Monthly Archives: June 2015

WHO expands list of recommended birth control options in order to save women’s lives by Al Jazeera Staff Reporters

Every year, 87 million women become pregnant unintentionally due to the underuse of modern methods of contraception.

Every year, 87 million women become pregnant unintentionally due to the underuse of modern methods of contraception.

The World Health Organization just added a series of long-acting, hormonal contraceptives to the list of globally recommended birth control methods, which will significantly reduce mothers’ risk of dying during childbirth, experts say. The WHO’s guidelines relax restrictions on the use of hormonal methods for breastfeeding women who are less than six weeks postpartum, according to researchers at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

The guidelines are welcome in many poor countries, where the researchers hope policymakers and health industries will adopt the updated recommendations to battle high maternal death rates.

More than half of women in low- and middle-income countries (defined as nations with a gross national income less than $12,615 per capita) become pregnant within two years of a first birth, despite their desire to postpone pregnancy or not have another baby at all, according to a study in Contraception, a reproductive health journal. Pregnancies that occur within that interval are at higher risk of resulting in maternal, newborn or child death, according to the researchers.

Experts writing on ‘Global Health Now’, a blog affiliated with Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, called the move “bold” and “overdue” – one that increases women’s chances to access safe reproductive healthcare worldwide.

Every year, 87 million women become pregnant unintentionally due to the underuse of modern methods of contraception, according to a 2014 study in 35 low- and middle-income countries published in Human Reproduction, an Oxford University journal. An estimated 222 million girls and women who want to avoid another pregnancy are not using any method of contraception, according to the WHO.

While more than 92% of mothers do not wish to give birth again soon after a pregnancy, 61% of postpartum women in low- and middle-income countries do not use family planning methods, according to the Contraception study.

But at least half of these women give birth again within an interval that’s deemed unsafe to the mother’s health, according to the same study. Even when a mother is using contraceptives, the study found, she is relying on short-acting methods rather than long-acting ones such as implants.

Previously, medical practitioners were discouraged from prescribing hormonal birth control such as patches and implants to women who are less than six weeks postpartum. Many women rely on barrier methods, such as condoms, or believe that practicing breastfeeding prevents pregnancy, fueling many unwanted births that put mothers’ health at risk, according to the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s researchers.

“The support for postpartum family planning contained in the revised MEC [WHO recommendations] should usher in a wave of policy changes that make the FP2020 commitment an attainable goal rather than a lofty target,” the researchers added, referring to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s public health target of reaching 120 million more women and girls with voluntary family planning options.

Source: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/6/1/who-expands-birth-control-options-for.html

Leave a comment

Filed under Family Planning, Population, Women's Rights

Thoughts on Pope Francis’ Laudato Si by Herman Daly

The big ideas of the encyclical are Creation care and justice, and the failure of our technocratic growth economy to provide either justice or care for Creation.

The big ideas of the encyclical are Creation care and justice, and the failure of our technocratic growth economy to provide either justice or care for Creation.

As a Protestant Christian my devotion to the Catholic Church has been rather minimal, based largely on respect for early church history, and for love of an aunt who was a nun. In recent times the Catholic Church’s opposition to birth control, plus the pedophile and cover-up scandals, further alienated me. Like many others I first viewed Pope Francis as perhaps a breath of fresh air, but little more. After reading his encyclical on environment and justice, dare I hope that what I considered merely “fresh air” could actually be the wind of Pentecost filling the Church anew with the Spirit? Maybe. At a minimum he has given us a more truthful, informed, and courageous analysis of the environmental and moral crisis than have our secular political leaders.

True, the important question of population was conspicuous by its near absence. In an earlier offhand remark, however, Francis said that Catholics don’t need to breed “like rabbits,” and pointed to the Church’s doctrine of responsible parenthood. Perhaps he will follow up on that in a future encyclical. In any case, most lay Catholics have for some time stopped listening to Popes on contraception. The popular attitude is expressed in a cartoon showing an Italian mamma wagging her finger at the Pontiff and saying, “You no playa da game; you no maka da rules.” Discussing population would not have changed realities, and would have aroused official opposition and distracted attention from the major points of the encyclical. So I will follow Francis’ politic example and put the population question aside, but with a reference to historian John T. Noonan, Jr.’s classic book, Contraception* which sorts out the history of doctrine on this issue.

The big ideas of the encyclical are Creation care and justice, and the failure of our technocratic growth economy to provide either justice or care for Creation. Also discussed was the integration of science and religion as necessary, though different, avenues to truth. And yes, the Pope supports the scientific consensus on the reality of climate change, but, media monomania to the contrary, the encyclical is about far more than that.

Francis’ voice is of course not the first to come from Christians in defense of Creation. In addition to his ancient namesake from Assisi, Francis also recognized Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of the Eastern Orthodox Church, who has for two decades now been organizing conferences and speaking out in defense of rivers and oceans, including the Black Sea. The Orthodox Church lost a generation of believers to Communistic atheism, but is gaining back many young people attracted to the theology of Creation and the actions it inspires. Liberal mainline Protestant Christians, and more recently, conservative Evangelicals, have also found their ecological conscience. So Francis’ encyclical would seem to be a capstone that unifies the main divisions of Christianity on at least the fundamental recognition that we have a shamefully neglected duty to care for the Earth out of which we evolved, and to share the Earth’s life support more equitably with each other, with the future, and with other creatures. Many atheists also agree, while claiming that their agreement owes nothing to Judeo-Christian tradition.

This theology of Creation should not be confused with the evolution-denying, anti-science views of some Christian biblical literalists (confusingly called “Creationists” rather than “literalists”). Mankind’s duty to care for Creation, through which humans have evolved to reflect at least the faint image of their Creator, conflicts headlong with the current dominant idolatry of growthism and technological Gnosticism. Creation care is also incompatible with the big lie that sharing the Earth’s limited resources is unnecessary because economic growth will make us all rich. Francis calls this magical thinking. He skates fairly close to the idea of steady-state economics, of qualitative development without quantitative growth, although this concept is not specifically considered. Consider his paragraph 193:

“In any event, if in some cases sustainable development were to involve new forms of growth, then in other cases, given the insatiable and irresponsible growth produced over many decades, we need also to think of containing growth by setting some reasonable limits and even retracing our steps before it is too late. We know how unsustainable is the behaviour of those who constantly consume and destroy, while others are not yet able to live in a way worthy of their human dignity. That is why the time has come to accept degrowth in some parts of the world, in order to provide resources for other places to experience healthy growth.”

Laudato Si is already receiving both strong support and resistance. The resistance testifies to the radical nature of Francis’ renewal of the basic doctrine of the Earth and cosmos as God’s Creation. Pope Francis will be known by the enemies this encyclical makes for him, and these enemies may well be his strength. So far in the US they are not an impressive lot: the Heartland Institute, Jeb Bush, Senator James Inhofe, Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santorum, and others. Unfortunately they represent billions in special-interest money, and have a big corporate media megaphone. They believe in letting The Market set policy and behavior. The encyclical calls out the opponents and forces them to defend themselves. Neither The Market nor technology created us, or the Earth that sustains us. Thanks to Francis for making that very clear when so many are denying it, either explicitly or implicitly.

* John T. Noonan, Jr., Contraception: A History of its Treatment by the Catholic Theologians and Canonists, Belknap Press, 1986. Noonan demonstrates the lack of a biblical basis for opposition to contraception, as well as the origins of church doctrine in secular Roman law, which was absorbed into canon law. The ancient Roman meaning of “proletariat” was “the lowest class, poor and exempt from taxes, and useful to the republic mainly for the procreation of children.” Clearly contraception was not indicated for them, although tolerated for patricians. This literal meaning of proletariat as the prolific class was lost when Marx redefined the word to mean “non owners of the means of production.” But the Malthusian connection with overpopulation and cheap labor has remained real, even if downplayed by Marxists as well as Catholics.

Source: The Daly News, 23 Jun 2015. <http://steadystate.org/thoughts-on-pope-francis-laudato-si&gt;

Also see: <Pope Francis.aletela.org>

Leave a comment

Filed under Climate, Culture, Environment, Ethics, Family Planning, Leadership, Sustainability

Microbes, biodiversity and the benefits of getting dirty by David Suzuki

People responding to David Suzuki Foundation surveys after our annual 30X30 Nature Challenge report significant mood improvements, more vitality and energy, and increases in nature-specific emotions like awe, curiosity and fascination.

People responding to David Suzuki Foundation surveys after our annual 30X30 Nature Challenge report significant mood improvements, more vitality and energy, and increases in nature-specific emotions like awe, curiosity and fascination.

We’re surrounded by life, but Earth’s most plentiful living things are invisible to the naked eye. Microbes are not only around us, they live on and in us. Although some mocrobes cause maladies ranging from food poisoning to smallpox, there are many more we couldn’t live without.

Beneficial microbes break down food and produce vitamins in our guts. They coat our skin, protecting us from attacks by harmful microbes. Outside our bodies, they decompose organic waste, fix nitrogen and produce half the world’s oxygen.

Scientists refer to the microbial communities on and in our bodies as “microbiomes”. Every one of us hosts as many as 100 trillion microbes — our guts alone are home to 500 to 1,000 different bacteria species!

Just as human activity is harming the diversity of visible life, it’s also diminishing microbial diversity. As researchers learn more about the profound ways good microbes keep people healthy, they’re also seeing how our urbanized, indoor lifestyles have transformed our microbiomes, increasing the risk of disease.

Just as we pollute the environment outside us, we can also pollute and upset the “normal flora” of our bodies by what we eat and do. Effects range from indigestion to deadly disease. One modern consequence of our lack of understanding about the necessity of healthy microbiomes is seen in our use of antibiotics. Despite their benefits, decades of overuse for personal sanitation, minor maladies and to promote growth in livestock has led to new illnesses and infections as sometimes-harmful bacteria evolve to resist antibiotics and our own microbial defences.

According to Alan Logan, author of Your Brain on Nature, diet and where we live and play have a tremendous influence on the microbial ecosystems on our skin and in our noses, mouths and intestines. Logan and experts from a range of disciplines at the Natural Environments Initiative workshop at Harvard School of Public Health found people who live in areas with rich plant diversity have more diverse microbiomes. The air we breathe, the soil we dig and the outdoor plants we come into contact with include a variety of microbes that may be absent in indoor and built environments.

Researchers have even found digging in dirt, whether gardening or playing, can benefit our physical and mental health. A microbe common to mud and wet soils, Mycobacterium vaccae, has been shown to influence brain neurotransmitters to reduce anxiety and improve cognitive functioning. Another microbe encountered in natural environments, Acinetobacter lwoffii, has been shown to benefit the human immune system, preventing asthma, hay fever and other ailments in children who have been exposed to it — although it can also cause infections and gastric problems for people with compromised immune systems.

Research by Ilkka Hanski and colleagues at the University of Helsinki found microbe diversity reduced the incidence of allergies. They compared adolescents living in houses surrounded by biodiverse natural areas to those living in landscapes of lawns and concrete. From skin swabs, they learned that higher native-plant diversity appears to be associated with greater and more diverse microbial composition on the participants’ skin, which led to lower risk of a range of allergies.

It’s likely that, as we learn more about the microbial world, we’ll find other beneficial microbes in nature. The research also highlights the importance of overall biodiversity to human health. A good solution to protecting biodiversity, from the smallest microbe to the largest animal, and to keeping ourselves healthy, is for all of us to spend more time outside.

According to the American Public Health Association, “People of all ages and abilities enjoy higher levels of health and well-being when they have nature nearby in parks, gardens, greenways, naturalized schoolyards and playgrounds, and natural landscaping around homes and workplaces.”

People responding to David Suzuki Foundation surveys after our annual 30X30 Nature Challenge report significant mood improvements, more vitality and energy, and increases in nature-specific emotions like awe, curiosity and fascination. Research has also shown people who develop deeper connections with nature are more likely to care for and protect it, a phenomenon renowned biologist E.O. Wilson called “biophilia.”

As this year’s 30X30 Nature Challenge wraps up, consider it an inspiration to get outside at least 30 minutes every day of the year. It’s good for your health, mood and microbiome — and nature!

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.  The David Suzuki Foundation is a registered charity in both Canada (BN 127756716RR0001) and the United States (94-3204049). We are located at 219-2211 West 4th Avenue, Vancouver, B.C., V6K 4S2.

Leave a comment

Filed under Environment, Food

Milkweed is a monarch’s best defense — You can help by David Suzuki

What can you do to help? Plant Milkweed and Don’t Use Roundup!

What can you do to help? Plant Milkweed and Don’t Use Roundup!

The monarch butterfly is a wonderful creature with an amazing story. In late summer, monarchs in southern Canada and the U.S. northeast take flight, travelling over 5,000 kilometres to alpine forests in central Mexico. The overwintering butterflies cling to fir trees there in masses so dense that branches bow under their weight.

The monarch’s multigenerational journey northward is every bit as remarkable as the epic southern migration. Three or four successive generations fly to breeding grounds, lay eggs and perish. The resulting caterpillars transform into butterflies and then take on the next leg of the trip. Monarchs arriving in Canada in late summer are often fourth or fifth generation descendants of butterflies that flew south the previous year.

What may be the monarch’s most striking quirk is its caterpillars’ reliance on milkweed as its sole food source, a phenomenon called “monophagy”. Milkweed plants contain small traces of cardenolides, bitter chemicals monarchs store in their bodies to discourage predators, which associate the butterflies’ distinctive coloration with bad taste. But relying on a single type of plant for survival is a risky strategy that has put monarchs in grave danger.

In the mid-1990s, the eastern monarch population was more than one billion. In winter 2013, the population had dropped by more than 95 per cent to 35 million, with a modest increase to 56.5 million this past winter. As University of Guelph postdoctoral research fellow Tyler Flockhart notes, a single severe storm could extinguish the entire monarch population. A 2002 snowstorm wiped out 80 million butterflies. A similar trend has been occurring west of the Rockies, where the western population overwinters in California and migrates as far north as central B.C.

Roundup Kills Butterflies

Much of the monarch butterfly decline has been pinned on virtual eradication of its critical food source throughout much of its migration path by profligate use of a glyphosate-based weed killer called Roundup, which corn and soybean crops have been genetically modified to tolerate. Blanketing fields with the herbicide kills plants like milkweed. As a result, several U.S. Midwest states — the heart of monarch breeding territory — have lost most of their native milkweed, causing monarch reproductive rates to drop by more than 80 per cent.

A recent study suggests glyphosate is merely the first of a one-two toxic punch from industrial agricultural operations. The second is neonicotinoids, the controversial nicotine-based insecticides that have been identified as a chief culprit in the decline of honeybees, along with a host of birds, bees and butterflies. It appears that even at one part per billion, these chemicals can affect monarch caterpillar development, delivering a potential knockout blow for the imperiled insects.

The good news is that many jurisdictions are catching up with the science. Ontario’s government has proposed regulations to reduce neonic use by 80 per cent over the next couple of years. In early April, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a moratorium on new applications to use neonicotinoids. I hope this marks the turning of the toxic tide, but time is running out.

What can you do to help? Plant Milkweed and Don’t Use Roundup!

While government agencies in Mexico, the U.S. and Canada are scrambling to hatch plans to save monarchs, the scientific community has been clear: A lot of milkweed must be planted over the next few years. One great opportunity is the many thousands of kilometres of linear corridors — rail, road and hydro rights-of-way — that run throughout the migratory landscape and can be modified to grow milkweed and other pollinator-friendly plants.

Yards, school grounds and parks are also perfect for butterfly gardens and milkweed patches, and planting milkweed in your backyard or balcony garden is a great way to help. Be sure to call your local garden center or nursery to ensure they stock native milkweed plants and seeds this spring.

Find out more about milkweed and information about how to bring monarchs back from the brink at the David Suzuki Foundation’s Got Milkweed campaign website. You can also donate to support Foundation volunteers planting milkweed in the Greater Toronto Area.

Planting milkweed may seem small, but the combined actions of thousands of concerned Canadians and Americans stitching together parks and yards with schools and rights-of-way into a glorious tapestry of butterfly corridors could usher in a new, hopeful era for monarch butterflies.

From our friends at the David Suzuki Foundation. Written by David Suzuki with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Communications Specialist Jode Roberts.

1 Comment

Filed under Environment, Wildlife