

Professor Steve Howdle, whose research is focused on exploiting the unique properties of supercritical carbon dioxide, said [1]:

Biodegradable polymers are particularly attractive for use in drug delivery, as once introduced into the body they require no retrieval or further manipulation and are degraded into soluble, non-toxic by-products. Different polymers degrade at different rates within the body and therefore polymer selection can be tailored to achieve desired release rates.

Gene delivery

Another interesting recent development is a report by MIT researchers that they have found a way to create gene carriers from biodegradable polymers instead of viral materials [3].

Gene therapy is the introduction of a gene or genes into the cells of a tissue to treat disease. Although 1,180 gene therapy clinical trials have been conducted since 1989 [4], there are no FDA-approved gene therapies, in part because viruses are used as gene carriers. Viruses present a number of potential problems, including toxicity, immune response and targeting issues.

The MIT study focused on three poly(beta-amino-esters) chains of alternating amine and diacrylate groups that spontaneously assemble with DNA to form nanoparticles when mixed together. The polymer-DNA nanoparticle can act like an artificial virus and deliver DNA when injected into tissue. Researchers chemically modified the ends of the polymer chains using a library of small molecules to attenuate and optimize nanoparticle formation and DNA delivery.

According to Daniel Anderson, the study leader and research associate in MIT’s Center for Cancer Research [5]:

Just by changing a couple of atoms at the end of a long polymer, one can dramatically change its performance. These minor alterations in polymer composition significantly increase the polymers’ ability to deliver DNA, and these new materials are now the best non-viral DNA delivery systems we’ve tested.

Degradable polymers are used in dissolvable stitches and have been utilized in the pharmaceutical industry in various forms for decades. Using the technologies described above, not only are we able to produce purer products that offer therapeutic benefits, but both the processes and products are cleaner and safer for the environment.

References

1. Using green chemistry to deliver cutting-edge drugs. The University of Nottingham. 2007 Sep 13.
2. Tai et al. Putting the fizz into chemistry: applications of supercritical carbon dioxide in tissue engineering, drug delivery and synthesis of novel block copolymers. Biochem Soc Trans. 2007 Jun;35(Pt 3):516-21.
   View abstract
3. Green et al. Combinatorial Modification of Degradable Polymers Enables Transfection of Human Cells Comparable to Adenovirus. Advanced Materials. 2007 Oct;19(19):2836-42.
4. Gene Therapy Clinical Trials Worldwide. Provided by the Journal of Gene Medicine. Updated 2007 July.
5. MIT works toward safer gene therapy. MIT News. 2007 Sep 7.

With advances in organic chemistry, many antibiotics today are created by chemical synthesis. However, mimicking nature by identifying, producing and characterizing the appropriate enzymes, not to mention ensuring each enzyme enters the reaction at the proper time in the biosynthetic pathway, is exceedingly complicated. Two U.S. research groups have demonstrated the ability to do just this, thus imitating a biosynthetic process outside the cell.

The first study, carried out at the University of California, demonstrated the multienzyme biosynthesis of the Streptomyces maritimus bacteriostatic agents (meaning an antibiotic that inhibits the growth and reproduction of bacteria without killing them) enterocin and wailupemycin [3]. The production of enterocin from benzoic acid required 12 enzymes. Both antibiotics are naturally created by a Hawaiian sea sediment bacterium.

The second study done at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, demonstrated the biosynthesis of the antitumor fungal metabolite terrequinone A [4]. The researchers first identified the biosynthetic pathway in the fungi Aspergillus nidulans and then reconstituted it in a test tube. The reaction required 5 enzymes and the study constitutes the first identification of a biosynthetic pathway for that class of fungal toxins.

Until now, only the complex biosynthetic pathways inside a cell could manipulate the chemical structure of a substance and produce a natural molecule. One of the lead authors of the University of California study said [5] that it:

… may signal the start of a new era in how drugs are synthesized. Assembling all the enzymes together in a single reaction vessel is a different way to make a complex molecule.

More work is required to scale up the process for mass production. However, the studies prove that biosynthesis of natural products is possible without the use of man-made chemicals – a concept known as green chemistry – and can be done relatively cheaply.

Green chemistry attempts to reduce or eliminate the generation and use of hazardous substances in the design and development of chemical products and processes. Green chemistry began in the United States following the passage of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, which established a national policy to prevent or reduce pollution at its source whenever feasible. Following the act’s passage, the EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) launched a program that included grant support of research to prevent pollution in the synthesis of chemicals. Today, the mission of the EPA Green Chemistry Program is to promote innovative chemical technologies that reduce or eliminate the use or generation of hazardous substances in the design, manufacture, and use of chemical products.

References

1. The Most Important People of the Century – Scientists & Thinkers – Alexander Fleming. The Time 100. 2003.
2. Chain et al. Penicillin as a Chemotherapeutic Agent. Lancet, vol. 2. 1940, pp. 226-228.
3. Cheng et al. Enzymatic total synthesis of enterocin polyketides. Nat Chem Biol. 2007 Sep;3(9):557-8. Epub 2007 Aug 12.
   View abstract
4. Balibar et al. Terrequinone A biosynthesis through L-tryptophan oxidation, dimerization and bisprenylation. Nat Chem Biol. 2007 Sep;3(9):584-92. Epub 2007 Aug 12.
   View abstract
5. Simple Method To Create Natural Drug Products Developed. ScienceDaily. 2007 Sept. 5.

You read that right, widespread use of E85 would likely result in an increase in respiratory-related deaths and hospitalizations.

Stanford University atmospheric chemist Mark Z. Jacobson, author of the study said [2]:

“Ethanol is being promoted as a clean and renewable fuel that will reduce global warming and air pollution, but our results show that a high blend of ethanol poses an equal or greater risk to public health than gasoline, which already causes significant health damage.”

Jacobson used a sophisticated 3-D atmospheric computer model that accounted for the transport of tailpipe emissions across the U.S. along with chemical and radiative transformations in the atmosphere – key components that have been neglected in previous studies. He combined the ambient concentrations with health effects and population data to simulate air quality in the year 2020, when ethanol-powered vehicles are expected to be widely available in the U.S. He then determined the health risks due to gasoline and ethanol, and analyzed the results at high resolution in Los Angeles and at lower resolution in the entire U.S.

Jacobson explained that:

“… chemicals that come out of a tailpipe are affected by a variety of factors, including chemical reactions, temperatures, sunlight, clouds, wind and precipitation. In addition, overall health effects depend on exposure to these airborne chemicals, which varies from region to region. Ours is the first ethanol study that takes into account population distribution and the complex environmental interactions.”

The results

The study results show that converting to E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) could result in higher ozone-related asthma, hospitalization and mortality. The death rate increases about 9% in Los Angeles and 4% in the U.S. over projected death rates with gasoline vehicles.

E85 vehicles reduced atmospheric levels of two carcinogens, benzene and butadiene, but increased two others, acetaldehyde and formaldehyde. As a result, cancer rates for E85 are likely to be similar to those for gasoline. In some parts of the country (Los Angeles and the Northeast), E85 use was projected in increase ozone levels. The oxidant ozone is a well-known air pollutant. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), ozone inhalation is associated with respiratory tract inflammation and functional alterations of the lung [3]. The increased levels of ozone were partially offset by decreased levels in the Southeast. Nonetheless, future E85 use may be a greater overall public health risk than gasoline. Jacobson concludes that E85 is unlikely to improve air quality over future gasoline vehicles and that unburned ethanol emissions from E85 may result in a global-scale source of acetaldehyde larger than that of direct emissions.

Brazil

Brazil is the only country in the world where a large-scale ethanol fuel program, introduced in 1979, has been implemented. By 1997, approximately 4 million Brazilian automobiles ran on neat ethanol (100% ethanol) and another 9 million ran on an ethanol-gasoline blend (22% ethanol) [4]. Since the introduction of ethanol fuel in Brazil, several studies on air quality have been conducted that confirm Jacobson’s recent projections.

In 1990, the concentration of ambient acetaldehyde was determined to be the most abundant carbonyl in three major cities of Brazil [5]. Indeed, acetaldehyde concentrations in urban areas of Brazil were substantially higher than concentrations measured elsewhere in the world, and was thought to be the result of large-scale ethanol fuel use. A more recent study measuring the ambient concentrations of up to 61 carbonyls in Rio de Janeiro found that the most abundant were formaldehyde and acetaldehyde [6]. The authors ranked measured carbonyls with respect to ozone formation potential and reaction with OH and found that ozone formation is dominated by formaldehyde (43% of total) followed by acetaldehyde (32%).

Health effects

In children, repeated short-term exposure to ozone may damage developing lungs and may lead to permanent reductions in lung function [7]. Indeed, time spent outside in areas of high ozone is associated with a higher incidence of asthma than areas of low ozone. Adults exposed to ozone exhibit impaired lung function and irritative lower airway symptoms [8]. Ozone exposure has been associated with an increased number of hospital admissions [9-12]

Alternative alternatives

E85 clearly has it’s advantages: in addition to the potential carbon savings and reduced impact on global warming, E85 can be distributed and dispensed like conventional liquid fuel and can be used in vehicles that cost automakers very little in terms of additional cost. However, although I am all for decreased dependence on fossil energy, it shouldn’t come at the expense of our health.

There are alternatives, including hybrid technology and biodiesel.

In a recent interview with NPR, former Chrysler chairman Lee Iacocca said that the Big Three American automakers (General Motors Corporation, Ford Motor Company and Chrysler) lost their dominance because they failed to “follow-the-market”.

At the end of the interview, he said:

” … I’ve become real fan in the past year of plug-in hybrids. That’s the wave of the future.”

Plug-in hybrids – a third alternative. You can listen to Iacocca’s interview with NPR here.

References

1. Gray et al. Bioethanol. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2006 Apr;10(2):141-6. Epub 2006 Mar 7.
   View abstract
2. Ethanol Vehicles Pose Significant Risk to Health, New Study Finds. Stanford Report. 2007 Apr 18.
3. Ozone and Your Patient’s Health, Course Summary & Key Points. Air Pollution Training Institute, Environmental Protection Agency.
4. Grosjean D. Atmospheric Chemistry of Alcohols. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 1997; 8(4): 433-42.
5. Grosjean et al. Urban Air Pollution in Brazil: Acetaldehyde and Other Carbonyls. Atmospheric Environment 1990 24B: 101-106.
6. Grosjean et al. Speciated ambient carbonyls in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Environ Sci Technol. 2002 Apr 1;36(7):1389-95.
   View abstract
7. McConnell et al. Asthma in exercising children exposed to ozone: a cohort study. Lancet. 2002 Feb 2;359(9304):386-91.
   View abstract
8. Bromberg and Koren. Ozone-induced human respiratory dysfunction and disease. Toxicol Lett. 1995 Dec;82-83:307-16.
   View abstract
9. Medina-Ramon et al. The effect of ozone and PM10 on hospital admissions for pneumonia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a national multicity study. Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Mar 15;163(6):579-88. Epub 2006 Jan 27.
   View abstract
10. Lee et al. Association between air pollution and asthma admission among children in Hong Kong. Clin Exp Allergy. 2006 Sep;36(9):1138-46.
    View abstract
11. Chang et al. Air pollution and hospital admissions for cardiovascular disease in Taipei, Taiwan. Environ Res. 2005 May;98(1):114-9.
    View abstract
12. Yang et al. Association between ozone and respiratory admissions among children and the elderly in Vancouver, Canada. Inhal Toxicol. 2003 Nov;15(13):1297-308.
    View abstract

• Switch out old incandescent bulbs for high-efficiency bulbs.
• Call on elected officials to support a mandatory 2016 phase-out of low efficiency incandescent lighting.

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) projects an electric bill savings of $18 billion annually if energy-efficient lighting was adopted across the U.S. [2]. Annual energy demand would be reduced by the equivalent of 80 coal burning power plants, eliminating more than 158 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions by 2016.

Climate change solutions – what you can do today

The Earth Day Network has compiled a list of the top 10 actions for individuals, orgnaizations and businesses to take as an initial step in reducing your contribution to global warming.

1. Project Switch – replace your incadesent light bulbs with energy efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs).

   Turn off unneeded lights, dim lights when possible and let natural sunlight into your home.

2. Drive your car differently or replace it with a fuel-efficient car.

   Drive less, keep your car tuned up to improve fuel efficiency and slow down.

3. Manage household heating and cooling costs.

   Replace older heating and cooling systems with new efficient models (or tune up your existing system), buy a programmable thermostat, add two degrees to the AC thermostat in the summer and two degrees in the winter, make sure windows and doors are sealed, and avoid air conditioners and use ceiling fans whenever possible.

4. Make your refrigerator efficient.

   Replace older refridgerators with new energy efficient models, don’t set the thermostat too high, clean the condensor coil, and make sure the doors seal properly.

5. Manage other household appliances.

   Set your hot water heater at 120 degrees, insulate your hot water heater and pipes, install a timer on your water heater to turn off at night and on just before you wake in the morning, wash more dishes by hand, wait until you have a full load of dishes to run the dishwasher, wash clothes in warm, not hot water, and don’t over-dry your clothes.

6. Green plants with less water, more trees to provide shade.

   Plant trees to provide shade, choose hardier plants in your yard that require less water, and water your lawn sparingly.

7. Buy Green Energy and invest in green energy stocks.

Many utilities give consumers the option to buy “green power”, producing electricity from renewable energy sources such as solar, geothermal and wind. Ask for it! Invest in socially responsible funds.

8. Go organic.

   Eat locally grown food, eat fruits and vegetables in season, and plant your own vegetable garden.

9. Buy recycled products.

   Manufacturers use recycle products, including aluminum and tin cans, glass containers and pulp cardboard.

10. Be a minimalist. Simply use and buy less.

    Buy in bulk and buy quality products that last longer.

Earth Day was created in 1970 to spark a revolution against environmental abuse. The Earth Day Network seeks to grow and diversify the environmental movement worldwide, pursuing it’s goals for a healthy and sustainable planet through education, politics, cultural events and consumer activism. More than 500 million people participate in Earth Day civic activities, making it the largest secular civic event in the world.

References

1. Earth Day Network Launches 2007 Campaign to Phase-out the Inefficient Incandescent Light Bulb. Earth Day Network. March 14, 2007.
2. Four Billion Points of Light: ACEEE Joins Lighting Market Transformation Initiative. ACEEE. March 14, 2007.

• The first 24-hour television network dedicated exclusively to green lifestyle programming, including eco-design, organic food and green architecture.
• A 50 million dollar investment towards the creation of content focused on sustainable development, conservation, organic lifestyle and healthy living. The first major project, “Ten Ways to Save the Planet”, will be a global effort to identify solutions to the planet’s most serious environmental threats. The series is scheduled to premier in the third quarter of 2008.
• A robust multi-platform offering with interactive tools and comprehensive “how-to” resources.
• Annual scientific exploration with explorer and wilderness educator Josh Bernstein to the planet’s most endangered locations to raise awareness.
• A world renowned advisory board, consisting of preeminent scientists, researchers, innovators and environmental leaders, will help to guide Discovery’s global efforts.
• Discovery will host a PlanetGreen Innovation Conference showcasing the latest inventions and innovative technologies currently being developed.
• Discovery will further it’s commitment to responsible operations and make its global headquarters in Siver Spring, Maryland a carbon-neutral building.
• Discovery will work with a broad coalition of partners, including The Nature Conservancy, Treehugger.com and Grist.org, to produce relevant and entertaining programming, to provide timely, reputable information, and to inspire individuals to make a difference.

Discovery PlanetGreen will be headed by Eileen O’Neill, former General Manager of the Discovery Health Channel. Discovery Communications Chief Executive David Zaslav said in an interview [2]:

“To be able to rebrand an existing channel and launch with over 50 million homes in 2008 is a big statement to where the world is today. Five years ago, people would have said ‘who are those lefties talking about green’? Today, green means responsible.”

Today green also means profitable. More and more people are willing to spend more for energy-efficient and eco-friendly goods and services. Indeed, a recent Orbitz survey found that 63% of Americans would pay more to rent a hybrid vehicle or stay at a “green” hotel [3]. Additionally, 52% of Americans state they would be willing to donate a small portion of their vacation budget to help save the environment when booking a trip.

It will be interesting to watch the development of eco-friendly advertising and marketing on Discovery’s new channel. I doubt the network will change the world, but maybe it can give it a big push in the right direction.

References

1. Discovery Communications to Dedicate 24-Hour Television Network Exclusively for the Environmentally Conscious Lifestyle. PR Newswire, United Business Media. April 5th, 2007.
2. Discovery to start ‘green’ cable channel. United Press International. April 5, 2007.
3. Orbitz Survey: 67% of Americans Stress Importance of Eco-friendly Travel. PR Newswire, United Business Media. April 11, 2007.