| Dear
EarthTalk: Are there any major efforts underway to
interest and involve high school and college students in
environmental issues?
-- Beth Marin,
via e-mail
When a handful
of concerned undergrads at the University of North Carolina
advertised in the Greenpeace newsletter in 1988 for other
student environmentalists to connect with, they weren’t
sure what kind of response to expect. But within weeks they
were deluged with mail, and so they decided to launch the
first national network of green college and high school
students, the Student Environmental Action Coalition (SEAC).
Today SEAC is
made up of over 1,000 student groups at colleges, high schools
and middle schools throughout the U.S. and Canada. And since
its founding, the group has tallied a number of success
stories, including: helping prevent construction of the
Hydro Quebec II dam in Canada that would have flooded and
destroyed the indigenous Cree Nation’s homeland; starting
recycling programs at 200 colleges and high schools; persuading
office supply giant Staples to phase out virgin papers and
to offer more recycled options; and supporting a successful
ballot initiative that helped clean up Florida’s pig
farming business.
Another big player
on the student green scene is the Sierra Student Coalition
(SSC), the young arm of the Sierra Club. SSC conducts national
campaigns in which each chapter participates, supported
by a small staff at the Sierra Club’s Washington, D.C.
office. SSC’s network of 250 high school and college
groups also undertakes local efforts to educate both students
and the larger public about the issues. And they provide
seminars that teach students how to organize campaigns and
lobby Congress. SSC’s major effort right now is the
Campus Climate Challenge, taking place at more than 530
colleges where students are pressing campuses to be “models
of sustainability” in their transportation, building
and energy policies.
There are also
organizations that emphasize direct service. The Student
Conservation Association (SCA) boasts some 3,000 current
members (and 50,000 alumni) in four countries. Calling itself
“conservation in action,” SCA gets students’
hands dirty on a variety of restoration projects that connect
participants to the land and provide valuable lessons in
the process, hoping that students will be inspired to go
on and protect the environment throughout their lives. Founded
in 1957, SCA is celebrating its 50th anniversary in 2007.
Another approach
to student environmental activism is provided by Youth for
Environmental Sanity (YES!). Since its founding in 1990
by two teens, YES! leaders have traveled the world conducting
week-long student gatherings called “Jams,” in
which groups of about 30 convene to discuss environmental
problems and ways to get involved. YES! Jams have involved
some 650,000 students in 65 countries, and YES! says that
its alumni have gone on to start more than 400 nonprofits
working for positive change.
Student Public
Interest Research Groups (PIRGS) are also a growing entity
on campuses. Each focuses on environmental concerns as well
as on other issues such as world hunger and increasing voter
turnout among 18-24 year-olds. They give students resources
and tools including guides on leadership, media and campaign
organizing. PIRGs focus on giving students experience and
education in democratic citizenship by giving them skills
that allow them to voice their opinions in an effective
manner.
CONTACTS:
SSC; SEAC;
SCA;
YES!;
Student
PIRGs
Dear EarthTalk:
What’s the deal with rBGH, the hormone given to
cows that makes them produce more milk? Why do some groups
want it banned?
-- David Gray,
via e-mail
Cows naturally
produce bovine somatotropin (BST) in their pituitary glands,
and traces are secreted by the animals when they are milked.
More popularly known as BGH, or bovine growth hormone, BST
interacts with other hormones in cows’ bodies to control
the amount of milk they produce.
In order to increase
milk production, scientists working for Monsanto spent years
in the lab developing a genetically-engineered synthetic
version of the hormone called rBGH, or recombinant bovine
growth hormone. Monsanto obtained approval to market rBGH
(known by the trade name Posilac) from the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) in 1993 and began offering it
to interested farmers. Today, about a third of American
dairy cows are injected with rBGH, which boosts milk production
by about 10 percent.
But the use of
rBGH is controversial, due to potential health hazards to
both cows and humans. According to the Center for Food Safety
(and supported by a 2003 study published in the Canadian
Journal of Veterinary Research), cows treated with rBGH
suffer a 50 percent greater incidence of lameness (leg and
hoof problems), 25 percent more udder infections (mastitis),
and serious reproductive problems including infertility,
cystic ovaries, fetal loss and birth defects.
Such animal health
issues can sometimes translate into human ones, as antibiotics
used to fight infection can find their way into milk, affecting
our disease-resistance. Also, animals given rBGH produce
more insulin growth factor-1 (IGF-1). Studies, says the
Organic Consumers Association (OCA), have linked high levels
of IGF-1 in humans who consume rBGH milk with breast, prostate,
colon and other cancers. This suggests that our natural
defenses against early cancerous cells may be blocked by
IGF-1.
Controversy also
surrounds the fact that there are no labeling requirements
in the U.S. for rBGH. In February 2007, OCA, along with
the Cancer Prevention Coalition and the Family Farm Defenders,
filed a joint petition asking the FDA to require cancer
risk warning labels on all U.S. milk produced with rBGH.
They also asked the FDA to suspend rBGH approval due to
“imminent hazard.” Analysts doubt the FDA will
take the request seriously, despite not knowing what problems
with rBGH might arise down the road.
Monsanto maintains
that humans digest so little of the hormone that it has
no direct effect on our health. The World Health Organization,
the FDA and numerous medical associations concur that milk
from rBGH treated cows is safe for human consumption. However,
many remain wary and, as a result, several nations have
banned rBGH, including all 25 European Union nations, Japan,
Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
In the U.S.,
despite lack of federal concern, consumer pressure has led
many companies to discontinue the use of rBGH. In January
2007 Safeway announced it would go rBGH-free at both its
Portland (OR) and Seattle plants. Others following suit
include Starbucks, Ben and Jerry’s and Chipotle Mexican
Grills.
CONTACTS:
Center
for Food Safety; Cancer
Prevention Coalition; Organic
Consumers Association; Family
Farm Defenders |
