[Summit] Summit Digest, Vol 60, Issue 22

[Ben Rackliffe]

I agree. There have been too many emails that don't concern the  
neighborhood or greater city. They are adversly effecting the  
functionality of this mailing list. A different forum is appropriate.

Ben Rackliffe

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 17, 2010, at 10:26 AM, summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us wrote:

> Send Summit mailing list submissions to
>    summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    summit-owner at sna.providence.ri.us
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Summit digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Banana lectin identified as HIV inhibitor by U-M    scientists
>      UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN (marco pereira)
>   2. suggestion for non-local postings on the Summit list (John  
> Landry)
>   3. Local Posts (John Bazik)
>   4. Re: more water chemistry (Hope for Health)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
> From: marco pereira <markenid2004 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Summit] Banana lectin identified as HIV inhibitor by U-M
>    scientists UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
> To: Summit Neighborhood <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
> Message-ID: <333966.7348.qm at web56405.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Discovery of how Ban-Lec binds to a key HIV-1 protein opens
> door to developing microbicides that can prevent sexual transmission  
> of
> HIV
>
>
> ANN ARBOR, Mich.?
> A potent new HIV inhibitor derived from bananas may open the door to
> new treatments to prevent sexual transmission of HIV, according to a  
> University of Michigan Medical School study published this week.
> Scientists have an emerging interest in lectins, naturally
> occurring chemicals in plants, because of their ability to halt the
> chain of reaction that leads to a variety of infections.
> In laboratory tests, BanLec, the lectin found in bananas, was as
> potent as two current anti-HIV drugs. Based on the findings published
> March 19 in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, BanLec may become a  
> less expensive new component of applied vaginal microbicides,  
> researchers say.
>
>
>
> http://www2.med.umich.edu/prmc/media/newsroom/details.cfm?ID=1521
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> GENERAL CONTRACTOR
> WINDOW PRESERVATION BY JAY MARCO
>
> PAINTING: INTERIOR & EXTERIOR, ROOFING, PORCH, HOME IMPROVEMENT
> STORM WINDOW AND DOOR - INSTALLATION
> THERMOGRAPHER - CHECK THE INSULATION OF YOUR HOUSE WITH OUR
> INFRARED CAMERA
>
> http://www.betterthaneverwindows.com/index.html
>
> www.markspaintingpvd.com
> info at jaymarcowindows.com
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20100317/cae5692f/attachment-0001.html 
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:11:29 -0400
> From: John Landry <jtlandry at verizon.net>
> Subject: [Summit] suggestion for non-local postings on the Summit list
> To: Summit Neighborhood <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
> Message-ID: <F5FD819E-9ADF-436F-ADFE-2E82FA618DED at verizon.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> There have been a lot of postings lately on health concerns.  I'm
> quite interested in the ones about local matters, such as our water
> quality.  I'm not interested in the ones that could have appeared on
> any neighborhood list in the country.  Since this is a neighborhood
> list, could we set up a special subgroup about non-local matters,
> which people would have to opt-in to read?  -John Landry
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:52:16 -0400
> From: John Bazik <jsb at cs.brown.edu>
> Subject: [Summit] Local Posts
> To: summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> Message-ID: <20100317135216.GA26070 at cs.brown.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Please remember that this is the Summit list - for issues concerning
> our neighborhood and our city.  If your post does not have a  
> neighborhood
> connection, please find a different forum for it.
>
> Also a reminder to Summit readers that the Market list is a separate,
> very-low-volume venue for buying and selling with your neighbors, and
> for learning about sales and events at local businesses.  Most of you
> already read it, but I think new people sometimes miss it when they
> sign up.
>
> To subscribe, visit the "Mailing List" link on SNA's home page:
>
> http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>
> John
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Hope for Health <libertyliterary at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Summit] more water chemistry
> To: Summit Neighborhood <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>,    Breslers
>    <breslerfamily at gmail.com>
> Message-ID: <688872.70624.qm at web50805.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It is truly sad that we have contaminated our water
> and changed our water containers to toxic plastic,
> so that you appear to be stuck with the choice
> between possible mold or drinking unhealthy
> chemicals!? So sorry!? I wish I had a better
> answer for you.
>
> Blessings,
>
> Liberty G
>
> --- On Tue, 3/16/10, Breslers <breslerfamily at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Breslers <breslerfamily at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Summit] more water chemistry
> To: "Summit Neighborhood" <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
> Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2010, 8:59 PM
>
> Poland Spring is close to pH 7. Most of the other bottled waters I  
> tested were closer to 8.
> Things like molds grow in water filters, to which I am very allergic/ 
> sensitive, and also I do not think they will correct pH.
>
> One filter housing I saw had a blown in filler, which is  
> formaldehyde!!
> For now I am doing bottled, although it's not perfect.
>
> Elianna
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Hope for Health <libertyliterary at yahoo.com 
> > wrote:
>
> Charlotte,
>
>
>
> Below is a link to the best source of info on this I could
>
> quickly find.  They start with water filter pitchers, but
>
> go on to discuss faucet, under-the-counter and whole-house
>
> filters.  They mention that some faucets may need an
>
> "adaptor" - perhaps such is available for yours.  I'd suggest
>
> contacting these folks to ask.  Otherwise, my main comment
>
> is that the water filter pitchers are plastic, which I'm
>
> not happy about.  However, if none of the other options is
>
> possible for you, they would be better and cheaper than
>
> bottled water (also in plastic) - as long as you keep them
>
> in the refrigerator and don't let them get warm.  Plastic
>
> leaches chemicals into food when heated, which is why you
>
> should never put it in the microwave.
>
>
>
> See: www.consumersearch.com/water-filters/water-filter-pitchers
>
>
>
> Please let me know how you make out!  We used to have great
>
> water here, but they had a problem a few years back and now
>
> chlorinate the heck out of it.  This doesn't remove the
>
> many chemical contaminants already in the water, but adds
>
> chlorine chems to the mix.  Yukkh! :-(
>
>
>
> Blessings,
>
>
>
> Liberty G
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 3/16/10, O'Kelly, Charlotte <COKELLY at providence.edu>  
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> From: O'Kelly, Charlotte <COKELLY at providence.edu>
>
>> Subject: RE: [Summit] more water chemistry
>
>> To: "Hope for Health" <libertyliterary at yahoo.com>
>
>> Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2010, 8:29 AM
>
>> the new style faucet I have on my
>
>> kitchen sink won't accept a filter. Is there any other way I
>
>> can filter my drinking water?
>
>> Charlotte
>
>>
>
>> ________________________________________
>
>> From: summit-bounces at sna.providence.ri.us
>
>> [summit-bounces at sna.providence.ri.us]
>
>> On Behalf Of Hope for Health [libertyliterary at yahoo.com]
>
>> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 11:36 PM
>
>> To: Theresa Mathiesen; Summit Neighborhood; Breslers
>
>> Subject: Re: [Summit] more water chemistry
>
>>
>
>> For drinking water, both my organization,
>
>> Toxics Information Project (TIP) and the
>
>> great independent research non-profit,
>
>> Environmental Working Group recommend
>
>> a water filter on your kitchen faucet.
>
>> That avoids the plastic, which can indeed
>
>> leach into your food or water, especially
>
>> when exposed to heat.  It also takes out
>
>> at least a fair quantity of contaminants
>
>> in the water from your pipes.
>
>>
>
>> See the excerpts below on the subject from
>
>> our Autumn 2007 TIP TALKS newsletter,
>
>> at www.toxicsinfo.org/tiptalks/Autumn07.htm
>
>>
>
>> Blessings,
>
>>
>
>> Liberty G
>
>> ****************************************************************
>
>>        TAP WATER:  TO DRINK OR
>
>> NOT TO DRINK?
>
>>
>
>> The recent DC Tap Water report revealed that tap water
>
>> samples in the Washington, DC area contained toxic
>
>> chlorination by-products at levels above federal health
>
>> limits.  An average reader might read that and run to
>
>> the local Safeway or Piggly Wiggly to stock up on bottled
>
>> water. But you're smarter than that.  You probably even
>
>> already know there's a cheaper, more
>
>> environmentally-friendly way to dramatically lower levels of
>
>> these toxic byproducts: carbon filtration. In fact, it's 10
>
>> to 20 times less expensive than bottled water ($100 vs.
>
>> nearly $2,000 annually) AND it doesn't produce the waste and
>
>> pollution bottled water does. Carbon filtration could be a
>
>> countertop pitcher, a faucet-mount, an under-sink model, or
>
>> a whole-house model.   So make the smart
>
>> choice: pass up bottled water. Get a carbon filter instead.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Chlorine Pollutants at High Levels in DC Tap Water
>
>>
>
>> New tests find high levels of hazardous chlorination
>
>> byproducts in D.C. tap water
>
>>
>
>> Published July 19, 2007
>
>>
>
>> In spite of the best efforts of the Washington Aqueduct to
>
>> provide quality drinking water to the District of Columbia,
>
>> tap water tests from May, 2007 revealed toxic by-products of
>
>> the chemicals used to purify Potomac River water, at levels
>
>> above annual federal health limits.  These results
>
>> illustrate the tremendous difficulties that water utilities
>
>> face when trying to provide tap water that is free of
>
>> potentially deadly bacteria and pathogens, yet not
>
>> contaminated with toxic by-products of the chemicals used to
>
>> kill these same microbes.  This problem is particularly
>
>> acute when utilities draw water from poorly protected water
>
>> sources like the Potomac River.  As recently reported
>
>> in the Washington Post, the Potomac may not even be suitable
>
>> for swimming; turning this water into safe drinking water is
>
>> a serious public health challenge.
>
>>
>
>> Based on these test results the Environmental Working Group
>
>> (EWG) is recommending carbon filtration for all 1.1 million
>
>> consumers of tap water from the Washington Aqueduct in
>
>> Washington DC and northern Virginia. Carbon filtration of
>
>> tap water will dramatically lower levels of toxic
>
>> disinfection byproducts; it is also 10 to 20 times less
>
>> expensive than bottled water, and does not produce the waste
>
>> and pollution associated with the packaging and transport of
>
>> bottled water.  EWG collected tap water samples in May,
>
>> 2007, from 18 locations across Washington D.C., including
>
>> the U.S. Capitol, EPA headquarters, parks, schools, and
>
>> residences of pregnant women and other groups susceptible to
>
>> health harms from exposures to disinfection byproducts. We
>
>> commissioned tests from an accredited lab for two classes of
>
>> disinfection byproducts ? trihalomethanes, or THMs, and
>
>> haloacetic acids, or HAAs. The laboratory analyses found:
>
>>
>
>>    * More than 40 percent of the tap water
>
>> samples [1] contained chemical byproducts of water treatment
>
>> above annual federal health limits. The group of
>
>> contaminants known as haloacetic acids (HAAs) were found at
>
>> their highest levels since 2001, the last year before the
>
>> Washington Aqueduct modified its treatment techniques in an
>
>> attempt to reduce levels of trihalomethanes, related
>
>> byproducts of tap water chlorination.
>
>>    * HAAs were highest at the Martin Luther King
>
>> Jr. Memorial Library, an elementary school in the district's
>
>> Northwest quadrant, and the home of a woman who was 9 months
>
>> pregnant.
>
>>    * Almost 90 percent of the samples had THMs
>
>> at levels associated in epidemiological studies with low
>
>> birth weight and serious birth defects in infants. TTHM
>
>> levels were highest at the National Mall, the same
>
>> elementary school, and the home of a 2-year-old infant.
>
>>
>
>> Benefits of water disinfection come at a price.
>
>> Chlorination of tap water is one of the greatest public
>
>> health improvements of the last 100 years, vastly reducing
>
>> deaths from water-borne diseases. But chlorination produces
>
>> disinfection byproducts (DBPs) like THMs and HAAs that are
>
>> themselves potentially harmful. Because of the recognized
>
>> health risks of the byproducts, in particular THMs, many
>
>> utilities, including the Washington Aqueduct, have switched
>
>> from treatment using so-called free chlorine to compounds
>
>> called chloramines, which tend to produce lower levels of
>
>> the handful of disinfection byproducts for which EPA has set
>
>> legal limits, including THMs and HAAs. But because
>
>> chloramines are not as effective at disinfection as free
>
>> chlorine, the Aqueduct, like other utilities that use
>
>> chloramine, periodically switches back to chlorine.
>
>>
>
>> This so-called "chlorine burn" removes sludge and sediment
>
>> from the pipes, but also temporarily raises the level of
>
>> disinfection byproducts. This year the utility's chlorine
>
>> burn was conducted between April 7 and May 7. While
>
>> chloramines appear to help lower THM levels, they also
>
>> produce an entirely different set of byproducts, including
>
>> the HAAs and other byproducts, for which we have less
>
>> information about long-term human health effects. A recent
>
>> EPA study found that water treated with chloramines had the
>
>> highest levels of iodacetic acid, a byproduct that in animal
>
>> studies has been found toxic to cells and DNA. In general
>
>> however, the long-term public health consequences of
>
>> exposure to chloramines and chloramines byproducts is poorly
>
>> understood.  What is known about HAAs, however, raises
>
>> concerns. EPA classifies HAAs as possible human carcinogens,
>
>> and peer-reviewed studies have identified adverse
>
>> reproductive and developmental effects, and the ability
>
>> to damage DNA. The state of Oregon has warned that long
>
>> term exposure to HAAs at levels equal to those found in DC
>
>> tap water could cause injury to the brain, nervous system,
>
>> the eyes, and the reproductive system.
>
>>
>
>> Disinfection byproducts are a bigger problem than these
>
>> tests show.  EPA scientists have identified a total of
>
>> 600 disinfection byproducts in tap water but EPA has set
>
>> legal limits in tap water for only 11.  And these legal
>
>> limits, such as those for HAAs and THMs, are established as
>
>> a balance between health, treatment cost and
>
>> feasibility.  This is a critical point for most
>
>> consumers:  The legal limit, or MCL, is not intended to
>
>> be a true safe exposure level.  For almost all
>
>> contaminants in tap water, including those identified in
>
>> this analysis, the MCL allows far more contamination than
>
>> the truly safe level, or what EPA refers to as the public
>
>> health goal.  In 1999, EPA strengthened the legal limit
>
>> for THMs in tap water and set a first-time standard for HAAs
>
>> due to these chemicals' potential links to cancer, birth
>
>> defects, and other adverse health outcomes.  To comply
>
>> with these tighter standards, DC Water and Sewer Authority
>
>> began using chloramine as a
>
>> disinfectant because of its known capacity to lower levels
>
>> of the regulated byproducts.  This switch, which the
>
>> utilities' water quality test reports show did indeed lower
>
>> THM and HAA levels, also spurred some significant negative
>
>> consequences: it likely created a complex, new suite of
>
>> disinfection byproducts that are neither defined nor
>
>> studied; and it contributed to elevated lead levels in tap
>
>> water across the District, a problem that prompted
>
>> additional manipulations in water c