Environmental health entails everything around us – our food and water, our work, our habits, where we live and travel, climate, things happening in other parts of
the world – and these things are all connected.
The effect of the world we live in on and our health has received much well deserved attention during the past decade. This doesn’t mean that environmental health hazards are new: they’ve always been around, but they’ve changed over the centuries. A thousand years ago the greatest health risks would have come from unsanitary water supplies and living conditions, spoiling of stored food and the possibility that a wolf or tiger might attack you outdoors. The greatest worries in the twentieth century are about radioactivity; toxic substances used in farming, food storage and industry; predicted climatic changes (though there’s still much dispute about whether these predictions will our come true); transport hazards; problems caused by the increasing number of people in the world. Many of today’s worries have resulted from attempts to correct some of the problems of the past. For example, many people fear that water purification processes may be harmful to health; some people are allergic to chemicals used to sterilise and preserve food; there are fears that agricultural pesticides enabling us to grow food for our increasing population may be toxic or have unknown long-term effects; some synthesised substances that have become important to humans such as chemicals (including medicines), fibres and plastics may turn out to be dangerous to health.
The worst fear is that chemicals, radioactivity and other environmental influences could change our cells’ genes to cause cancer in those exposed or defects and illness in future generations.
• Carcinogens cause cancer. The sun and cigarette smoking are our greatest carcinogenic risks.
•Mutagens cause changes (mutations) in the genes of living cells. When mutations occur in gametes (ovum and sperm cells) they can be passed on to future generations. Large doses of
radiation are mutagenic.
•Teratogens can cause errors of development of the foetus, leading to spontaneous abortion or birth defects. The rubella virus and some drugs can be teratogenic.
Toxins can enter our bodies through our skin, through our intestines, and through our lungs from things inhaled. A large dose of any toxic agent usually has a severe, immediate effect such as second-degree burns from the sun or intense illness due to swallowing chemical poisons or inhaling toxic gas. Prolonged low-dose exposure more often causes chronic illness, and there may be a latent period between exposure and the development of disease. Skin cancer from the sun, emphysema or lung cancer from cigarette smoking, and chronic bronchitis from living or working where the air is full of smoke are examples of latent effects.
There are plenty of naturally occurring environmental hazards. Radioactivity occurs naturally (though in most places in very small amounts); ultraviolet rays in sunlight can cause skin cancer; many plants and some animals can poison humans; many people suffer respiratory disorders from inhaling plant pollens.
Other hazards are the result of human activity, such as synthetic pesticides, pollution of rivers and oceans with sewage or industrial effluent, tobacco and industrial smoke, increased pollen counts in air from farming, altered content of minerals in the air, soil and water due to mining and agriculture.
The media tend to exaggerate and sensationalise health risks. Some reports give unbalanced emphasis to worries about possible hazards that are unfounded without giving the full story or mentioning known benefits. I feel that a lot of our concerns come from not enough knowledge and understanding (at least in my case) of the accelerating technology of today. The unknown is always frightening.
Now, whenever I hear about a new environmental health risk, I try to find out more about it before getting worried. I remind myself that when steam was first used to turn engines and when electricity was introduced for lighting and power, many people predicted that harnessing these great powers surely would soon bring about the end of the world.
If you’re worried that something in your environment may be causing illness, ask someone with knowledge in environmental health (maybe your doctor or council health inspector) for advice. Beware, you may get several conflicting answers to your questions. When there is dispute over environmental hazards, I prefer to take advice from committees of experts nominated by differing interest groups, such as the committees of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), which investigate and issue statements on all concerns about environmental health, including standards for safe maximum residue levels (MRLs) of pesticides, agricultural chemicals, feed additives, veterinary medicines and noxious substances in food; guidelines for clearance of water treatment chemicals and processes; and guidelines for controlling emission of pollutants. If you can’t find information about your concern, write to your federal and State ministers for health, or your mayor or shire chairperson. Our government is more vigilant than most and quick to respond to concerns that Australians may be exposed to unnecessary health risks.
There are heavy penalties for industrial pollution, and all new technology must be proven to have a great deal more benefits than any known risks. Otherwise it is outlawed. If there are any possible risks however unlikely, manufacturers are required to provide warning and information about safety precautions. Still, not al processes (and especially older ones) have come under scrutiny and there is always the possibility of undetected risks. We must all maintain our vigilance about environmental health risks.
*35/31/5*