Newsroom
Media contact: Leigh Ann Oatney, (971) 230-1293
About NWHF and Frequently Asked Questions
PRESS RELEASES ARCHIVE
You’re only as healthy as your environment
Commentary by Thomas Aschenbrener, president of NWHF, published in the April 3, 2008 issue of the Oregonian
You’re responsible. You follow a sensible diet and get the right amount of exercise and sleep. You avoid high-risk behaviors such as smoking cigarettes, and you go to your doctor for regular checkups. And you’re fortunate to have affordable health insurance and receive quality care when you need it. These are important factors to good health. But they aren’t enough.
Last year, the Oregon Environmental Council profiled the level of pollution in 10 individuals from around our fair state. The research found that all 10 had potentially toxic and harmful environmental pollutants in their bodies, such as mercury and the banned chemical PCB. Recently, the environmental council followed up on this study with a new research report, "The Price of Pollution," which was funded by a grant from the Northwest Health Foundation.
Despite our own best efforts to be personally responsible and despite affordable access to the best health care in America, the environment around us often determines our health. Mercury, PCBs and other pollutants found in many of Oregon’s rivers and in the air we breathe are linked to a broad range of birth defects, including heart problems, spina bifida and cleft lip and palate. Air pollution triggers asthma attacks; benzene emissions from gasoline are linked to cancer and childhood leukemia; and lead exposure leads to learning disabilities that could stop Oregon children from reaching their full potential.
There is an awful and obvious human cost to these environmentally related diseases. The new OEC study shows us the staggering economic cost as well: Oregonians spend more than $1.5 billion each year to treat preventable diseases caused by pollution.
Responsible personal behavior and great medical care are simply not enough to ensure good health. Protecting the health of entire populations is a "public health" approach, one that recognizes the effects of social and environmental influences on personal health. That approach is underappreciated in Oregon, which ranks 43rd in the nation in per capita state funding for public health.
We can reduce pollution in the environment. Thanks to the OEC and the work of Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency changed its rules last year so that the gasoline sold in Oregon did not have more benzene in it than the rest of the nation. But much more needs to be done. For example, we should require that complete information on chemical ingredients and their toxicity be publicly available, and that the use of these chemicals should be reduced when they pose serious risks to human health. States are stepping up to the challenge. Last year, California took action to remove phthalates from children’s toys, and Washington recently approved similar legislation targeting toxins in children’s toys.
For policymakers, businesses and citizens alike, this research should spur Oregon to new levels of support for public health and a clean environment. The upfront cost of moving forward seems much less imposing now that the Oregon Environmental Council has documented the cost of doing nothing.