Surviving LA

Noises Off

Surviving LA — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:57:56 GMT

Noise (unwanted sound) is another not so pleasant feature of the urban environment. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that Americans cite noise – more than crime, litter, traffic, or inefficient government – as the biggest problem affecting their living environments. 138 million people in the US are regularly exposed to noise levels labeled as excessive by the Environmental Protection Agency. Noise clearly causes stress and can negatively impact mental and physical health. Noise has been shown to activate the sympathetic and endocrine systems (fight or flight). While many do what they can to avoid excessive noise, humans are not physiologically prepared to turn noise off ; people are wired to respond to sound for survival purposes. Noise leads to hearing fatigue and tinnitus; annoyance; interference with social behavior; interference with speech communication; sleep disturbance; decrements in school and work performance; psychiatric problems; fetal development problems; and cardiovascular disease.

Children are especially sensitive to noise. High levels of classroom noise have been shown to affect cognitive
performance. Reading and memory have been reported to be impaired in schoolchildren who were exposed to high levels of aircraft noise. Some studies have shown higher stress hormone levels and higher mean blood pressure readings in children exposed to high levels of community noise.

Roadways are responsible for most of the noise in urban environments, but airports have also been shown to be uniquely associated with noise related physical and mental health problems. Environmental noise regulations usually specify a maximum outdoor level of 60 to 65 decibels - dB(A), while occupational safety organizations recommend that the maximum exposure to noise is 40 hours per week at 85 to 90 dB(A). The threshold for sleep interference is 45 dB(A) or lower. One exposure to levels above 140 dB(A) can permanently damage hearing. The following are the decibel levels of common noise exposures:

• 0 dBA: softest sound a person can hear with normal hearing
• 10: normal breathing
• 20: whispering at 5 feet
• 30: soft whisper
• 40: quiet residential area
• 50: rainfall
• 50: large office
• 60: normal conversation
• 70: freeway traffic
• 75: washing machine
• 80: alarm clock
• 80: ringing telephone
• 85: vacuum cleaner
• 85: noisy restaurant
• 90: blender
• 90: truck
• 95: hair dryer
• 110: shouting in ear
• 110: crying baby
• 110: motorcycle
• 115: subway
• 120: thunder
• 120: jet plane (at ramp)
• 120: ambulance siren
• 120: rock concert
• 166: handgun

Reducing the number of cars on the road here will help our ever worsening noise problem. Riding your bike to wrok once a week is a "sound" way to make the noise less noisy.

Cleaning Up L.A.'s Environment

Surviving LA — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:39:10 GMT

The environment truly is becoming a problem and us Angelenos are not only at risk of being harmed by the environment we are also responsible for the environmental problems we face. Over the past two decades many have been striving to get a “handle” on the environment; there is a real fear that our planet is quickly deteriorating. The Urban Environmental Accords, where various cities agreed to work toward improving water and air quality and reducing waste, is a sign of a collective interest in preserving and improving the environment in urban centers. The accord dictates that cities will take the following actions:

•Increase the use of renewable energy.

•Adopt a citywide green house gas reduction plan to reduce emissions by twenty five percent by 2030.

•Establish a policy to achieve zero waste to landfills and incinerators by 2040.

•Adopt a citywide law that reduces the use of disposable, toxic or non-renewable products.

•Implement “user-friendly” recycling and composting programs.

•Adopt a policy that mandates a green building rating system that will apply to all new municipal buildings.

•Adopt urban planning principles that advance higher density, mixed use, walkable, bikeable and disabled-accessible neighborhoods which coordinate land use and transportation with open space systems for recreation and ecological restoration.

•Adopt a policy or implement a program that creates environmentally beneficial jobs in low-income neighborhoods.

•Ensure that there is an accessible park or recreational open space within half-a-kilometer of every city resident by 2015.

•Conduct an inventory of existing canopy coverage in the city and plant and maintain canopy coverage in not less than fifty per cent of all available sidewalk plating sites.

•Pass legislation that protects critical habitat corridors and other key habitat characteristics (e.g. water features, food bearing plants, shelter for wildlife, use of native species, etc.) from unsustainable development.

•Develop and implement a policy which expands affordable public transportation coverage to within half-a-kilometer of all city residents in ten years.

•Implement a policy to reduce the percentage of commute trips by single occupancy vehicles by ten per cent in seven years.

•Every year, identify one product, chemicals, or compound that is used within the city that represents the greatest risk to human health and adopt a law to provide incentives to reduce or eliminate its use by the municipal government.

•Promote the public health and environmental benefits of supporting organic foods .Ensure that twenty per cent of all city facilities (including schools) serve locally grown and organic food within seven years.

•Establish an Air Quality Index (AQI) to measure the level of air pollution and set the goal of reducing by ten per cent in seven years the number of days categorized in the AQI range as "unhealthy" to "hazardous."

•Develop policies to increase adequate access to safe drinking water, aiming at access for all by 2015.

•Protect the ecological integrity of the city’s primary drinking water sources (i.e. aquifers, rivers, lakes, wetlands and associated eco-systems).

•Adopt municipal wastewater management guidelines and reduce the volume of untreated wastewater discharge by ten per cent in seven years.

Such efforts reflect a growing understanding of the far reaching effects that the environment can have on people’s lives and ultimately the success of a city. They also reflect an understanding that everyone contributes to the world’s environmental problems on some level and that everyone can do something to improve the environment.

If you are interested in working on some or all of this issues then contact me, Jeffrey Tipton, at 213-952-9723 and I can help point you in the right direction.

Free the Water: Maria Shriver's Conference Nixes Bottled Water

Surviving LA — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:54:49 GMT

Bottled water is under attack and it's about time. The bottled water industry has been raking in billions of dollars over the years selling a lie. The water one gets in bottled water is not better than tap water - it often is tap water - but putting it in a plastic container actually makes it more harmful to health than tap. The bottled water industry has scared people into believing that tap water is dangerous, but it is their water that is dangerous to both consumers and the environment.

Maria Shriver's bold environmental leadership will be demonstrated this week in Long Beach as she has decided to not provide bottled water to her 15,000 guests at her annual conference and will instead be encouraging them to to drink from the tap. Guests will be given reusable water canteens and she will be providing information about the safety of tap water.

Now is the time to take back the tap and get folks invested in the control of their most precious resource: water. The last thing people need to do in these troubled economic times is to waste money on bottled water. The last thing people need to do in these troubled environmental times is to support the continued use of single use plastic containers through the purchase of bottled water. Maria Shriver is doing the right thing by leading the leaders at her conference to tap water. People are thirsty for change and Maria is serving up a big glass of refreshing change by saying no to bottled water.

As Sarah Janssen, an NRDC scientist, stated, “It’s safe to say that for most of us, plain old tap water is just as good for you as bottled, if not better. It costs less and does not consume so much energy or leave as much waste, making it the right choice for people and the environment.”

Amen.

More info:

http://www.californiawomen.org/

2008 Flu Season

Surviving LA — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:45:04 GMT

It's heeeeeeere. The flu season has officially begun in California. Cases have already been identified (http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/usmap.htm) and one can be certain that more are coming. The recommendations have been expanded this year. The changes for this year are:

Annual vaccination of all children aged 5--18 years is recommended. Annual vaccination of all children aged 5--18 years should begin in September or as soon as vaccine is available for the 2008--09 influenza season, if feasible, but annual vaccination of all children aged 5--18 years should begin no later than during the 2009--10 influenza season.

Annual vaccination of all children aged 6 months--4 years (59 months) and older children with conditions that place them at increased risk for complications from influenza should continue. Children and adolescents at high risk for influenza complications should continue to be a focus of vaccination efforts as providers and programs transition to routinely vaccinating all children.

Either TIV or LAIV (live virus) can be used when vaccinating healthy persons aged 2--49 years. Children aged 6 months--8 years should receive 2 doses of vaccine if they have not been vaccinated previously at any time with either LAIV or TIV (doses separated by 4 or more weeks); 2 doses are required for protection in these children. Children aged 6 months--8 years who received only 1 dose in their first year of vaccination should receive 2 doses the following year. LAIV should not be administered to children aged <5 years with possible reactive airways disease, such as those who have had recurrent wheezing or a recent wheezing episode. Children with possible reactive airways disease, persons at higher risk for influenza complications because of underlying medical conditions, children aged 6--23 months, and persons aged >49 years should receive TIV.

Essentially anyone can get the flu vaccine if they aren't allergic to eggs and have not had a reaction to the flu vaccine in the past.

Palisades Integrative Medical Clinic (www.integrativeclinics.org) has plenty of vaccine available this year and is giving shots everyday in October and November.

Call 213-952-9723 for more information.

Are You Ready?

Surviving LA — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 20:53:08 GMT

The last major quake to hit L.A., the Northridge earthquake, which occurred on January 17, 1994, registered 6.7 magnitude on the Richter scale and killed approximately fifty people, and also injured over 9000. Of the fifty who died, it appears that twenty died as a result of a heart attack.

The Kobe earthquake in Japan in 1995 demonstrated how damaging and deadly earthquakes can be in urban settings. The Kobe quake killed 5,096 people and injured 26,797. One-fifth of the city's population was left homeless and more than 103, 521 buildings were destroyed. Most of the deaths and injuries occurred when older wood-frame houses with heavy clay tile roofs collapsed. The collapse of these buildings was followed by the ignition of over 300 fires within minutes of the earthquake. Response to the fires was hindered by the failure of the water supply system and the disruption of the traffic system.

There is much that one should do to prepare for an earthquake yet most do nothing. Do you know what to do when the earth starts rocking? Are you ready?

Follow the plan:

http://lafd.org/eqbook.pdf

Give a Little, Get A lot

Surviving LA — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:58:22 GMT

LA is a difficult place to live. There is the unbearable harried pace, mutual alienation, and distance from the rhythms of nature and of human nature. It can be tough to find happiness in LA.

Self-reported happiness has been flat for decades in the US, or has even slightly declined since the late 1930’s, despite each generation having more material wealth than did the preceding one. Anxiety and depression are up, especially among teens. While those whose basic material needs are met are happier than those who struggle in poverty, once basic needs are met, increased material prosperity does not bring increased happiness. This is in part because people tend to assess their level of relative prosperity by making comparisons with those who have more, and thus always perceive themselves as wanting. But it is also because financial capital does not equate with social capital. Americans today, while better off materially than their forbears, now report having only two very close friends, whereas twenty years ago they had three. This loss of “social capital,” which occurs despite material prosperity, has been described with terms such as “bowling alone”. The United States ranks 23rd among nations in the first-ever “world map of happiness”

Living in a big city is clearly a risk factor for unhappiness. Maybe one solution is to recover community in the big city. Researchers have begun to focus on the benefits to the agent of altruistic or “other-regarding” behavior in the domains of families, neighborhood, and society. If kind emotions and/or helping behavior are associated with well-being and health, we need to express these capacities even though our environment may work hard to inhibit such expression. Harvard’s Pitirim A. Sorokin, in his classic 1954 treatise entitled, The Ways and Power of Love, began his “Preface” with the assertion that unselfish love and altruism are “necessary for physical, mental, and moral health,” and that “altruistic persons live longer than egoistic individuals.” This connection has been examined in a major longitudinal prospective study of Harvard graduates over a fifty-year period, with the finding that generativity and happiness are very closely associated.

Well-being consists of feeling hopeful, happy and good about oneself, as well as energetic and connected to others. Clearly “doing unto others,” practicing “love of neighbor,” and in general giving to others in heart and action is contributory to happiness. This is true for all ages. Stephanie Brown (2003), for example, reported on a 5-year study involving 423 older couples. Each couple was asked what type of practical support they provided for friends or relatives, if they could count on help from others when needed, and what type of emotional support they gave each other. A total of 134 people died over the five years. After adjusting for a variety of factors – including age, gender, and physical and emotional health – the researchers found an association between reduced risk of dying and giving help, but no association between receiving help and reduced death risk. Brown, a researcher at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, concluded that those who provided no instrumental or emotional support to others were more than twice as likely to die in the five years as people who helped spouses, friends, relatives, and neighbors. Despite concerns that the longevity effects might be due to a healthier individual’s greater ability to provide help, the results remained the same after the researchers controlled for functional health, health satisfaction, health behaviors, age, income, education level, and other possible confounders. The researchers concluded that, “If giving, rather than receiving, promotes longevity, then interventions that are currently designed to help people feel supported may need to be redesigned so that the emphasis is on what people do to help others.”

“Doing unto others” results in deeper and more positive social integration, distraction from personal problems and the anxiety of self-preoccupation, enhanced meaning and purpose as related to well-being, a more active lifestyle that counters cultural pressures toward isolated passivity, and the presence of positive emotions such as kindness that displace harmful negative emotional states. It is entirely quite plausible, then, to assert that altruism enhances happiness and health. The idea that human beings are inclined toward helpful pro-social and altruistic behavior seems incontrovertible, and it is highly plausible that the inhibition of such behavior and related emotions would be unhealthy.

There is a strong association exists between the well-being, happiness, and health of people who are emotionally kind and compassionate in their charitable helping activities - as long as they are not overwhelmed, and here world view may come into play. The great challenge of urban living – and of living in general – is to live a generous life, which is also a happier and healthier one. The freedom from a solipsistic life in which one relates to others only in so far as they contribute to one’s own agendas, as well as a general freedom from the narrow concerns of the self, bring us internal benefits, as all significant spiritual and moral traditions prescribe.

Can You Spare a Euro?

Surviving LA — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:41:15 GMT

Gas and food prices are up. This year's Writer’s Guild strike cost the region 2.5 billion dollars and the Screen Actors Guild strike may be about to strike. The foreclosure bust is here and threatens to worsen. It seems the only people in town with money these days are European and Asian visitors. The unemployment rate has creeped up to 6.2% and probably won't improve in 2009. The largest job losses in 2008 will be found in construction (-10,000 jobs), finance & insurance (-5,000 jobs), and manufacturing (also a loss of 5,000 jobs). The biggest employment gains during 2008 will come in health services (+8,500 jobs), government (+6,000 jobs), and professional, scientific & technical services (+5,000 jobs). The employment situation should improve a tad in 2009, with an increase of 0.6% or +25,200 jobs.

...from Jack Kyser of the LAEDC (July 2008)

LA River Expedition

Surviving LA — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:12:13 GMT

Here is a little video that pretty much sums up the 2008 LA River Expedition:

Enjoy!

Commuting in LA

Surviving LA — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 17:41:10 GMT

Only in LA...

Having spent a lot of time in and around the L.A. River lately I would like to share this alternative commuting idea with you all - click on video image. Tired of high gas prices and traffic? Got a couple of hundred bucks for a kayak? Not afraid of Hepatitis?

Let It Flow

Surviving LA — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:20:21 GMT

I am four days out from my trip down the LA River and she's still stuck in my head - literally. I acquired a sinus infection and some GI stuff, but I'm on the mend. There is still much to learn from this trip, but I feel that I am getting somewhere. Angelenos need to begin their reclamation of the river. We all need to spend more time around it and make our presence known. We need to take the river back first and then we need to ask for the powers that be to fix what they broke.

This comment chain from Eric Spilman's KTLA blog pretty much sums up how Angelenos (including me) see the LA River:

Eric, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the "LA River" part of the sewer system? I'm not trying to sink your boat but maybe the city doesn't issue a permit because they know what's floating in the water's depths.The mouth of the river opens to the ocean near CSULB campus. I used to watch that beautiful river often and while birds swim unimpeded during certain times of the year, I never saw kayaks, canoes or paddle boats, which you'd readily find blocks away off 2nd Street. Posted by: jozielee | July 29, 2008 at 11:13 AM

i agree. we still need the flood control, but why can't we at least boat on the Glendale Narrows, which is a nice stretch w/ actual rapids that's part concrete (for flood safety) and part natural (for recreational purposes)? what's wrong with that as a compromise? Posted by: bon | July 31, 2008 at 09:24 AM

just noticed the previous comment above. actually, depending on where you are on the river, the water quality varies widely -- from "near drinking water" coming out of the Tillman Treatment Plant in the Valley to horribly skanky near Willow Street in Long Beach. Generally speaking though, where there's nature, there's better water quality. big surprise? Posted by: bon | July 31, 2008 at 09:28 AM

No Jozilee, the sewer system has its own separate infrastructure. The LA River is an actual river (and the main reason the pueblo was founded here) and was the city's primary water source until Mulholland's aqueduct started sucking Owens Valley dry and the Corps of Engineers turned a beautiful resource into a means to throw every drop of rainwater AWAY rather than maintain it here for drinking supply. A move that's starting to look pretty retarded as climate change and drought set in and the courts have begun restricting our ability to import water from NorCal and Colo.

Expedition media links:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/07/dear-feds---tur.html

http://laist.com/2008/07/26/kayaking_the_la_river_part_1.php
http://laist.com/2008/07/27/kayaking_the_la_river_part_2_east_v.php
http://laist.com/2008/07/28/kayaking_the_la_river_day_3_marsh_p.php
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/07/kayakers-to-pad.html
http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/la-river-really-floats-their-boats/19347/

Down In the Los Angeles River: The LA River Expedition

Surviving LA — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 20:22:53 GMT

This past weekend (July 25th to July 27th) I and a few other "hearty" souls kayaked down the entire LA River - a 52 mile trek. The trip was physically exhausting, but also pretty darn exhilirating. I felt like a true explorer discovering a part of Los Angeles that few are familiar with. There were plenty of "events" along the way including a run-in with the police and a couple of nasty spills. Fortunately we had a film permit and the officer who approached us was into kayaking so he let us continue on.

While there are some bucolic portions of the river, it is for the most part a sewer. Storm drains dump into the river and the majority of the water comes from waste treatment plants. There is surprisingly a fair number of folks who fish the river - they must have strong immune systems - and quite a few of homeless who bathe in the river. I saw the best of nature and the worst of mankind during the journey.

The purpose of the trip was to highlight the state of the river and to give people the sense that the river belongs to them. There are many folks who have quietly working to raise consciousness about the river for many years. One of those people is Joe Linton. Joe wrote a fantastic book, "Down by the Los Angeles River," that every Angeleno should own.

You can check it out on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Down-Los-Angeles-River-Official/dp/0899973914/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217291162&sr=8-1

Tom Andrews, photographer for www.lalist.com took some fantastic photos over three days and those can be seen here:

http://laist.com/2008/07/28/kayaking_the_la_river_day_3_marsh_p.php

Tom took the picture of me above.

More posting about this important issue to come...........

Take Me to the River

Surviving LA — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 06:51:48 GMT

LA RIVER EXPEDITION 2008

Come join us this weekend, July 25 to July 27, as we take an environmental stand by taking a journey down the LA River. The objectives of the expedition are to raise consciousness about the river’s revitalization efforts, to raise money in support of river-related environmental organizations, to study ways to make access to the river as healthy and safe as possible, and to raise the bar for clean water and grand urban visions that will empower and protect local and national waterways for ourselves and for future generations.

The County and the Army Corps have essentially denied permits to access the LA River in kayaks for the purpose of this exploratory LA River Expedition — largely for “safety reasons.” Although the Corps acknowledges that the river is navigable, they will not allow boats on it; although LA County allegedly supports master plans for the river’s revitalization, they will not allow people in or near the riverbed.

The Expedition takes the stance that public trust law in California contains certain inalienable rights of access to the waters of the U.S., and that these time-honored, common sense laws supercede all bureaucratic misgivings, justifications and obfuscations regarding the denial of our request.

Meet us Friday, July 25 at 3:00 pm at the LA River Headwaters on the overpass @ Owensmouth in Canoga Park for this most important and fun-spirited event.

Flowtus Interruptus

Surviving LA — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:19:20 GMT

The LA River access issue raised by Surviving LA and La La Times continues to be a topic of much debate. Here is another LA Times article about it:

Keeping Western waterways clean

The L.A. River deserves protection under the Clean Water Act. Will the feds step up?

Over the course of almost 40 years, the Clean Water Act -- which compels landowners to secure permits from the Environmental Protection Agency before dredging or discharging pollutants into "waters of the United States" -- has become the cornerstone of our water-quality law, helping states and local governments make development decisions that keep the country's watersheds healthy.

Here in Southern California, the Clean Water Act limits the sewage and industrial waste that flow into streams, rivers and, ultimately, the ocean. It protects washes and other seasonal waters from being bulldozed over, helping to maintain habitat for birds and other wildlife. But today, just as elaborate plans for a long-awaited Los Angeles River restoration have begun moving forward, the river and its already stressed watershed could lose some of the law's protections.

Lay the blame on legalese, courtesy of the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 2006 rulingin Rapanos vs. U.S., Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote that the term "waters of the United States," to which the Clean Water Act still applies, should be interpreted more narrowly as "navigable waters" and wetlands with a "significant nexus" to them.

It was left to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which shares enforcement responsibilities for the act with the EPA, to figure out how to define those and other muddy terms, and it chose to do so, critics say, literally and narrowly. By the corps' definitions, according to a memo released June 4, only two short stretches of the Los Angeles River are "traditionally navigable": 2 miles in the Sepulveda Basin and 1.75 miles in Long Beach.

No one knows, just yet, what the consequences will be for Los Angeles -- the river or the watershed -- because the corps has not yet determined whether specific waters are or aren't covered by the act. Once that process begins, the corps says, the entire Los Angeles River should remain protected because it meets the definition of "relatively permanent." People won't be able to start dumping into the waterway with impunity. The corps says that it maintains its commitment to restoring the river, and that it will be open to reevaluating the "navigability" of the currently "non-navigable" stretches.

Still, real threats remain to Clean Water Act protection for the dozens of ephemeral waterways that feed into the Los Angeles River, which may or may not be deemed to share a significant nexus with the traditionally navigable portions of it. Environmentalists and local officials worry that without assurances of the federal protection that has kept these waterways (relatively) clean for more than a generation, people will be free to develop without oversight, and water quality and habitats will degrade bit by bit.

One thing is clear: This is no way to manage one of the most important environmental protections in American law.

Even though their streams and swales are often dry, Western watersheds are integrated systems. Paving over an isolated canyon here and another there can divert waters or create runoff that makes its way to a distant ocean, disrupting wildlife and public health. Making decisions piecemeal -- hoping that the EPA will step in to question permit applications as they surface -- is woefully inefficient at best and insidious at worst. In a desperate effort to get the corps to change its mind about the Los Angeles River's "traditional navigability" and guarantee protection for isolated waters, a few activists have started kayaking down the concrete channels. That this appears to be the most meaningful way citizens can register their concern for the watershed is absurd.

There are better strategies to keep the Clean Water Act strong in the arid West, where waters are more likely to resemble puddles than the mighty Mississippi (the kind of river, incidentally, that lawmakers had in mind when they used terms such as "navigability"):

* The EPA could step up its involvement in making determinations of navigability. While traditionally the agency has deferred to the corps on such matters, lawyers at the Natural Resources Defense Council and other advocacy groups have argued that the EPA has the power to challenge corps decisions. If EPA officials choose not to raise a challenge, they must commit now to carefully reviewing the flood of permit applications that is sure to rise in the coming months. Local governments too must plan to pick up the slack and come up with their own regulations if federal protections are removed.

* Ideally, Congress should rewrite the Clean Water Act in plainer English. Fortunately, the House has already started the process with HR 2421, the Clean Water Restoration Act. Introduced last year by Reps. James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.), John D. Dingell (D-Mich.) and Vernon J. Ehlers (R-Mich.), the bill would replace the term "navigable waters of the United States" with "waters of the United States," restoring the broader, more inclusive pre-Rapanos understanding of the act's jurisdiction. Staff on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which Oberstar chairs, are fielding suggestions for amendments to the bill, which has 174 co-sponsors in the House. We urge the committee to finish its work and get this bill onto the floor as soon as possible, and we call on the California delegation to support it.

All interested parties must collaborate to ensure that, as the corps promises, the restoration of the Los Angeles River will proceed and Western watersheds will remain healthy. Anything less, the Rapanos decision notwithstanding, would be a miscarriage of justice.

Emperor's New Clothes

Surviving LA — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 02:42:21 GMT

A lot of Angelenos don’t drink tap water and drink bottled water instead, but bottled water sold in the U.S. is not necessarily cleaner or safer than most tap water, according to a four-year scientific study by NRDC. There has been an explosion in bottled water use in the United States over the past ten years driven in large measure by marketing designed to convince the public of bottled water's purity and safety, and capitalizing on public concern about tap water quality. The NRDC studied more than 1,000 bottles of 103 brands of bottled water. While most of the tested waters were found to be of high quality, some brands were contaminated: about one-third of the waters tested contained levels of contamination including synthetic organic chemicals, bacteria, and arsenic. A key finding of the study was that bottled water regulations are inadequate to assure consumers of either purity or safety, although both the federal government and the states have bottled water safety programs. At the national level, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for bottled water safety, but the FDA's rules completely exempt waters that are packaged and sold within the same state, which account for between 60 and 70 percent of all bottled water sold in the United States (roughly one out of five states don't regulate these waters either). The FDA also exempts carbonated water and seltzer, and fewer than half of the states require carbonated waters to meet their own bottled water standards. Even when bottled waters are covered by the FDA's rules, they are subject to less rigorous testing and purity standards than those which apply to city tap water. For example, bottled water is required to be tested less frequently than city tap water for bacteria and chemical contaminants. In addition, bottled water rules allow for some contamination by E. coli or fecal coliform (which indicate possible contamination with fecal matter), contrary to tap water rules, which prohibit any confirmed contamination with these bacteria. Similarly, there are no requirements for bottled water to be disinfected or tested for parasites such as cryptosporidium or giardia, unlike the rules for big city tap water systems that use surface water sources. Some bottled water then may present a health threat to people with weakened immune systems, such as the frail elderly, some infants, transplant or cancer patients, or people with HIV/AIDS.

Drinking tap water is a better solution, but it isn't perfect. Here is the LA report from NRDC:

http://www.nrdc.org/water/drinking/uscities/pdf/la.pdf

Tap water, however, can be improved through the use of filters:

http://www.webmd.com/news/20070409/many-tap-water-filters-work-well

Green River

Surviving LA — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:25:39 GMT

Surviving LA is deeply committed to improving the life of the LA River. Our efforts have led to discussions and legal battles over the navigability of the river. Much work needs to be done to make this river makeover a reality. Join the Pacific American Volunteer Association’s 9th Los Angeles River Community Cleanup with partners Heal the Bay, Anahuak, NAACP, L.A. City Councilman Eric Gacetti and Urban Semillas this Saturday, June 14. Show up ealy for an 8:45am welcome by L.A. City Councilman Eric Garcetti.

For more info go to:

http://www.healthebay.org/assets/pdfdocs/events/2008-06-14_LARiverCleanup_Flyer.pdf

Listen to a discussion about our river efforts on Which Way, LA?:

http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/ww/ww080611navigating_the_law_a

More Miles Per Gallon

Surviving LA — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:50:30 GMT

Okay. Gas prices are crazy and this type of crazy probably isn't going away. There are many cars now that get good mileage, but if you are stuck with a gas guzzler then here are some things you can do to improve your fuel efficiency:

Keep your vehicle well maintained

A car in poor running condition will use more gas than one that has been tuned up. A dirty air filter can reduce gas mileage up to 20% and spark plugs in poor condition can reduce gas mileage up to 12%.

Keep tires properly inflated

Underinflated tires aren’t just dangerous — they devour fuel economy by as much as 25%! Overinflated tires aren’t efficient, either. Also keep your tires balanced and in alignment.

Alter your commute time

If possible, schedule your trips and errands for times when traffic is lighter. If your company allows it, try coming in earlier or later in order to avoid rush hour.

Optimize your travel

Consolidate trips: If you know you have to buy groceries, take your clothes to the dry cleaner at the same time, and then drop little Johnny at soccer practice. Combine multiple trips into one.

Lighten your load

Carry only the bare neccessities — don’t haul things in your trunk. For every extra 250 pounds your engine hauls, the car loses about one mile per gallon in fuel economy.

Reduce drag

About half of your vehicle’s energy is expended overcoming air resistance. (The other half is expended in acceleration.) Reduce your car’s workload — remove anything that might cause drag: luggage racks, bike racks, ski racks, etc,

Drive at a constant moderate speed

Edmunds.com found that the best way to improve fuel efficiency was to accelerate slowly and to brake over a longer distance. Aside from purchasing a new vehicle, this is the single most effective step you can take to reduce your costs. According to fueleconomy.gov: “As a rule of thumb, you can assume that each 5 mph you drive over 60 mph is like paying an additional $0.20 per gallon for gas.”

Don’t idle

Turn off your engine if you’ll be idling for more than thirty seconds. Starting your vehicle does use a burst of fuel, but not as much as allowing the engine to idle too long.

Anticipate stop signs and lights

Plan ahead. The less you have to stop, the better your gas mileage. Make it a game to catch all of the green lights. Laugh at the other guy as he sprints from red to red.

Keep your cool

Most people claim that it makes more sense to use air conditioning on the highway, and to roll down the windows in city traffic. It’s commonly claimed that either method is going to reduce your fuel economy by about 10%. But according to research performed by found, there’s no real difference between driving with the windows down or using the air conditioner. Consumer Reports obtained similar results:

Drive less!!!

Walk. Ride your bike. Take public transit. Carpool. Combine errands. It’s obvious, but easy to forget: the less you drive, the less you’ll spend on gas.

Bad News for Ken and Barbie

Surviving LA — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:28:35 GMT

Ultraviolet radiation harms and kills people. Ultraviolet (UV) rays are a part of sunlight and the rays can penetrate and change the structure of skin cells. There are three types of UV rays: ultraviolet A (UVA), ultraviolet B (UV, and ultraviolet C (UVC). UVA is the most abundant source of solar radiation at the earth's surface and penetrates beyond the top layer of human skin. Scientists believe that UVA radiation can cause damage to connective tissue and increase a person's risk for developing skin cancer. UVB rays are less abundant at the earth's surface than UVA because a significant portion of UVB rays is absorbed by the ozone layer. Unfortunately, because of a massive hole in the ozone layer, more UVB rays are getting in. UVB rays penetrate less deeply into the skin than do UVA rays, but also can be damaging. One in five Americans will develop skin cancer in their lifetime (around 1.3 million cases per year, and one American dies every hour from the disease. Melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, is also one of the fastest growing types of cancer in the United States. Melanoma cases in this country have more than doubled in the past two decades, and the rise is expected to continue. Nonmelanoma skin cancers are less deadly than melanomas, but they can spread and further hurt and kill people. More than 1.2 million Americans develop nonmelanoma skin cancer a year and around 1,900 die from the disease.

Skin cancer prevention activities include reducing time of exposure to high-intensity UV radiation (the sun is strongest from 11 am to 3 pm); wearing protective clothing (such as long sleeves and hats) when exposed to sunlight, and by using adequate amounts of sufficiently protective sunscreen (UVA and UVB blocking). It is also important to have one’s skin checked if any abnormality is discovered.

Skin cancer concerns?

Contact me, Dr. Jeffrey Tipton, at 213-952-9723.

High Gas Prices Aren't the Only Problem

Surviving LA — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:32:03 GMT

The main and most significant outdoor air pollutants are ozone and particles and both are largely products of cars and trucks. Research has demonstrated that these two substances contribute to heart disease, lung cancer, asthma attacks, and interfere with the growth and function of the lungs. Particle pollution is a combination of fine solids and aerosols that are suspended in the air we breathe. The dark smoke that comes out of a car or truck or from a power plant or factory contains carbon particles and the raw ingredients for the particle pollutants. The particles themselves differ in size. Some are one-tenth the diameter of a strand of hair and some are even tinier; some are so small they can only be seen with an electron microscope. The differences in size make a big difference in how they affect the body. The body is good at stopping larger particles from making it to the lungs, but doesn’t keep out smaller particles, those that are smaller than 10 microns, or micrometers, in diameter, or about one-seventh the diameter of a single human hair. These smaller particles get trapped in the lungs and the smallest are so minute they can pass through the lungs into the blood stream. Particles are categorized according to size - coarse, fine and ultrafine particles. Coarse particles fall between 2.5 microns and 10 microns in diameter. Fine particles are 2.5 microns in diameter. Ultrafine particles are smaller than 0.1 micron in diameter and are small enough to slip through the lung and into one’s circulatory system. While cars aren’t as “smoky” as they used to be, the newer pollution control systems in cars help create ultrafine particle emissions. Once inhaled, ultrafine particles pass through the wall of the lung cells and invade the mitochondria, which produce the energy that cells need to live. Damage to the mitochondria eventually reduces the ability of the cells to function normally, thereby reducing overall lung function. Reduced lung function makes it harder for people to fight off infections and cope with allergens, as well as to extract needed oxygen from each breath. The particles also penetrate through the lung tissue and are carried by the bloodstream into the brain where they can cause inflammation of the brain and cell damage. Likewise, the ultrafine particles have been shown to contribute to heart disease and strokes by causing thickening of blood vessels.

In the early 1990’s, dozens of short-term community health studies from cities throughout the United States and around the world indicated that short-term increases in particle pollution were associated with adverse health effects ranging from increased respiratory symptoms to increased hospitalization and emergency room visits to increased mortality from respiratory and cardiovascular disease. Several studies have also demonstrated that short-term exposure to particle pollution can be deadly. Particle pollution diminishes lung function, causes greater use of asthma medications and increased rates of school absenteeism. Long-term or chronic exposure to particles have been shown to cause: increased hospitalization for asthma attacks for children living within 200 meters of roads with heavy truck or trailer traffic; impaired lung function growth in children and teenagers; significant damage to the small airways of the lungs; increased risk of dying from lung cancer; and increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

The solution:

Ride Your Bike to Work

www.la-bike.org

Changing Your Behavior to Prevent Heart Disease and Cancer

Surviving LA — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:52:07 GMT

Not all the factors associated with cardiovascular disease and cancer are known, but the cornerstones for preventing them are not smoking, having a healthy diet, weight maintenance, physical activity, and limiting alcohol consumption. Preventing cancer and cardiovascular disease requires some work; behavior change can be very difficult, but many people are able to quit smoking and lose weight. No matter what aspect of behavior is going to be modified there are some important first steps everyone needs to consider before making changes. Self-assessment is the first step. An honest and thorough look at current behaviors, attitudes, triggers, support systems, and other issues can assist in understanding the scope of needed changes, identifying target behaviors, and outlining priorities. Being informed is also an important step for helping change to be more successful. Current factual information can help ensure informed decision making when assessing the pros and cons associated with change. Becoming prepared to make a change is also important. Setting goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, rewarding, and time oriented can be helpful. Devising a set of mini-goals helps goals to be more attainable. Once goals are set, developing a change plan prior to making lifestyle changes is important. Plans should be realistic, flexible, and include strategies for overcoming potential barriers to change and dealing with relapse. When putting change plans into action it’s very important to reexamine original goals and the change plan, making any necessary changes along the way. It typically takes six months before new, healthier habits are cemented in, but chances of success are optimized by being sufficiently prepared before making a change.

Clearing Up (the confusion about) Colds and Flu

Surviving LA — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:07:59 GMT

There is much confusion about the difference between colds and flu and even more confusion about how to treat them. I will now attempt to clear the matter up – pun intended.

Cold and flu present with certain symptoms. The symptoms are often the body’s attempt to get rid of the virus and to minimize damage. Sneezing ejects the virus from the nose, cough from the lungs and throat, vomiting from the stomach, and diarrhea from the intestines. And fever makes it difficult for the virus to reproduce. The topic of viral illnesses will always remain somewhat confusing, since the body has a relatively small number of symptoms with which to respond to an ever-changing, wide variety of viruses. While colds and flus may overlap, the differences between them are important.

The three most frequent symptoms of a cold are nasal stuffiness, sneezing, and runny nose. Throat irritation is often involved (but not with a red throat). Adults and older children with colds generally have minimal or no fever. Infants and toddlers often run a fever in the 100 to 102 degree range. Depending on which virus is the culprit, the virus might also produce a headache, cough, postnasal drip, burning eyes, muscle aches, or a decreased appetite, but in a cold, the most prominent symptoms are in the nose.

When someone has a cold, the nasal secretions are teeming with cold viruses. Coughing, drooling, and talking are all unlikely ways to pass a cold. But sneezing, nose-blowing, and nose-wiping are the means by which the virus spreads. You can catch a cold by inhaling the virus if you are sitting close to a sneeze, or by touching your nose, eyes, or mouth after you have touched something contaminated by infected nasal secretions.

Once you have “caught” a cold, the symptoms begin in 1 to 5 days. Usually irritation in the nose or a scratchy feeling in the throat is the first sign, followed within hours by sneezing and a watery nasal discharge.

Within one to three days, the nasal secretions usually become thicker and perhaps yellow or green — this is a normal part of the common cold and not a reason for antibiotics. The entire cold is usually over all by itself in about 7 days, with perhaps a few lingering symptoms (cough) for another week.

While there is much debate about the best way to treat the symptoms of a cold, the following seem to work and are relatively safe:

Pain medicines (Tylenol, Advil) for pain and/or fever

Moist heat (shower) for congestion

Increased fluid intake (including chicken soup)

Popsicles and/or hard candy for dry throat

Several studies have shown that Vitamin C may help reduce one’s chance of getting a cold and can slightly shorten the duration of a cold.

The flu can be a much more serious illness. The most deadly recent worldwide outbreak was the flu epidemic at the beginning of this century and killed more than 20 million people. Even today, more than 36,000 people in the United States die from the flu each year — primarily those who are weak from advanced age or a major illness.

Classically, the flu begins abruptly, with a fever in the 102 to 106 degree range (with adults on the lower end of the spectrum), a flushed face, body aches, and marked lack of energy. Some people have other systemic symptoms such as dizziness or vomiting. The fever usually lasts for a day or two, but can last five days.

Somewhere between day 2 and day 4 of the illness, the “whole body” symptoms begin to subside, and respiratory symptoms begin to increase. The virus can settle anywhere in the respiratory tract, producing symptoms of a cold, sore throat, ear infection, and/or pneumonia.

The most prominent of the respiratory symptoms is usually a dry, hacking cough. Most people also develop a sore (red) throat and a headache. Nasal discharge and sneezing are not uncommon. These symptoms (except the cough) usually disappear within 4 to 7 days. Sometimes there is a second wave of fever at this time. The cough and tiredness usually lasts for weeks after the rest of the illness is over.

Inhaling droplets from coughs or sneezes is the most common way to catch the flu. Symptoms appear 1 to 7 days later (usually 2-3 days). The flu is airborne and quite contagious, and with its short incubation period it often slams into a community all at once, creating a noticeable cluster of school and work absences.

If you are feeling ill and you’re not sure if you have a cold or the flu, then it’s never a bad idea to give your doctor and let him or her “clear things up.”

Contact me, Dr. Tipton, at 213.952.9723 if you need more info.