|
We tend to think of our homes as safe
havens, places that protect and nurture us. And while we may not like
going to the office, we typically do not think of them as toxic.
Unfortunately, the great indoors may be slowing killing us. The
Environmental Protection Agency estimates that pollution indoors can be
six to ten times higher than outside and is responsible for serious
health effects. It is widely recognized as the most serious potential
environmental risk to human health. A Scientific American article
stated that nearly all cancers appear to be caused by exposures to
factors in the environment”.2 because we spend 90% of our time indoors,
we are potentially exposed to 90% of the factors that cause cancer and
illness while we are indoors.
Just because there is not an immediate and observable heath effect below
a certain concentration of a chemical or hazard does not mean you are
not being affected. Consider carbon monoxide. It is a colorless,
odorless gas caused by leaky gas appliances. You may not know you’re
being poisoned until it’s too late. Many people die in their sleep each
year from carbon monoxide poisoning. There are other environmental
pollutants that may be affecting your health without you being aware of
them.
How Bad is It?
How many friends and co-workers
do you know that start to sneezing, have their eyes water and allergies
take over after they get to work? According to a United States Senator
and author of the Indoor Air Quality Act, “we now have evidence that the
health effects of indoor air pollutants result in reduced productivity,
sick time and heath costs estimated to be in the tens-of-billions of
dollars3” Eight-million school and work days are lost
annually to allergies. We spend $600 million every year to get relief4.
- Millions of people are undergoing
needless drugging, hospitalization or even surgery because the
environmental cause of their problem is not understood5
- One in four has allergies today6.
- A legislative report in
Massachusetts stated that indoor air pollution accounts for 50% of
all illness8
- 70% of cancers are caused by
environmental factors8
- Pesticides are a major risk factor
for breast cancer9
- Pets that lived to an average age of
15 or 16 in the 1960s now die at seven or eight10
The following are just a few of the
health symptoms that have been attributed to the indoor environmental
factors:
- Allergies
- Headaches
- Fatigue
- Muscle cramping
- Frequent colds or flu
- Poor concentration
- Depression
- Irritability
- Hyperactivity
- Insomnia
What Level is Safe? - The Rain
Barrel EffectStudies that indicate environmental pollutants play a role
in the creation of allergies and illness show that no single factor
causes a disease11. Rather, the cumulative load of multiple
poisons creates allergies and illness. People don’t get most diseases –
they develop them.12
Picture an empty barrel outdoors. A few rain drops in the barrel
hardly make a difference. But left out long enough the barrel overflows.
There is the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. It’s the same
thing with the body’s immune system. It can only handle so much. Toxic
mold may cause the body to have an allergic reaction, but it may be the
dust, chemicals, pesticides, cleaning products, fragrance, pesticides,
new carpet, and new paint and sleeping next to the TV that made the body
vulnerable to mold.
It takes 2
More than one substance might be necessary to
cause a reaction: the primary allergy and a trigger. For example,
researchers have found there may be a synergistic effect between the
presence of tobacco smoke and mold and between tobacco smoke and
allergens in house dust13. One may be mildly allergic to mold
and to dog dander but it takes both to trigger a reaction.14
The One-percent Rule
According to product safety labeling and
material safety data sheets, if a product contains
greater than 1% of a hazardous ingredient, the ingredient must be on
the label. If it’s less than 1% it may not be required to be on the
label even if it’s a hazardous substance. Consider the following case
as an example of how a low level exposure, lower than what is thought to
be harmful, may be dangerous.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers something to contain
asbestos only if it contains greater than 1% asbestos fibers. If it
contains less than 1% then the material it is not considered asbestos.
This is the criteria used to assess if something contains asbestos when
performing renovations that disturb asbestos in buildings including
schools. How was the 1% chosen as a cut-off value? They had to draw the
line somewhere. So many things contain asbestos they wanted to be
realistic about the hazard and not to cause a panic. But the 1% rule may
be seriously flawed. problems. You could just drive down the street and
notice people sitting on their front poach next the supplemental oxygen
tank they needed to breathe. Not just the workers, and not just the
families of the workers– the whole town was affected. One in six in
Libby is currently diagnosed with a lung disease due to asbestos. The
company that made the product claims they did nothing wrong – the
vermiculite contained less than 1% asbestos.
In Libby, Montana, a company now out
of business made insulation by mining a natural mineral called
vermiculite. The mining, processing and packaging took place in Libby.
The finished product came in bags under the brand name Zonolite which
was shipped out by rail and installed in approximately 30 million homes
across America.
Libby is a small town. Over the years, the town doctor noticed more and
more residents having respiratory problems. You could just drive down
the street and notice people sitting on their front poach next the
supplemental oxygen tank they needed to breathe. Not just the workers,
and not just the families of the workers– the whole town was affected.
One in six in Libby is currently diagnosed with a lung disease due to
asbestos. The company that made the product claims they did nothing
wrong – the vermiculite contained less than 1% asbestos.
Government Permissible Exposure Levels
In the work place, the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have established
maximum levels of chemicals and other hazards that workers are allowed
to be exposed to. These levels are often cited as thresholds below which
exposure is not hazardous. These levels are based on economics - not
health. The government does an analysis of how much it will cost to
enforce the standards they set. If it’s going to cost business too much
to reduce worker exposure to below the permissible levels companies will
sue them. Therefore the government, OSHA, works with companies to set
the limits based on what will cause an immediate and obvious reaction in
otherwise healthy, male adult workers.
Permissible exposure limits (PELs) are often established without any
long-term studies. Often there are no health studies at all. Studies
that are done do not take into consideration the potential effects that
may result from multiple chemicals or hazards being present that react
with each other to create a complex soup of new and potentially more
toxic ones. PELs are not based on how the hazards affect children,
pregnant women or immune compromised people. There is evidence to
suggest that 15% - 20% of the population will react negatively to
exposures below OSHA’s established values15. Yet these
exposure limits are often applied to non-industrial places such as
schools, hospitals, homes and offices. Don’t assume that the office,
school or environment you work in is safe because levels are below OSHA
guidelines.
Acceptable Indoor Environments
So what are acceptable standards
for a healthy building? Use nature and the outdoors as a yardstick. When
ever there is question as to if the indoor air quality is acceptable
compare it to the outdoors. What are the levels of chemicals and mold
found outside?
For example, there are currently no government regulations regarding
what level of mold indoors determines there is a mold problem. Instead,
comparisons are made of the level of mold indoors to outdoors. This is a
good thing. Although states such as California have passed a law
requiring mold exposure limits to be established, this has not been
done. It wasn’t done because the law wasn’t funded. It may not be able
to be done because there are variances in personal sensitivities and a
vast array of molds that make it extremely difficult to establish
acceptable levels of exposure. If there was a certain level of mold
deemed acceptable we would be in big trouble. That would mean there
could be a mold problem in a building and people getting sick from it,
but the exposure limits would say it’s ok.
I think similar comparisons are the best way to assess other
hazards. If you live in Los Angels or New York City, the outdoor
concentration of dust and chemical smog is going to be higher than
Aspen, Colorado. But the levels inside your home or office should still
be less than or equal to outdoors. If the indoor level of pollution is
higher than outdoors there are sources indoors that should be identified
and reduced or eliminated.
This is what the standards issued by the International Institute for
Bau-Biologie and Ecology (building biology) state. The institute was
started in Germany about twenty years ago. After World War II when
Europe was being rebuilt, people noticed that they felt worse in
buildings built using modern building materials than they did in those
constructed out of traditional materials. Scientists tested the air and
compared levels of pollutants such as chemicals, mold and
electromagnetic fields from those in older and newer homes to what was
found outdoors. They produced a set of standards that relates levels of
indoor pollution to relative health risks using the outdoors and nature
as the ultimate benchmark.
Don’t sweat the small stuff
There is a saying about worrying
too much: “I’m going to die of something some day.” The author chooses
not to worry about all the little things either. But it would nice to
avoid illness until death and have a highest quality of life in the
meantime. That’s why the list of the Top 10 was developed. Small
changes can make a difference. A 2000 study conducted at the Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory in California, estimated that improved
indoor environments could save $6 billion to $14 billion from reduced
respiratory disease and $1 billion to $4 billion from reduced allergies
and asthma16." |
|