Environmental pollution and diseases
Marina Ristic
ENG 101
Prof Wolahan
Research Paper
While considerable attention is focused on viruses, bacilli and genetic factors as a
cause of diseases, why is not enough attention given to pollution in the environment and to
the risks posed by this modern threat to health? It seems only when catastrophes strike
resulting in many deaths that legislative bodies hear the public clamor and decide finally to
close the barn door after the horse has escaped. Exposure to environmental pollution remains
a major source of health risk throughout the world, therefore we should be aware of the
effects of certain chemicals on human life, different types of environmental pollution,specific
areas where pollution is most severe as well as what should and must be done by government
to counteract increasing levels of pollution.
The pollution of the Yellow Creek in Kentucky is one of the many examples where
environmental destruction posed risks to human health. Chemicals that were dumped by an
upstream leather tanning company into the creek killed fish, aquatic life and livestock.
Moreover they caused severe immune system damage to its residents, which also lead to
cancer and many central nervous system diseases. One of many victims of this pollution is
Wilson, who stated in his article,” The doctor explained that the problem was similar to
AIDS. The difference was our immune system were not damaged by a virus, but by
chemicals”.(Wilson 2).Wilson and his neighbors asked the doctor if he would testify to the
results in court. The doctor assured them that he would testify but he asked $10,000 in
advance. Since they hardly had enough money for air-line tickets to California and laboratory
fee for ten blood tests, to raise $10,000 was unthinkable. Even though government officials
claimed there was no risk to human health, Wilson and his neighbors learned that chromium
which was used in the tanning process causes cancer. After three years of asking politicians
and different agencies for help, the community met and decided to file a class-action lawsuit
against the tannery. Dr William Reid from Tennessee is one of doctors who began to raise
concerns about a possible link between environmental contamination and the illnesses he was
seeing in patients. He said that government is not giving tools to do the testing and the
research.
What I’ve discovered is that politics seems to have suppressed science. If
I compare environmental science with oncology --environmental science
doesn’t follow their leads. When something new comes up in cancer
research, people jump on it. When it was discovered that lead increased
learning problems -- the medical community didn’t follow up on that. Or
heavy metal exposure and its health effects-- what I think will be the
biggest health threat -- the standardized test and other medical tools
aren’t there because the politicians aren’t giving the funding for that.
(Reid qtd. in Wilson 5).
Also, the people who are exposed to environmental poisoning are usually people without
health coverage and in areas with limited medical facilities. For that reason they don’t have
the luxury to choose their doctors. Only a few doctors will treat them without medical
coverage. Since everyone is focused on health care, we should take into consideration the
health of those citizens who are most directly affected by environmental degradation and
poisoning.
The Yellow Creek situation is not a unique one. There are many similar
situations and the common thing among them is the attempt to ease their suffering by taking
their problems to different agencies that regulate only environmental pollution not to those
that involve health. As a result public health agencies do not directly feel this pressure from
thousands of affected communities. According to the “Environmental Protection Agency”
there are many studies that demonstrated an association between environmental exposure and
certain diseases. For example arsenic and radon cause cancer, mostly lung cancer, while lead
causes nervous system disorders. Some effects on health may be short-term, such as irritated
eyes from smog. Other effects, such as emphysema, heart disease and cancer are chronic and
sometimes even fatal. Health problems from lead exposure are a major environmental health
problem because they are widespread. Children are much more vulnerable to the effects of
lead than adults. Most of all lead has the negative effect on nervous system, can lower
intelligence, and it is also associated with attention and behavioral problems. Air pollution
has been associated with several health problems like nose and throat irritation, acute
condition of existing diseases like asthma, and premature death.
The impact of air pollution on health was underscored in December 1952
when a slow-moving area of high pressure came to halt over the city of
London. Fog developed over the city, and particulate and sulfur pollution
began accumulating in the stagnating air mass. Smoke and sulfur dioxide
concentrations built up over three days. An estimated 4,000 extra deaths
occurred over a three to four day period.(Environmental pollution and
Diseases).
The air pollution in London represents the first quantitative air pollution exposure data
with a link to health. There is no question that air pollution can kill. According to American
Heart Association research, it is estimated that people living in the most polluted U.S. cities
could lose between 1.8 and 3.1 years because of exposure to chronic air pollution. The
researchers also found that exposure to traffic-related air pollutants was more highly related
to mortality than city wide background levels. For example, people who live near a major
road were more likely to die from cardiovascular disease.(Air Pollution, Heart Disease and
Stroke). In its State of the Air 2006 report, the American Lung Association claimed that
“over half of the U.S. population lives in countries that have unhealthful levels of either
ozone or particle pollution.”( Schwartz). According to an Environmental Protection Agency
“ozone can irritate lung airways and cause inflammation much like a sunburn…People with
respiratory problems are most vulnerable, but even healthy people that are active outdoors
can be affected when ozone levels are high.(Schwartz).
Indoor air pollution can be much more dangerous than outdoor air
pollution. Secondhand smoke is the largest contributor to indoor air pollution when a smoker
is present. According to American Heart Association secondhand smoke affects the heart and
circulatory system “exposure to the secondhand smoke of just one cigarette per day
accelerates the progression of atherosclerosis.”(Air Pollution, Heart diseases and Stroke).
The National Research Center for Environment and Health in Germany recently did a study
of children’s exposure to passive smoking. “Non-smoking children exposed to parental
tobacco smoke at home compared with not exposed showed in average higher nicotine
and cotinine concentration (8.1 vs.2.7).Maternal smoking showed a stronger effect than
paternal smoking. Children exposed to parental smoke showed much higher biomarker
levels than the non-smoking spouse of an adult smoker.(Heinrich 303). According to
Heinrich, passive smoking definitely has a much more serious effect on children, therefore
children need special protection from passive smoking at home. According to Military
Medical and Pharmaceutical Journal of Serbia and Montenegro tobacco smoke as well as
other chemicals is directly connected to lung cancer and various pulmonary diseases. The
research study showed that: “Oxidative stress appears when the oxidant-antioxidant balance
becomes unbalance as a result of many factors such as tobacco smoke and chemicals in
environmental pollution. Tobacco smoke causes the appearance of oxidative stress in lung
cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. A complex mixture of chemical
compounds, including oxidant agents, comprise tobacco smoke”.(Obradovic). The New
England Journal of Medicine” studies have reported association between particulate air
pollution and daily mortality rates. Mortality rates were most strongly connected to cigarette
smoking and air pollution with fine particulates, including sulfates. Air pollution was
positively associated with death from lung cancer and cardiopulmonary disease. In Japan in
1956. large number of people were poisoned by fish and shellfish contaminated by
methylmercury. The marine products in Minamata Bay had a highest level of mercury
contamination and diseases is known as a Minamata diseases. “The symptoms of patients
were serious, and extensive lesions of the brain…2252 patients who have been officially
recognized as having Minamata diseases,1043 have died,”(Harada).The areas in the world
where environmental pollution is most severe are generally developing countries. These
countries have few or inadequate pollution controls either from lack of resources or because
of ignorance. In some cases the cities in such countries continue to have an industry from
another era, with pollution from unregulated lead or coal mines or from plants formerly
manufacturing nuclear weapon. Recently the Blacksmith Institute in report gathered over
seven years by a team of environmental and health experts, including faculty from Johns
Hopkins, Mount Sinai Medical Center and the City University of New York, stated,
among other things, that various Russian cities have extremely bad levels of pollution.
Dzherzhinsk is the city which during the cold war was a site of a chemical weapons plant.
The city has a population of 300,000. According to the Blacksmith report, the life
expectancy in this city is about 42 for men and 47 for women. Clearly, pollution
must here be considered as a factor. More than 10 million people are at risk for lung
infection, cancer and shortened life expectancy because they live in those cities.” Living
in a town with serious pollution is like living under a death sentence. If the damage does
not come from immediate poisoning, then cancers, mental retardation, are likely
outcomes”.(Fuller 2).In Chernobyl 5.5 million people are still threatened by radioactive
material that continues to seep into groundwater and soil 20 years after the nuclear power
plant exploded there. Besides those Russian cities, cities in China, Peru, India, Zambia
and Dominican Republic are considered the most polluted cities in the world. Because of
poor quality of air, residents of Linfen, which is in the heart of China’s coal producing
province, suffer from bronchitis, pneumonia and lung cancer. India and Zambia have
serious groundwater pollution by heavy metals. According to the Blacksmith, the cities
are reminders of an early industrial era. They are polluted because unregulated lead and
coal mines or unrefined nuclear weapons manufacturing plants. Blacksmith Institute’s
chief of global operations, Dave Hanrahan, said that some solutions to this problem could
be as simple as reducing dust levels and removing contaminated soil. He stated:” The
most important thing is to achieve some practical progress in dealing with this polluted
places. There is a lot of good work being done in understanding the problems and
identifying possible approaches.”(Hanrahan qtd in the Blacksmith’s).
Exposures to environmental pollution still remain a major source of health risk throughout
the world. Of course risks are much higher in developing countries, where poverty, lack of
investments in modern technology and weak environmental legislation cause high pollution
levels. Unsafe water, poor sanitation and poor hygiene are major sources of exposure along
with indoor air pollution. About 9% of total disease burden are attributed to pollution and
considerably more in developing countries.
According to the National Environmental Trust report “Even though the Bush
administration is not reducing mercury emissions as quickly or completely as the Clean Air
Act requires, it can still claim that it is at least doing something. The same can not be said
for lead, arsenic, dioxin, chromium and dozens of other dangerous air toxics – many of which
are emitted at levels that dwarf power plant mercury emissions”.(Choe).When it comes to
power plant air toxics, the Bush administration is seriously shortchanging public health. Even
though data from the Environmental Protection Agency show that coal fired power plants
emit more than sixty toxic air pollutants, the agency is promoting plan for reduction of
mercury alone. Bush administration’s “mercury plan” allows power plants to emit unlimited
quantities of these pollutants. These highly toxic emissions pose serious public health treats
and should be completely reduced.
The natural environment should not be the sink in which unlimited amounts of
chemicals can be poured. There are known technologies and proven strategies for controlling
pollution and for reducing its negative effects on human health. It is the responsibility of
governments and moral obligation to ensure the well being of its citizens by applying
measures to reduce if not eliminate environmental pollution.