Testimony Submitted to the
Environment
and Public Works Committee
U.S. Senate
Regarding Green School Initiatives
by Daniel Swartz
Executive Director
Children’s Environmental Health Network
October 1, 2002
The Children’s Environmental Health Network commends this
Committee for bringing attention to the issue of children’s environmental
health and the important relationship between children’s health and the school
environment.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this testimony
for the record. The Children’s
Environmental Health Network is a non-partisan and multi-disciplinary national
project whose mission is to protect the fetus and the child from environmental
hazards and to promote a healthy environment.
The Network’s Board of Directors and committee members include numerous
experts in children’s environmental health who serve on key Federal advisory
panels and scientific boards.
The last few years
have seen a dramatic increase in awareness of the simple fact that children may
be harmed by a wide range of environmental toxicants – often in ways quite
dissimilar to adults. Yet much more
needs to be done in educating the public, changing behavior, amending our
policies, and gaining more information if we are to meet the challenge of
providing a healthy environment and protecting our children from environmental
risk.
In my testimony, I’d like to
highlight a few of the basic medical and scientific concepts that form the
foundation for this field and outline how our policies relating to school
facilities can better recognize these concepts.
A fundamental maxim of pediatric
medicine is that children are not “little adults.” What does this mean when we talk about children and environmental
toxicants? Scientists have documented
the many differences between adult and child behavior and exposures; often
these differences lead to higher exposures for children. The medical evidence
is unassailable that every child experiences particular windows of
vulnerability from conception through adolescence. In brief, children can be
more susceptible to harm caused by environmental agents. Exposures that for an
adult may have little or no consequence can result in life-long harm for a
child.
There is clear, sound science
underlying these principles. There is a
solid consensus in the scientific community for these concepts. As additional
scientific knowledge in this field expands, it continues to reinforce this
foundation. I am attaching materials on
these points developed by the Network for additional background (Attachment
1).
If we take these principles and
apply them to the school environment, these are the types of pediatric,
scientific and public health concepts that should be shaping the policies and
activities of our educational institutions:
·
Children deserve a safe and healthy school environment,
including protection from harmful environmental exposures.
·
Every child experiences particular windows of
vulnerability from conception through adolescence. Exposure at those moments of vulnerability to environmental
hazards can lead to permanent and irreversible damage.
·
These windows of vulnerability do not exist for adults,
so standards based on effects on mature systems will not take into account
children's vulnerabilities.
·
Children's exposures to environmental toxicants are not
the same as adult exposures; exposure estimates based on adult exposures are
likely to understate children's exposures.
·
Past practices which do not take children's
vulnerabilities and exposures into account cannot be assumed to be protective
of children's health.
·
Parents and other caregivers deserve to know what their
children are exposed to in school facilities and the impact of such exposures.
·
Research, data collection and other components of
public health infrastructure must be in place to identify and correct existing
problems and to prevent potential environmental problems in school facilities
and children and their caregivers should have access to these resources.
However, in most cases our
educational facilities are not guided by these concepts. Children spend hours
every day in and around their school.
Chemical toxicants and biological agents in the classroom, on the
playground, in the science lab, or in other school facilities can lead to
health risks and adverse learning conditions.
They can affect many different body systems and impact health, learning,
productivity, and self esteem. Yet few
steps have been taken to protect children from environmental toxicants in the
school environment. I am also attaching to this testimony a summary of the health
effects and toxicants of greatest concern in the school environment. (Attachment 2)
Leadership
through Policy
We join with other witnesses
testifying today commending the Senate for its leadership in passing such
important initiatives as the Healthy and High Performance Schools provisions in
H.R. 1/P.L. 107-110, the “No Child Left Behind Act of 2001” and the “School
Environment Protection Act.”
Under the Healthy and High
Performance Schools program:
·
The Department of Education is directed to undertake a
study of “unhealthy public school buildings” and their health and learning
impacts.
·
A joint Department of Education-Department of
Energy-Environmental Protection Agency grant program was created to award
grants to State and local educational agencies to support healthy and high
performance school buildings.
·
The Department of Education is to biennially report to
Congress on this program.
The Network was
delighted at the enactment of these provisions. We strongly urge their full implementation, and expect these
measures to receive the strong support of both Congress and the
Administration. The Department of
Education must provide funding and implementation of these provisions. The Department must also be a full
participant in activities such as the Interagency Task Force on Children’s
Environmental Health and Safety and the National Children's Study.
Though the Network and others
were heartened by the Senate’s decision to
-- twice --
adopt the
“School Environment Protection Act,” we were doubly disappointed
by the House’s decisions not to accept these important provisions on the
education bill and the farm bill.
Many school districts around the
nation have implemented integrated pest management (IPM) programs
to minimize the use of pesticides and have instituted processes to provide
advance notice of pesticide use in schools to parents and employees. The “School Environment
Protection Act” would further
encourage schools to adopt IPM programs and would provide a
valuable tool for parents.
Additional Steps
These efforts are
vital, but additional efforts are needed, such as research into the
relationship between environmental hazards at school and their affect on health
and learning. This type of research
must also involve interagency coordination and support.
Little is known about the
incidence of health effects which may have a school-related environmental
component, the substances to which children are exposed in school, and
connections between these exposures and health effects. Little is known about exposures in the
school environment, where millions of American children spend a large portion
of their childhood. No research or data
collection efforts exist.
Schoolchildren and their families deserve access to an agency which can
help answer their questions, investigate concerns and provide information on
exposures.
A network for
identifying, investigating, responding to, and preventing environmental health
problems in schools is needed to help protect children’s health in school. Data
systems that link environmental factors with health conditions need to be
developed to obtain data for disease prevention and health promotion. Such a network would help to close the gap
in knowledge regarding the prevalence and incidence of environmentally-related
conditions and environmental exposures.
The Network urges the Committee to support S. 2054, the “Nationwide
Health Tracking Act of 2002.”
Schoolchildren
deserve to be protected from environmental hazards in their school; however, no
standards exist providing such protections.
For example, in the states with
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) coverage, school employees
are covered by standards including:
·
a written hazard communication standard that lists all
products with toxic ingredients, access to material safety data sheets,
training for employees on chemical hazards;
·
protective equipment for employees to use;
·
a laboratory standard covering science teachers and
technicians;
·
emergency evacuation procedures; and
·
access to any environmental monitoring performed by the
employer.
However, students are not covered
by these standards.
Also, as a result of queries from
school personnel, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH), has visited schools for Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) investigations,
which assess risks and exposure and health consequences for employees when
there are no standards. These
investigations can be requested by employers and employees.
Just as is the case with OSHA,
schoolchildren are not under the jurisdiction of NIOSH, so the institute does
not have the authority to undertake investigations based on concerns about
student risks, exposures and health effects.
The Network believes school children deserve at the very least the level
of protection and research afforded working adults -- and probably even more
protection.
We commend you for the leadership
you have shown by holding this hearing.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Protecting
Children from Environmental Toxicants 
Children’s Environmental Health Network
Every day, we are exposed to
dozens, perhaps hundreds, of chemicals.
Such extensive exposure is relatively new. Since World War II, thousands of new, primarily synthetic,
chemicals have been discovered and introduced into commerce and our
environment. In 1940, the annual
production of synthetic chemicals was 1.3 billion pounds; in 1980, it was 320
billion pounds.[i] In 1999,
more than 7 billion pounds of toxic chemicals were released into the nation's
environment.[ii] Chemicals are ubiquitous; traces of
synthetic compounds are found in all humans and animals around the world.[iii]
Both synthetic and natural
chemicals, such as lead, once released into the environment, can harm the
health of humans and wildlife.
The diverse and growing range of
chemicals to which we are exposed means that today’s children live in an
environment vastly different from previous generations. Currently more than
70,000 chemicals are in use. For the
majority of these chemicals, little is known about their health effects on
children.[iv]
Children Are Not Just "Little Adults"
Children, from conception through
adolescence, are in a dynamic state of growth as their immature nervous,
respiratory, reproductive, immune and other systems develop. Because of these developing systems, growing
organisms can be more vulnerable to permanent and irreversible damage from
toxicants than mature organisms.
Children experience the world differently
than adults, meaning that children's exposures to environmental toxicants and
their levels of exposure can vary dramatically from those of adults.
The Delicate Choreography of Children's Growth
The primary task of infancy and
childhood is growth and development. If growth and development are hampered,
the chances of a healthy adulthood are dramatically decreased. Many different
kinds of environmental insults have the potential to damage these natural
processes, potentially leading to lifetime harm. It is often impossible to repair damages that occur in childhood.
Studies of the impact of exposure
to environmental toxicants on development make clear that not just the degree
and route of exposure but also the timing of the exposure affects the response.
Example: Development of the Nervous
System. One of the critical
organ systems to be considered in evaluating the effect of environmental
toxicants on the fetus, infant, and child is the nervous system. Its anatomic and functional development is
complex, intricate, and dependent on a precise sequence of events that occur at
specific points in the development of the child. This exquisitely scripted pattern of development can be disrupted
and irreparably injured by various agents at various stages, resulting in very
specific alterations of neurologic and behavioral development. Key stages in the anatomical development of
the central nervous system, beginning in utero and continuing into adult life,
include:
j Formation of the neural tube, an embryonic
structure that leads to all further brain development.
j
Neuron proliferation, the growth of functional brain cells.
j Cell
migration, the process by which cells move from one place to another to
form the complex structure of the brain.
j
Synaptogenesis, the process by which connections between neurons
occur. Both the numbers and complexity
of these interconnections affect the functioning of the brain.
j Cell
death. The nervous system initially
produces more neurons than it needs.
The process of brain maturation requires the retention of some neurons
and the natural loss of other neurons.
j
Pruning of synapses.
Synaptogenesis, which peaks at two years of age, creates more
connections between neurons than are needed.
Subsequently, there is an orderly process of loss of some connections
and retention of others.
j
Myelination, the process by which the communicating structures of
neurons are covered to protect them and improve their function. Myelin functions like the insulation on an
electrical cord.
Each one of these vital
steps to a healthy brain and nervous system can be disrupted by environmental
agents, resulting in permanent injury or impairment.
Because of children’s developing
systems, children can be more susceptible to harm caused by environmental
agents. Exposures that for an adult may have little or no consequence can
result in life-long harm for a child.
Children are different from
adults in other ways. Because biochemical systems are still
developing in the fetus and the child, their ability to detoxify and excrete
toxins differ from adults. This
difference is sometimes to their advantage, but more frequently children are
not as able to excrete toxins and thus are more vulnerable to them.[v]
What we don’t know about the
effects and potential effects of environmental toxicants is far more than what
we do know, not just for the nervous system (see box) but also for our
reproductive, immune and other critical systems, as well as our state of
knowledge for carcinogenic, endocrine and other health effects.
Children Experience The World
Differently
Children's exposures to
environmental toxicants, and their levels of exposure, can vary dramatically
from those of adults.
Pound for pound, children eat
more food, drink more water, and breathe more air than adults do. Young
children have higher metabolic rates than do adults.[vi] A school-age child, on average, drinks twice
as much water per pound of body weight and eats two to three times as much
fruit per pound of body weight as an adult.[vii] Because of these differences, potential
exposure to toxins that might be in the water or the air such as lead,
pesticides, and nitrates is potentially greater for children.
Exposure differences are also a
result of locations where children spend time, the activities in which children
indulge, and children’s level of personal hygiene. Thus, in identifying how children may be exposed to a chemical
and the level of exposure, it is inadequate to simply extrapolate from adult
exposure.
Behavioral differences, because
of age and developmental stages, means that opportunities for exposure to
environmental chemicals such as pesticides also differ. These differences exist both between adults
and children as well as between children of different ages.
Some examples of children's
behavior and activities that lead to exposure differences include:
jYoung
children spend hours close to the ground where there may be more exposure to
toxins in dust, soil, and carpets as well as to low lying vapors such as radon
or pesticides.
j
Toddlers and primary school children may spend many hours sitting or lying on
the floor while watching TV or playing games (2-3 hours/day). They place their fingers in their mouth
frequently (9-10 times/hour); they are constantly touching their clothes (65
times/hour), objects (118 times/hour) and surfaces (97 times/hour). When they
put their fingers in their mouth, whatever they have touched, they swallow.
j Children often eat snacks while sitting on
the floor, thus whatever environmental chemicals are on the floor can adhere to
both their hands and food and will be ingested through hand to mouth activities
and through contamination of the food with dirty hands.
j Primary school children are likely to spend
more time outdoors than toddlers or infants, typically in contact with dirt or
grass and are also more likely to be outside barefoot than either older or
younger children. They roll on the
grass, tumble, and play games. They
typically do not wash their hands after coming indoors and before eating. Whatever is on the grass may be absorbed
through the skin on the body and feet or ingested when they put their hands in
their mouth.
j Older children also spend a lot of time
outdoors, typically playing organized games such as soccer or football, or
hanging out. Their activities may
include dermal contact with soil or grass.[viii]
This type of behavior/exposure
data do not exist for children older than 12. In addition to sources of exposure
through play that may be similar to younger children, older children may
have exposures similar to adults. For
example, adolescents may work on farms or can be exposed to workplace toxins in
shop class, vocational-education settings, and in work settings.
The data that do
exist show that children are more heavily exposed than adults to toxicants such
as pesticides. For example, studies
that looked at biomarker levels for a commonly used organophosphate pesticide,
chlorpyrifos, in children and adults found that the levels of the pesticide in
children were substantially higher than in the adult population.
Summary
In brief, a child's metabolism,
physiology, diet, exposure patterns, and behavior are different than those of
an adult.
A child is exposed to multiple
toxicants in the course of her/his life, sometimes simultaneously, sometimes
sequentially. Children have a longer
life span than adults so they have more time to develop diseases with long
latency periods that may be triggered by earlier environmental exposures, such
as cancer or Parkinson's disease.[ix] The effects of multiple and/or cumulative
exposures and their potential synergistic effects are not known.
Experience with a variety of
chemicals, from alcohol to environmental toxicants like lead and mercury, has
shown us that what is safe for the adult is not necessarily safe for the fetus,
infant or child. Exposure levels that
for an adult would have no impact or a transitory impact can have life-long
negative consequences for a child.
For More Information:
Contact the
Children’s Environmental Health Network at 202-543-4033 or visit the Network's
Web site <www.cehn.org> which includes the Resource Guide on Pediatric Environmental Health.
The Network is a non-partisan and
multi-disciplinary national project whose mission is to protect the fetus and
the child from environmental hazards and to promote a healthy environment. The Network’s three areas of concentration
are education, research and policy.
Environmental
Health In Schools 
Children’s Environmental Health Network
Chemical toxicants and biological
agents in the classroom, on the playground, in the science lab, or in other
school facilities can lead to health risks and adverse learning
conditions. They can affect many
different body systems and impact health, learning, productivity, and self
esteem.[x]
Children spend hours every day in
and around their school facilities.
However, few steps have been taken to protect children from
environmental toxicants in the school environment.
Other than lead[xi],
asbestos,[xii] and radon,[xiii]
the Federal government has not instituted requirements or guidelines that would
protect children from the same chemical exposures that require employee
notification and other worker protections.
Although students may indirectly benefit from the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) and National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH) activities that cover school employees, OSHA and NIOSH have
no jurisdiction for investigating the health impact of exposure to students. Additionally, only 26 states have OSHA
coverage for their public employees.[xiv]
Specific health effects and
toxicants of concern in the school environment include:
AIR POLLUTANTS, AIR QUALITY, and ASTHMA
Children are especially
susceptible to air pollutants. The
airways of young children are smaller than those of adults. Inhalation of air pollutants that would
produce only a slight response in an adult can result in a significant
obstruction in the airways of a young child.
Children have increased oxygen needs compared to adults, they breathe
more rapidly and, therefore, inhale more pollutants per pound of body weight
than adults. They often spend more time
engaged in vigorous outdoor activities than adults.
·
Asthma is the leading serious chronic illness among
children.[xv] The number of children with asthma in the
United States is rapidly growing, increasing by 75 percent between 1980 and
1994.[xvi] Asthma is the number one cause of
hospitalization among children under the age of 15.[xvii]
·
Asthma is the leading cause of school absenteeism due
to a chronic illness.[xviii] The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
estimated that American children lost 17 million school days in 1997 due to the
disease, and that parents lost 5 million work days in order to care for their
children with asthma-related illness.[xix] Nearly 1 in 13 school-age children has
asthma.[xx]
·
The impact of asthma falls disproportionately on
African-American and certain Hispanic populations and appears to be
particularly severe in urban inner cities.[xxi] These differences include both the incidence
of asthma as well as mortality rates.
In 1997, non-Hispanic Black children living in families with incomes
below the poverty level were found to have the highest rates of asthma.[xxii] Between 1980 and 1993, death rates for
asthma were consistently highest among blacks aged 15-24 years.[xxiii]
·
Major indoor triggers of asthma attacks include
irritants such as commercial products (paints, cleaning agents, pesticides,
perfumes), building components (sealants, plastics, adhesives, insulation
materials), animal and insect allergens, environmental tobacco smoke, and
molds.[xxiv] Many of these triggers can be found in
schools.[xxv]
·
Air pollutants such as particulate matter[xxvi]
and ozone[xxvii] also can
trigger asthma attacks.
·
Although the causes of asthma are not yet known, one
recent 10-year study found that ozone was linked to causing asthma, especially
among physically active school age children living in high ozone communities.[xxviii]
·
Nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide decrease lung function
in asthmatics.[xxix] Long-term exposure to air pollution (such as
nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter) slows children's lung development over
time. While these are generally thought
of as outdoor air pollutants, these agents will be found in schools that keep
windows open much of the year. In
addition, children will encounter these pollutants during school hours while on
the playground or sports field during recess, physical education and sporting
events.
·
Poor indoor air quality can reduce a person's ability
to perform specific mental tasks requiring concentration, calculation, or
memory.[xxx]
·
Air quality problems inside school buildings can arise
from a variety of sources, such as mold growth from excessive moisture,
chemical emissions, insufficient fresh air supply, pollutants, and high radon
levels.[xxxi]
·
27% of schools in a U.S. General Accounting Office
survey reported unsatisfactory ventilation.
22% reported unsatisfactory indoor air quality generally.[xxxii]
·
An EPA investigation of 29 schools across the country
found inadequate ventilation in most of the schools.[xxxiii]
LEARNING DISABILITIES -- DEVELOPMENTAL
DISABILITIES
Seventeen percent of children
under 18 have been diagnosed with one or more developmental disabilities. These disabilities include Attention
Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and autism and are the result of complex
interactions among genetic, environmental and societal factors that impact
children during vulnerable periods of development.[xxxiv]
·
A recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) report indicated that approximately 1.6 million elementary school-aged
children (7 percent of children 6-11 years of age) have been diagnosed with
ADHD, which is also known as Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD).[xxxv]
·
A recent National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (NIEHS) study indicated that the incidence of ADHD may be greatly
underestimated by school and public health officials. In the study, parents reported more than 15 percent of boys in
grades one through five had been diagnosed with ADHD. Overall, more than nine percent of all fourth and fifth grade
children studied were taking medication to treat ADHD.[xxxvi]
·
Known or suspected causes of brain and nervous system
disorders are exposure to lead, methylmercury, and some pesticides, therapeutic
drugs and food additives.[xxxvii] Other chemical classes suspected of
developmental neurotoxicity include cancer chemotherapy medications,
polyhalogenated hydrocarbons, psychoactive drugs, and solvents.
MERCURY
Schools are places where children
and elemental mercury may come together via thermometers and barometers, in
laboratory courses or “show-and-tell.”
Mercury can also be released through broken fluorescent light tubes or
thermostats. Elemental mercury is a
liquid at room temperature but readily volatizes to a colorless and odorless
vapor.
·
Mercury is a potent neurotoxicant and children are
particularly susceptible to mercury’s dangers. Mercury interferes with brain development and more easily passes
into the brains of fetuses and young children than into the brains of adults.
·
Both short- and long-term exposure to mercury vapor can
lead to brain disorders. These include a wide variety of cognitive,
personality, sensory and motor disturbances.[xxxviii]
·
Mercury poisoning is linked to kidney and liver damage
and reproductive disorders.
·
Exposure to high levels of mercury vapor, such as
heating elemental mercury in inadequately ventilated areas, have resulted in
fatalities.[xxxix]
·
Mercury-containing products or spills must be properly
handled. Even small mercury spills require specialists. Improper clean-up of a mercury release, such
as vacuuming up the mercury from a broken thermometer, will spread the mercury
into the air.[xl]
·
In July 2000, the National Academy of Sciences
concluded that every effort should be made to reduce the release of mercury
into the environment.
PESTICIDES
·
Pesticide exposure
may result in symptoms ranging from relatively mild headaches and skin rashes
to paralysis and death. Some long-term
illnesses linked to pesticide exposure may be subtle -- such as neurological
disorders or reduced cognitive skills.[xli] Long-term illnesses and those with delayed
onsets, such as cancer, which may appear years after exposure, can also
occur. Most exposures to pesticides
cause no symptoms. Even when exposures are symptomatic, they are often misdiagnosed. This may mask the true extent of the
illnesses caused by pesticides.[xlii]
·
Scientific reviews
of the U.S. pesticide regulatory system identified important gaps in knowledge
about the health effects of pesticides on children’s developing systems as well
as children’s actual exposures to pesticides.[xliii] According to the American Academy of
Pediatrics, “because the health effects of pesticide exposure on children are
not well studied, an approach that reduces their exposure to these chemicals is
desirable.” [xliv]
·
Pesticide use in
schools can be widespread. It can
include “routine spraying,” ostensibly to prevent the development of problems,
in classrooms, hallways, the cafeteria, and other areas. This type of use may
result in children being exposed to high levels of pesticides.[xlv] Additionally, pesticides can be used in the
building when an infestation is noted and pesticides may also be used outside
on lawns and playing fields.
·
Information about
on the amount of pesticides used in the nation’s 110,000 public schools is not
available. The Federal government does
not collect such data, and, as of 1999, only two states collected data on
pesticide use in a manner that allows for identifying use in school facilities.[xlvi]
·
From 1993 through
1996, about 2,300 pesticide-related exposures involving individuals at schools
were reported, according to the American Association of Poison Control Centers
(although these data are not believed to be complete).[xlvii]
LEAD
·
Lead is a potent neurotoxin. Exposure to lead can cause a variety of health effects, including
delays in normal physical and mental development in children, slight deficits
in attention span, hearing, and learning disabilities of children. Long-term effects can include stroke, kidney
disease, and cancer.[xlviii]
·
Children of day-care-age who are in lead-contaminated
buildings will be at highest risk of adverse outcomes from the exposure, but
older children may be effected as well.
·
A common source of lead exposure for children today is
lead paint and the contaminated dust and soil it generates.[xlix] According to a report on the condition of the nation’s school facilities by the U.
S. General Accounting Office, schools built
before 1980 were painted with lead paint.[l]
·
Children may also be exposed to lead through drinking
water that has elevated concentrations from lead plumbing materials. Lead contamination in drinking water occurs
from corrosion of lead pipes and it cannot be directly detected or removed by
the water system.[li] According to the EPA, the longer water
remains in contact with leaded-plumbing, the more the opportunity exists for
lead to leach into water. As a result, facilities with on again/off again water
use patterns, such as schools, may have elevated lead concentrations.[lii]
·
Some support was provided to schools through the Lead
Contamination Control Act of 1988 to identify and correct
lead-in-drinking-water problems at schools, especially water coolers with
lead-lined tanks.[liii]
SCHOOL BUSES and DIESEL EXHAUST
·
According to the EPA, diesel engine emissions
contribute to serious public health problems including: premature mortality, aggravation of existing
asthma, acute respiratory symptoms, chronic bronchitis, and decreased lung
function. They have also been linked to
increased incidences of various cancers in adults in more than 30 health
studies.
·
Diesel exhaust is known to be a major source of fine
particles that can lodge deep in children's lungs, increasing the likelihood of
asthma, chronic bronchitis, heart disease and even premature death.[liv]
·
In the United States, nearly 600,000 school buses
transport 24 million students to school daily.
Collectively, U.S. children spend 3 billion hours on school buses each
year.[lv]
·
Children who ride diesel school buses are exposed to an
excessive amount of toxic diesel exhaust.
The excess levels on the buses are 23 to 46 times higher than levels
considered to be significant cancer risks according to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and federal guidelines.
The diesel exhaust exposures are likely to result in an additional 23 to
46 cancer cases per million children exposed.[lvi]
MOLD
·
Mold grows on virtually any substance when moisture and
oxygen are present, including ceiling tiles, carpets, wood and paper. Some molds, such as black molds or
Stachybotrys, are known to produce potent toxins which can cause impaired
breathing and cause allergies.[lvii]
·
Children can be exposed to mold in schools if the
building has indoor air that is very damp or if there have been water leaks. Mold may grow within 48 hours if the
building materials or furnishings are damp.[lviii]
·
The common symptoms of mold toxin exposure include
headache, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea and respiratory irritation.[lix]
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Contact the Children’s Environmental
Health Network (www.cehn.org) at
202-543-4033 or the Healthy Schools Network (www.healthyschools.org) at
518-462-0632.
[i] Diagnosing and Treating Environmental
Health Problems. Interview with Robert
R. Orford, Minnesota Medicine
1991;74:7-10.
[ii] Based on data from the U.S. EPA’s Toxic
Release Inventory for 1999, posted on http://www.scorecard.org/env-releases/us-map.tc.
[iii] Colborn T, Dumanoski D and Myers
JP. Our
Stolen Future. New York, NY:Dutton,
1996.
[iv] Schaefer M. Children and Toxic Substances:
Confronting a Major Public Health Challenge. Environmental Health
Perspectives 1994;102(Supp 2):155-156.
[v] Echobichon DJ and Stevens DD. Perinatal Development of Human Blood
Esterases. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1973;14:41-47.
[vi] National Research Council. Pesticides
in the Diets of Infants and Children.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1993.
[vii] Guzelian PS, Henry CJ, Olin SS,
eds. Similarities and Differences Between Children and Adults: Implications
for Risk Assessment 1992. ILSI Press.
[viii] Busser HJ, Ott J, van Lummel RC,
Uiterwaal M and Blank R. Ambulatory
monitoring of children's activity. Medical Engineering and Physics 1997 19:
440-5.
Connolly RD
and Elliot JM. Evolution and ontogeny
of hand function in N. Blurton-Jones (ed).
Ethological Studies of Child
Behavior Cambridge UP, London, 1972.
Eaton WO
and Yu AP. Are sex differences in child
motor activity level a function of sex differences in maturational status? Child
Development 1989 60:1005-11.
Engstrom
L-M. Physical activity of children and
youth. Acta Paediatric Scand 1980
Suppl 282:101-5.
Fenske RA,
Black KG, Elkner KP, Lee C, Methner M and Soto R. Potential exposure and health risks of infants following indoor
residential pesticide application. Am J. Public Health 1990 80:689-93.
Freedson
PS. Field monitoring of physical
activity in children. Pediatric Exercise Sci 1989 8-18.
Freeman
NCG, Ettinger A, Barry M and Rhoads G.
Hygiene and food related behaviors associated with blood lead levels of
young children from lead contaminated homes.
J Exp Assess and Environ Epi
1997 7:103-18.
Freeman
NCG, Lioy PJ, Pellizzari E, Zelon H, Thomas K, Clayton A and Quackenboss
J. Responses to the Region 5 NHEXAS
Time/activity diary. J Exp Assess and Environ Epi 1999 in
press.
Gallahue DL
Understanding Motor development: infants,
children, adolescents (2nd ed) Benchmark Press, Indianapolis 1989.
Quackenboss
J, Pellizzari ED, Clayton A, Lioy PJ, Shubat P and Sexton K. Measurement and analysis of children's
exposures to pesticides and PAHs. The
7th annual meeting of the International Society of Exposure Analysis, Nov. 2-5,
Research Triangle Park, NC 1997.
Reed KJ,
Jimenez M, Lioy PJ and Freeman NCG.
Quantification of Children's Hand and Mouthing Activities. J Exp Assess and Environ Epi 1999 in
press.
Tsang AM
and Klepeis NE. Descriptive Statistics Tables from a detailed analysis of the National
Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS) Data 1996 US EPA/600/R-96/074.
Wiley JA. Study of Children's Activity Patterns
California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, 1991.
[ix] Landrigan PJ and Carlson JE.
Environmental Policy and Children's Health. Future of Children Summer/Fall 1995;5(2):34-52.
[x] California Department of Health Services. California Interagency Working Group on
Indoor Air Quality in Schools, "Indoor Environmental Quality in California
Schools: An Assessment of Needs and Opportunities". August 1999.
[xi] Lead Contamination Control Act, P.L.
100-572.
[xii] The Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) requires all schools to
inspect and assess the condition of asbestos-containing material. (EPA regulations, Title 15, Chapter 53,
Subchapter II).
[xiii] In 1989, EPA recommended that schools
nationwide be tested for the presence of radon. U.S. EPA, Radon in Schools: Air and Radiation. Second Edition.
[xiv] OSHA Coverage of State and Local
Government Workers
[xv] American Lung Association, 2002
[xvi] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, America’s Children and the Environment,
December 2000.
[xviii] U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Indoor Air-Asthma Facts. Available at
www.epa.gov/iaq/asthma/introduction.html
[xix] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Costs of Asthma for 1997.
[xxi] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Indoor Air-Asthma Facts. Available at
www.epa.gov/iaq/asthma/introduction.html
[xxii] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, America’s Children and the Environment,
December 2000, p. 49.
[xxiii] Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, “Asthma Mortality and Hospitalization
among Children and Young Adults—United States, 1980-1993,” Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, May 3, 1996.
[xxiv] American Academy of Pediatrics, Handbook of Pediatric Environmental Health,
1999, p. 45.
[xxv] Environmental Law Institute, Research
Report. Healthier Schools: A Review of
State Policies for Improving Indoor Air Quality. January 2002.
[xxvi] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996 Air Quality Criteria for Particulate
Matter, Research Triangle Park, NC.
[xxvii] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996 Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and
Related Photochemical Oxidants, Research Triangle Park, NC.
[xxviii] Rob McConnell, Kiros Berhane, Frank D.
Gilliland, Stephanie J. London, Talat Islam, W. James Gauderman, Edward Avol,
Helene G. Margolis and John M. Peters.
"Asthma in Exercising Children Exposed to Ozone," The Lancet,
Vol. 359, No. 9304, Feb. 2, 2002
[xxix] American Thoracic Society, “Health
Effects of Air Pollution,” Am Journal of
Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 153:3-50, 1996.
[xxx]
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
"Indoor Air Quality and Student Performance" Indoor
Environments Division. Office of
Radiation and Indoor Air. August 2000.
[xxxi] Environmental Law Institute, Research
Report. Healthier Schools: A Review of
State Policies for Improving Indoor Air Quality. January 2002.
[xxxiii] U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Indoor Air-Schools. Frequently Asked Questions.
[xxxiv] In Harm's Way. Toxic Threats to Child Development Project. Executive Summary. 1998. Greater Boston
Physicians for Social Responsibility.
[xxxvi] Prevalence of Medication Treatment for
Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder Among Elementary School Children in
Johnston County, North Carolina. Andrew
S. Rowland, UNM Department of Family and Community Medicine. Available at
http://www.apha.org/news/press/2002_journal/feb02.htm.
[xxxvii] Congressional Office of Technology
Assessment report on neurotoxicity, 1990.
[xxxviii] ATSDR. Toxicological Profile, Mercury, http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp46.html.
For specific information on memory loss, see the section on Health Effects,
Section 2.2.1.4, Neurological Effects of Metallic Mercury
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp46-c2.pdf.
[xxxix] American Academy of Pediatrics, Handbook of Pediatric Environmental Health,
1999, p. 147.
[xl] American Academy of Pediatrics, Handbook of Pediatric Environmental Health,
1999, p. 152
[xli] U.S.
General Accounting Office, PESTICIDES: Use, Effects, and Alternatives to Pesticides
in Schools (RCED-00-17), November 1999, p. 3.
[xlii] U.S.
General Accounting Office, PESTICIDES: Use, Effects, and Alternatives to Pesticides
in Schools (RCED-00-17), November 1999, p. 3.
[xliii] National Research Council. Pesticides
in the Diets of Infants and Children.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1993.
[xliv] American Academy of Pediatrics, Handbook of Pediatric Environmental Health,
1999, p. 314.
[xlv] American Academy of Pediatrics, Handbook of Pediatric Environmental Health,
1999, p. 314.
[xlvi] U.S. General Accounting Office, PESTICIDES: Use, Effects, and Alternatives
to Pesticides in Schools (RCED-00-17), November 1999, p. 2.
[xlvii] U.S.
General Accounting Office, PESTICIDES:
Use, Effects, and Alternatives to Pesticides in Schools (RCED-00-17),
November 1999, p. 2.
xviCalifornia Interagency Working Group on Indoor Air
Quality, Committee on Indoor Environmental Quality in Schools, "Indoor
Environmental Quality in California Schools:
An Assessment of Needs and Opportunities, August 1999.
xvii Myrhrvold, A.N., Olsen, E., and O.Laundsen. "Indoor Environment in Schools-Pupils
health and performance in regard to CO2 concentrations".
xv111 Natural Resources Defense Council and Coalition for
Clean Air, No Breathing in the Aisles:
Diesel Exhaust Inside School Buses,
2001
xixU.S. Newswire via Comtex, February 7, 2002. Berkeley, California.
xx Environment and Human Health, Inc., Children's Exposure
to Diesel Exhaust on School Buses, February 7, 2002. Available at www.ehhi.org.
[xlviii] U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Office of Water. National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations. Consumer Factsheet on
Lead.
[xlix]
U.S. EPA Office of Children’s Health Protection, at
http://www.epa.gov/children/toxics.htm.
[l] U. S. General Accounting Office, Report to Congressional Requesters. 1995
School Facilities: Condition of America's Schools, GAO/HEHS-95-61., p. 27.
[li]
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Consumer Factsheet on Lead.
[lii] U.S. EPA, “Lead in drinking water in
schools and non-residential buildings,” EPA 812-B-94-002, April 1994, available
at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/consumer/leadinschools.html.
[liii] U.S. EPA, “Lead in drinking water in
schools and non-residential buildings,” EPA 812-B-94-002, Section 1 -
Background Information (p. 3-11), April 1994, available at
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/consumer/leadinschools.html.
[liv] U.S.
Newswire via Comtex, February 7, 2002.
Berkeley, California.
[lv] Environment
and Human Health, inc., Children's Exposure to Diesel Exhaust on School Buses,
February 7, 2002. Available at
www.ehhi.org.
[lvi] Natural
Resources Defense Council and Coalition for Clean Air, No Breathing in the
Aisles: Diesel Exhaust Inside School
Buses, 2001
[lvii] Stricherz, Mark. "Moldy Buildings: Troubling Trend For
Many Districts". Education
Week. September 26, 2001.
[lviii] "Mold in My School: What Do I Do". The California Department of Health
Services. National Clearinghouse for
Educational Facilities. March 2002.
[lix] "Mold in My School: What Do I
Do". The California Department of
Health Services. National Clearinghouse
for Educational Facilities. March 2002