And, recent bio-monitoring have fund as many as 90 toxic chemicals in humans that don't belong in people...
With more and more people driving in urban gridlocked traffic, there is the real potential for self-fumigation in automobiles that are not equipped with internal air handling systems that permit occupants to recycle interior air without sucking in polluted exterior "road air." While your writing to auto makers requesting that they not wait ten to fifteen years or longer for unproven hydrogen fuel cell technologies, and that they begin more aggressively phasing in existing fuel efficiency technologies RIGHT NOW... also request that more vehicles be equipped with polluted road air exclusion systems... and crack your windows to help dilute the inside pollution in the meanwhile... Cheers to a cleaner-air, cleaner-planet, cleaner-people future, Rand Carlessnesshood 101 for Healthier Air, Planet, & People http://www.autobuyology.org/tellcarmakerstocleantheair.pdf on 1/17/2004 8:34 PM, Will Affleck-Asch at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ----- forwarded message ----- > Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 06:22:47 -0700 > From: Teresa Binstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Tiny particles 'threaten brain' - microscopic pollutants > > Tiny particles 'threaten brain' > By Alex Kirby > BBC News Online environment correspondent > Published: 2004/01/08 16:05:26 GMT > http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3379759.stm > > Microscopic pollutant particles given off by traffic and industry can enter > the > bloodstream and the brain after being inhaled, scientists have found. > > The particles are known to cause lung damage in susceptible patients, and are > implicated in cardiovascular disease. > > Experiments on rats and humans have now discovered they can penetrate > further into the body, with unknown results. > > UK scientists are calling for vigilance over the finding, and over the > possible > effects of a new group of particles. > > These objects are being created in the burgeoning field of nanotechnology, in > which atoms and molecules in materials are manipulated to exploit novel and > sometimes unusual properties. > > Mindful of the potential health impact of such particles, the UK Government > has > asked the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering to review the > current status of the science and assess if there is a need for new > regulation. > > Subtle infiltrators > > Many of us are routinely exposed to particles from diesel vehicle fumes (these > are normally known as PM10, from their size), which penetrate buildings and > are ubiquitous in cities. > > Some cooking stoves emit high levels of particles as well. > > There is also occupational exposure for people making products like sunblock > cream, inks, photocopier toners, and working with welding equipment. > > Ken Donaldson, Professor of Respiratory Medicine at the University of > Edinburgh, UK, said these sorts of particle were known to cause damage at the > point of entry to the human body. > > What was new, he said, was the discovery by researchers in Europe and the > US that they "can get to areas that bigger particles cannot reach". > > Patients who inhaled radioactive ultrafine carbon particles displayed traces > of it > in their bloodstream not long afterwards. > > Experimental rats which inhaled similar particles showed a marked decline in > particulate level in their lungs after six or seven days. > > Unknown hazard > > In the olfactory bulb and other parts of the brain, though, levels (although > lower than in the lungs) remained relatively stable over the same period. > > These very small pieces of matter are called nanoparticles, defined as > anything > smaller than 100 nanometres in size. A nanometre is one-billionth of a metre, > 80,000 times smaller than a human hair. > > Professor Donaldson said: "We are already exposed to nanoparticles of > different kinds. We already recognise that there is some ill-health associated > with these exposures. > > "But they may also translocate away from their point of entry into the blood > or > the brain. We are not sure what the consequences of this are yet. > > "The nanotechnology revolution may design particles that are very different > chemically from the ones we are exposed to, and they might have very > different properties that made them more harmful. We should be vigilant." > > He told BBC News Online: "I think there could be an increased future risk for > all > of us, and also a higher risk for people exposed at present to nanoparticles > at > work, though it's impossible to say how much bigger their risk is. > > "These particles are not things you can trap with a filter. But they do > disperse > rapidly, unlike asbestos." > > Nanotechnology involves building working devices, systems and materials > molecule by molecule, and exploiting the unique and powerful electrical, > physical and chemical properties found at that scale. > > It has developed from advances in microscopy, materials science, > molecular-level manipulation, and the relationship between classical and > quantum physics. > > The UK's Royal Microcopical Society and the Institute of Physics are holding a > conference on the health implications of nanoparticles on 13 and 14 January at > the Daresbury Laboratories in northern England. > > © BBC MMIV > > * > The material in this post is distributed without profit to those > who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included > information for research and educational purposes. > For more information go to: > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html > http://oregon.uoregon.edu/~csundt/documents.htm > If you wish to use copyrighted material from this email for > purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission > from the copyright owner.
