Wallet Mouth

Another reason to eat your greens

Are you now, or have you ever been, a consumer of canned food?

Yeah, me too.

And I was none too pleased when I learned that epoxy-lined cans appear to be our main source of bisphenol A (BPA) exposure. I now avoid most canned food, which is kind of a drag convenience-wise (although it has done wonders for my soup-making skills).

Nonetheless, I'm still troubled by the estrogen-mimicking chemical's widespread presence in food packaging and other items (cash-register receipts is my new favorite).

So I was happy to learn from the Soft Landing (via Dr. Greene's blog—and thanks, Michele, for the tip) that preliminary research from Duke University suggests that folate and genistein may counteract the effects of BPA, particularly for children and possibly for adults as well. 

The endocrine-disrupting chemical is of particular concern for fetuses and children, because, as Dr. Greene puts it, "[BPA] turns on and off different genes," resulting in a higher risk for problems such as obesity, early puberty, and breast and prostate cancer.

In their experiments, the Duke researchers exposed pregnant animals to BPA and gave them extra folate (found in leafy greens) and genistein (found in legumes such as soy and fava beans). They found that "[t]hese nutrients switched the genes back the way they should be, and the BPA effect was completely nullified." Greene continues: "Beyond this, the researchers propose that these nutrients could block the effects of chemical estrogen exposures, even if given later in childhood and possibly even in adulthood."

Hmm... What's on the menu tonight? I think some romaine lettuce, spinach, asparagus, turnip greens, mustard greens, parsley, collard greens, and broccoli with fava beans!

[Creative Commons-licensed photo by Sherrie Thai]

No one wants to see your butt, especially birds

Walking to the grocery store the other day, I watched as a man took a final drag off his cigarette and then threw it onto the sidewalk. Sights like that are so common, seldom do they even register in my brain.

But in that moment I was struck by the bizarreness of this banal act: Why is this form of litter socially acceptable?

I'm a child of the '70s, so I remember Woodsy Owl's "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute" campaign well. And after observing litter patterns firsthand in Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent, I've come to the conclusion that in general, Americans seem to have internalized the fact that it's not great to throw crap on the ground.

But there seems to be an unspoken exception for the cigarette butt, which according to LitterButt is the most common form of litter. For some reason, people who would never dream of putting a candy wrapper anywhere but in a garbage bin think nothing of flicking their cigarette butts into the gutter. Why is that?

LitterButt suggests that smokers don't consider butts litter, and think that they will naturally decompose. Because, you know, some of them look sorta cottony. For a nice explanation of why that isn't true, see this helpful page from Virginia Clean Waterways.

"So what?" smokers may ask. Well, the nonprofit's website also explains that butts pose a threat to wildlife: "Studies conducted by Clean Virginia Waterways show that the chemicals in cigarette butts easily leach out of the butts, and are deadly to water fleas (a small but important animal that lives in most freshwater lakes and streams as well as the ocean)." In addition, birds and marine creatures often ingest cigarette butts, mistaking them for food. 

So my question is, How can we make throwing cigarette butts on the ground socially unacceptable?

In Japan, it's considered less OK than it is in the States. Campaigns and signs (like the humorously unclear one shown above, from Kimonobox.com) urge smokers not to drop their butts on the ground. Personal ashtrays (I saw the one pictured below, by NEU, on Japan Trendshop) are also common over there—and they offer a solution to the problem that butts can't go in garbage cans because of the fire hazard. What would it take to make them popular over here?

And/Or... what would it take for municipal garbage cans to have enclosed ashtrays on top?

Another interesting idea came from a designer I met the other night. What if cigarette boxes had a built-in butt-disposal compartment? This is unlikely, of course, since a larger package size would usher in a whole set of additional associated costs, but it certainly seems worthy of exploration.

What do you think?

'Slow Death by Rubber Duck' paddles in Bay

Well, it took two weeks, but the Slow Death by Rubber Duck authors, Rick Smith and Bruce Lourie (below), have made it from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco. They're reading tonight at Booksmith in the Upper Haight.

I wish I could make it, but since it starts at 7:30, chances are I'll be reading about choo-choo trains to Mini-Mouth. Hopefully I'll get my hands on a copy of the book soon, though. It sounds like a great addition to what's starting to be a substantial little section of my bookcase: Exposed: The Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Products and What's at Stake for American Power, a well-written primer on the issues, Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry, which I read last year and am still recovering from, and How Everyday Products Make People Sick: Toxins at Home and in the Workplace, which I confess I haven't read yet.