FEEDING YOUR BABY ARSENIC?

Last updated at 4:03 PM on 10th April 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1375416/Leading-brands-baby-food-contain-arsenic-toxins.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Small amounts of arsenic and other toxins found in the soil are getting into the ingredients used in top-selling baby foods, it has emerged.
Manufacturers insist the levels are so low that they do not pose a health risk.
However, scientists and food campaigners are calling for efforts to eliminate the chemicals completely from mass-produced products eaten by millions of youngsters.
Products from leading brands, including Organix, Hipp, Nestle and Holle, were tested by Swedish researchers.

Arsenic fears: Researchers found baby food contained toxins from soil that have made their way into ingredients

Writing in the journal of Food Chemistry, the scientists from the Unit of Metals and Health at Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden, said: 'Alarmingly, these complementary foods may also introduce high amounts of toxic elements such as arsenic, cadmium, lead and uranium, mainly from their raw materials.
'These elements have to be kept at an absolute minimum in food products intended for infant consumption.

'In infant foods, the high concentrations of arsenic in the rice-based foods are of particular concern.'

Two years ago, Britain's Food Standards Agency issued an official warning that young children should be stopped from drinking rice milk because of arsenic contamination.
It acted after two types of the poison were found in the rice milk, including the most harmful form, which is called inorganic arsenic.
While arsenic is known as a poison, it is also associated with the development of certain cancers.

TOP BRANDS FOUND TO BE CONTAINING TOXINS

• Organix First Organic Whole Grain Baby Rice
• HiPP Organic Peach and Banana Breakfast Porridge
• Holle Organic Rice Porridge

Professor Andrew Meharg, a biogeochemist at Aberdeen University, is particularly concerned about the presence of arsenic in the rice used in baby food.
'Baby rice is a very popular choice for parents weaning their babies onto solids, but there is a concern of arsenic contamination,' he said.
'Baby companies should be sourcing baby rice from regions of the world where levels of inorganic arsenic are as low as possible.'
Both the European Food Safety Authority and Britain's FSA are currently carrying out a review to set new limits for arsenic in food, particularly those designed for babies and toddlers.
Arsenic contamination of crops is a known problem associated with past pesticide use. Other heavy metals and toxins produced by heavy industry also find their way into the soil and food, even organic produce.
The Swedish team said toxin levels were measured in micrograms, one millionth of a gram. The amounts found were higher than in breast milk.
Organix First Organic Whole Grain Baby Rice contained two micrograms of arsenic per portion, along with 0.03 micrograms of cadmium and 0.09 micrograms of lead.
This product is sold by Boots.

Toxins: HiPP Organic Peach and Banana Breakfast Porridge and Holle Organic Porridge both contained small amounts of chemicals

HiPP Organic Peach and Banana Breakfast Porridge contained 1.7 micrograms of arsenic, 0.13 micrograms of cadmium and 0.33 micrograms of lead.
Holle Organic Rice Porridge contained 7.3 micrograms of arsenic per portion - the highest found in the study - along with 0.38 micrograms of cadmium and 0.26 micrograms of lead.
Dr Karin Ljung, who led the Swedish research, confirmed none of the chemicals found were above existing safety limits. However, she said there is a need to review these levels to ensure developing children are protected.
The FSA said this work is under way, adding: 'The Agency is actively engaging with the European Commission to review and establish long term limits for these environmental contaminants in food.'
The baby food trady body, the British Specialist Nutrition Association(BSNA), said its members 'carefully select and control their ingredients as well as the baby food' to ensure they are safe.
It said: 'That selection of suitable ingredients ensures the lowest possible occurrence of certain naturally-occurring substances. Ingredients that do not meet stringent specifications are not used in baby foods.'
HiPP insisted the levels of arsenic and cadmium in their Organic Peach and Banana Breakfast porridge are below official limits.
Organix said: 'Organix operates rigorous finished food testing to ensure food safety is monitored regularly. This includes testing for elements, microbiological, allergen and pesticide residues.
'Our further testing of finished foods and raw materials show ALL results conform to the current UK food standard.'
Plum said: 'Sampling of our recipe shows levels for arsenic are well below those in this latest study, and again these are well within the generally regarded safe and acceptable limits.'
Nestle said its raw materials are carefully selected to ensure substances absorbed from the soil are as low as possible.

THE WATER MINING OF LAKE ERIE

http://www.oregonohio.org/Water/water-plant.html
Superintendent of Water Treatment - Janiece Schmidt

Built in 1963, The Oregon Water Treatment System consists of the following sections:

Intake

Located in Lake Erie about 16 feet deep and 1.5 miles from shore is Oregon's intake crib. The Crib is totally submerged and connected to the City's Low Pressure Pumping Station located near Anchor Point Marina. The intake line is 48 inches in diameter and draws millions of gallons of water out of the lake for use by the citizens of Oregon and surrounding communities.

Low Pressure Pumping Station

After lake water flows into the Low Pressure Pumping Station through the raw water intake line, the water is pumped the water treatment plant. The pump station can be either locally or remotely operated by signals sent from the water treatment plant if required. The pumps located at the station range from 8 million gallons per day (MGD) to 17.2 MGD. Activated carbon can be fed at this location to address taste and odor causing agents in the raw water. The building also contains an auxiliary power plant capable of generating total electrical power for the station. Since the onset of the Zebra Mussel infestation in Lake Erie, it is necessary to feed a polymer or potassium permanganate to limit their growth in the intake conduit, the low pressure force main and the suction wells.

Treatment Plant

Raw water is transported from the Low Pressure Pumping Station to the Water Treatment Plant through 5 miles of 36 inch diameter pipe. The plant has been expanded to treat 16 million gallons of water per day (667,000 gallons per hour), and we've also upgraded our security. Continual monitoring of the chemical feeders and raw water by the plant's operators insures optimal treatment of the water. Lime and caustic soda for softening, alum for coagulation, carbon dioxide for neutralizing excess lime in solution and chlorine for disinfection are the primary parts of the treatment. Fluoride is also added in one of the final stages. The water is filtered through 8 rapid sand filters, then stored in 2 underground clear water reservoirs with a combined capacity of 7.5 million gallons. The main treatment plant also has an auxiliary power generator that will allow the plant to run uninterrupted should the normal power supply not be available. The water can be drawn out of the clearwater reservoirs with any of the 6 high pressure pumps that pump into the distribution system. These pumps range from 2 MGD to 8 MGD.

Distribution System

The elevated water storage tank near Coy and Navarre can hold 1 million gallons of water. This tank is connected to the water plant through a 15 mile loop of pipes which range from 48 inches to 20 inches in diameter. Tied into this main loop, or trunk lines, are many more lines which reduce in size to a diameter of 6 inches. These smaller lines are, for the most part, where the consumers tap in for their water. There are approximately 125 miles of underground water lines that continually carry water to the consumers.

Expansion

The City of Oregon has completed a five phase approach to expand the plant to 16 million gallons per day.

Phase 1 was the construction of an additional 8 MGD of new filter capacity and installation of a new 8 MGD high pressure pump. This phase was completed in September 2001.

Phase 2 was by far the largest phase and increased the plant capacity to 12 MGD. It includes a new chemical building and 4 MGD additional flocculation and settling capacity in addition to new chemical feeders. This phase was completed in August 2002.

Phase 3 was not to increase the capacity, but to update the existing plant's basin design and feeders. The additional capacity from Phase 2 allowed the original plant to be drained and the work done. This phase was completed in March 2004.

Phase 4 completed the plant expansion and brought the capacity up to 16 MGD with an additional 4 MGD of flocculation and settling basins added to the Phase 2 chemical building. This Phase was completed in December 2004.

Phase 5 was the installation of a computer system capable of performing many tasks. It will handle data by collection, logging and charting when necessary. It also automated some routine plant functions. Changes in the required dosages of the various feeders are made from a central console. It monitors water quality parameters and provides alarms before action levels are exceeded. This project was completed in May 2005.

WATER WARS

http://www.mcgill.ca/reporter/33/02/water/

Canada will come under increasing pressure to sell water to the U.S., with potentially serious environmental consequences, said McGill experts at a recent Macdonald Campus conference titled "Water: Gift, Commodity or International Weapon."

Peter Brown, director of the McGill School of Environment, believes that advocates of selling water must prove that the consequences will be acceptable.
"The burden of proof has been shifted. Human use of a resource has to be supported by reasons, and the reasons offered cannot be concerned solely with human well being. Within a framework of reverence for life, we have obligations for the flourishing of other life forms."
Brown also contended that buyers must demonstrate a "record of wise use" of water, and a sound overall water policy.
"Life forms cannot be eradicated for minor increments in human satisfaction. Species cannot legitimately be traded for fountains in desert golf courses."
In a subsequent interview, Brown explained why water sales on a large scale could have serious consequences.
"There are lots of ways in which changing either ground water or surface water will affect the ability of species to flourish or even survive, but if we started to sell huge quantities, in some cases it could mean that certain species, like the salamander, could not reproduce. If we dry up the springs they use to breed in, it could mean that species won't make it in that body of water."
Brown notes that sales of water to the States are negligible now, but an increasing number of droughts and climate change from global warming may result in more arid conditions in the central U.S. In addition, the U.S. population is expected to swell by at least 50 percent in the next few decades, thus expanding their water needs.
Furthermore, many of our neighbour's agricultural practices are unsustainable, particularly in the northern Midwest, where groundwater is being pumped out to irrigate crops.
"They have substituted rain- fed agriculture along the Atlantic coast -- because good farmland is being covered up by urban sprawl -- for an unsustainable irrigation-based agriculture in the Midwest. When the aquifer runs dry, which it absolutely will, what will they do? It seems likely that they will start looking to Canada, and say 'You have all this water, and you're not using it.'
"My answer would be that we are using it. Because humans are not the only ones who matter."
Brown is concerned that the offer of U.S. greenbacks may sweep aside such objections.
"It was important that we have the symposium now, because it is important to think about how to respond to pressure, once it starts. We're not under a lot of pressure now, but once hundreds of millions of dollars are put on the table, that will change, and the government may want to do things which are not necessarily sound.
"I think politicians will care about the environmental concerns if people show that they care."
Biology professor Joseph Rasmussen has a slightly different take on the problem. He sees Brown's scenario as optimistic, given U.S. history and the opportunities presented by the interconnectedness of the Great Lakes.
"In the 1960s, the midwestern states switched from grain to corn, a high water-demanding crop. So there is already pressure from U.S. agriculture, which wants to use more and more water from the Great Lakes. If the aquifer dries up, at the rate at which their agricultural production is escalating, they could very well need water equivalent to 10-20 percent of the water flow in the St. Lawrence."
Rasmussen fears that the U.S. may want to "hijack" water from the Great Lakes, rather than purchasing it, as in Brown's view.
"The Colorado River was hijacked, diverted into California to keep that state going. I don't know why Mexico doesn't scream about it more, since the Colorado River ends up with almost no water in it when it crosses the border into the Sea of Cortez. I think that we're going to face the same problem, in the next 50 years. "
Rasmussen says that the U.S. could simply leach water out of Lake Michigan, which they own, consequently forcing water out of the Great Lakes on the Canadian side of the border.
"Selling water might be the most optimistic scenario. If they take water out of Lake Michigan, they don't have to buy it from us. Taking it from Lake Michigan affects the discharge in the entire Great Lakes system; if it's coming out of the upper end, it's not coming out of our end."
A drop in water levels in the Great Lakes would affect Quebec most directly through the St Lawrence River.
"The discharge through the St. Lawrence River would drop, so that our fisheries in the Gulf of St. Lawrence could collapse."
In addition, because the U.S. owns Lake Michigan outright, "we can only negotiate water practices on Lake Michigan through the International Joint Commission and Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, a trans-border political body which has no power. I'm not optimistic that they can address this issue, if the U.S. takes a hard line and insists on growing high water-demanding crops in what is essentially a desert."
This could lead to a "pumping war," in which both sides pump water aggressively to prevent the other side from taking more than their share.
"This is a common practice in dry areas of the world. In areas where people live on ground water, they have to negotiate a cooperative plan to prevent a pumping war."
Another possibility is that Canada proactively offers Great Lakes water for sale, to offset the possibility of a hijacking.
"If they can take it anyway, we may feel forced to sell it, so that we at least get U.S. dollars in the bargain."
The conference was organized by the Brace Centre for Water Resources Management and co-sponsored by the McGill School of Environment.