| Dear
EarthTalk: Has China been making any progress
reducing its output of global warming gases, and/or in tackling
other environmental problems?
–Bill W., Saugus, MA
| |
Critics
say blaming China alone for its rampant pollution
is unfair, given that developed countries source a
significant amount of manufacturing there. "All
the West has done," says Greenpeace, "is
export a great slice of its carbon footprint to China
and make China the world‚s factory." Pictured:
A cloud of coal pollution hangs over a cluster of
power lines in China's northern region.
© Adam Cohn, courtesy Flickr |
Decades
of rapid-fire development and lack of government oversight
has meant that China now faces some serious environmental
challenges. According to research by the Netherlands Environmental
Assessment Agency, China surpassed the United States as
the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases in
2006—and hasn’t looked back. (While the Chinese
emit some eight percent more carbon dioxide than their American
counterparts, the U.S. still leads the world in greenhouse
gas emissions per capita, due
to its significantly smaller population size and higher
standard of living.)
Beyond
its contribution to global warming, China is also a world
leader in other forms of pollution, given its huge population
and its ambition to become the next international economic
superpower. According to the World Health Organization (WHO),
current levels of air pollution in China far exceed international
environmental standards. A recent analysis found, for example,
that the air in some four dozen Chinese cities contained
as much as seven times as much particulate pollution—which
can get lodged in human lungs and cause a wide range of
health problems—as deemed safe by WHO.
But
critics say blaming China for its rampant pollution is unfair,
given all the manufacturing the world’s developed
countries outsource to Chinese companies. Qin Gang, China’s
foreign ministry spokesman, refers to China as the “world’s
factory” and says: “A lot of what you use, wear
and eat is produced in China… “On the one hand,
you increase production in China; on the other hand you
criticize China on the emission reduction issue.”
Yang Ailun of Greenpeace China agrees: “All the West
has done is export a great slice of its carbon footprint
to China and make China the world’s factory.”
Despite
its efforts to go green, China still depends on coal—the
dirtiest of all the fossil fuels—for some two-thirds
of its energy needs. Chinese officials have strenuously
opposed the binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions set
by developing countries, arguing that already industrialized
nations are to blame for most of the emissions already in
the atmosphere.
According
to Isabel Hilton, a journalist with the UK’s Guardian,
industrialized countries should feel an obligation to shoulder
at least some of the burden of helping China become a greener
nation. “This means drastically reducing our own emissions
and helping China with the finance and technology required
to move to a sustainable, low-carbon economic system.”
There
is progress afoot: Meetings between top Chinese and U.S.
officials earlier this year led to the creation of a joint
research center to address issues related to clean energy,
with each country contributing $15 million to pay for initial
research efforts.
CONTACTS:
Netherlands
Environmental Assessment Agency; World
Health Organization; Greenpeace
China.
Dear
EarthTalk: What are the pros and cons of feeding
babies formula versus breast milk? And if I purchase formula,
should I spend the extra money on the organic variety?
-- Suzy W., via e-mail
| |
It
is generally acknowledged within the medical community
that breast milk is the ideal first food for babies,
though modern formula brands can get the job done,
too. Many companies now make organic baby formula,
a sure way to avoid the chemicals in many non-organic
varieties.
© George Doyle, Getty images |
It is generally
acknowledged within the medical community that breast milk
is the ideal first food for babies, though modern formula
brands can get the job done, too. Human breast milk naturally
contains the vitamins and minerals a newborn requires. According
to the website KidsHealth.org, breastfed infants have less
difficulty with digestion than their formula-fed counterparts.
And since breast milk is easily digested, breastfed babies
have fewer incidences of diarrhea or constipation.
Also, researchers
have found that infants fed with human breast milk have
lower rates of hospital admissions, ear infections, diarrhea,
rashes and allergies than bottle-fed babies. Meanwhile,
a raft of studies suggest that infants who are fed breast
milk may have lower incidences of asthma, diabetes, obesity
and other health problems later on in life.
“Human
milk is made for human infants, and it meets all their specific
nutrient needs,” says Ruth Lawrence, M.D., spokeswoman
for the American Academy of Pediatrics and professor of
pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Rochester
School of Medicine in New York. “We’ve known
for years that the death rates in Third World countries
are lower among breast-fed babies,” she adds. “Breast-fed
babies are healthier and have fewer infections than formula-fed
babies.”
Another related
upside to breast milk is cost savings—both for families
and the larger health care system. Mothers who can’t
or choose not to breast feed end up spending hundreds if
not thousands of dollars per year on formula, and higher
incidences of illness and disease down the road means higher
costs for all.
One concern with
breast feeding is that toxins present in mom’s bloodstream
can make their way into baby. But a 2007 study by Ohio State
and Johns Hopkins University researchers found that levels
of chemicals in breast milk were far below U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency maximum acceptable levels for even drinking
water, and that indoor air in typical American homes contains
as much as 135 times as many contaminants as mother’s
milk. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control maintains that
the benefits of breastfeeding far outweigh any chemical
exposure risks. “To date, effects on the nursing infant
have been seen only where the mother herself was clinically
ill from a toxic exposure,” reports the agency.
Of course, not
all mothers are able to breastfeed, and in such cases formula
can be a healthy alternative. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration
regulates all baby formulas to ensure purity and that they
meet nutritional requirements. Parents should know, however,
that they may not be avoiding chemical exposure by opting
for formula. Non-organic formula can contain the same or
higher amounts of chemical residues left over from its raw
materials. One way around this is to buy organic formula.
Leading makers include Nature’s One, Earth’s
Best and Bright Beginnings. Enfamil and Similac also now
offer organic varieties.
CONTACTS:
Kids
Health; American
Academy of Pediatrics; U.S.
Food and Drug Administration; Consumer
Reports. |
A
SYNDICATED COLUMN ONLY ON AMERICAJR.COM
|
