Hey Reader,
There's been a lot of confusing actions lately with large impacts on our daily health. I wanted to take a minute to talk through a couple of them.
We are here (in this proverbial health newsletter space) because we believe in the power of lifestyle and healthy food to heal the body and build better lives. Part of that is avoiding substances that could be damaging or toxic, like food additives and ultra-processed foods designed to build addictions and deliver little nutritional value, leading to obesity and a slew of other health conditions.
Equally important, if not more important, is reducing toxin exposure from the environment.
While we might be lucky enough to live in an area with great choices in food products from a variety of grocery stores and farmers markets, we are at the mercy of the larger community for our air and water quality.
This is why the removal of 31 EPA regulations designed to protect clean air and water is deeply concerning to me. Since I'm not an expert on the climate impacts, I'll focus on the health impacts of these changes.
- The AP reviews these changes and shares that public health experts are concerned about the long-term costs and impacts.
- Health Policy Watch expresses concerns to health from these changes, including early death.
- According to this study, pollution is responsible for 8-9% of global disease!
Depending on which outlet you see this from, you might see it framed as a deregulatory effort to reduce costs for the American family. For example, the updated EPA site explains allowing more mercury and carbon pollutants into the air and allowing the dumping of more wastewater as "reducing the costs to American Families."
My question is: At what cost?
If we believe, which I do, that we should have more stringent regulations on food additives because they can cause harm, why do we not also believe that we should have more stringent regulations on air and water contaminants that heavily impact health?
There is little we can do to change the air we breath when we go outside. We rely on regulations to prevent widespread pollution that is a well-known contributor and mediator of disease.
Even if this deregulation saves money on energy (which is not a given), what is the cost of that savings? If we save a few cents on energy to just later pay massive health care bills, is that worth it? Not to mention the non-financial costs of poor health?
And who will end up paying to clean up the grasslands, lakes, and rivers after dumping occurs?
If we believe in a healthier America, we should believe in it across the board. Giving big corporations a pass to pollute without consequence is not making us healthier and not saving us money in the long run.
I don't believe the narrative that our only path to provide accessible energy is to move backwards and remove protections put in place after learning the hard way about the negative consequences of water dumping and polluting.
If we believe in a healthier America and reducing toxin exposure, let's do it across the board! Let us build a society that values health while also innovating with energy and cost reduction!
We can do better if we expect better.
Now, for the tasty treats - homemade egg dyes if you're into that!
Recipe Spotlight
Naturally Dyed Eggs
Naturally dyed Easter Eggs using completely safe food-based products. These DIY food colorings are safe for kids and fun for the whole family.
|
Next time you have a question on the validaity of a nutrition claim, email me about it or try looking it up here.
One of the benefits of publicly funded research, aside from removing industry bias, is that you the tax payer have the right to the results!
|