Health

Study Finds Beaches Sicken 1.5 Million in California

July 19, 2006 — By Associated Press

LOS ANGELES — As many as 1.5 million people are sickened by bacterial pollution on Southern California beaches each year, resulting in millions of dollars in public health care costs, a new study has found.

The study prepared by researchers at the University of California-Los Angeles and Stanford University is believed to be the first to examine illnesses at a large swath of the nation's most popular beaches. Previous studies have linked health problems to contamination at individual beaches.

"This helps us understand (the) risks and identify beaches where cleanup can yield the most benefit," said Linwood Pendleton, an environmental economist at UCLA and an author of the study.

The study, posted Monday on the Web site of the journal Environmental Science and Technology, covers 100 miles of shoreline in Los Angeles and Orange counties, which is visited by an estimated 80 million people annually.

The study found that between 627,800 and 1,479,200 "excess" cases of gastrointestinal illness occur at the beaches each year. That is beyond the number that would normally be expected.

Gastrointestinal illness is most commonly associated with swimming in contaminated water and causes such symptoms as stomach cramps, diarrhea and vomiting. The study did not examine the prevalence of other illnesses associated with polluted water, including eye, ear and nose infections.

Healthcare costs for illnesses related to beach bacteria range from an estimated $21 million to $414 million annually, depending on the method of reporting used, researchers found. Those estimates include direct losses, including missed work, medical treatment costs and doctor visits.

The study focused on 28 beaches during 2000. Researchers used bacteria measurements from surf, considered beach attendance estimates and extrapolated the health effects using two computer models -- one favored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the other by the World Health Organization.

Pendleton said the wide range in health and costs estimates existed because one method relies more on precise controls to account for illnesses and environmental conditions and less on self-reporting.

The study is expected to be published Aug. 15.

Among other findings:

  • Beaches at Doheny, Malibu, Marina del Rey, Cabrillo and Las Tunas had the worst water quality, while Newport, Hermosa, Abalone Cove, Manhattan, Torrance and Bolsa Chica had the best.

  • The three beaches with the lowest incidence of gastrointestinal illness were San Clemente's city beach, Nichols Canyon and Las Tunas, largely due to a smaller number of visitors.

  • Cleaning up storm water runoff, the chief cause of dirty ocean water in Southern California, would prevent 394,000 to 804,000 gastrointestinal cases and save $13 million to $28 million in annual health costs in Los Angeles County.

    • The state has spent an estimated $51 million on 66 projects in the past six years under its Clean Beaches Initiative, said Bill Rukeyser, spokesman for the state Water Resources Control Board.

    Source: Associated Press


    Critics Blast EPA's New Mercury Proposal As Benefiting Industry, Endangering Children

    The Bush Administration on Friday (Jan. 30) released a dramatically weakened plan for regulating toxic mercury from coal-burning power plants, a proposal that was written in part by industry and one that is drawing sharp criticism from its own children's health advisers.

    Exposure to mercury by pregnant women and women of childbearing age can cause permanent brain damage to fetuses, infants and young children. But utilities -- the largest source of mercury emissions -- had lobbied against stiffer mercury regulations as too difficult and costly.

    The EPA's own panel of experts on children's health lodged a protest with the agency over the proposal last week. The Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, which includes pediatricians, businesspeople and scientists, said it was concerned that the agency's plan "does not sufficiently protect our nation's children," in a letter to EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt. "While cost effectiveness is important, the priority should be to protect children's health in a timely manner."

    Friday's formal publication of the proposal kicked off a 60-day public comment period, during which EPA will hold three hearings and citizens can submit written comments.

    The Administration is proposing to allow the single largest unregulated source of mercury -- coal-fired power plants -- to continue emitting high levels for at least the next decade, leaving children exposed to risks of developing problems with walking, talking and learning, clean air advocates charge.

    In 2000, the EPA determined that because of the serious health threats posed by mercury, it should regulate mercury from power plants. In 2001, EPA estimated that under the Clean Air Act, available technologies could reduce 90 percent of mercury from power plants.

    But Friday's proposal instead would allow some power plants to avoid reducing mercury emissions by letting plants sell pollution "credits" to others that fail to meet their own mercury targets. EPA proposes allowing power plants to emit six to seven times more mercury pollution into the air for a decade longer than its 2001 determination.

    Critics charge that the only beneficiaries of the EPA plan are electric utilities that rely on coal-fired plants. They note that President Bush has been by far the top recipient of campaign contributions since year 2000.

    The Washington Post noted in a story Saturday that whole passages of the EPA's proposal were taken directly from a memo written by a law firm representing the utility industry -- "at least a dozen paragraphs were lifted, sometimes verbatim, from the industry suggestions."

    White House records show that while utility representatives were invited to discuss the mercury emission proposal with the White House several times last fall, no consumer or public health groups were included.