PE alae eee tee a Ga The Other Press February 25, 1995 Toxic tampons: not a thing of the past by Claire Farid TORONTO (CUP) — Did you know that you are risking your health and harming the environment when you use menstrual products from your local drugstore? In terms of health, Toxic Shock Syndrome (TSS) is still the most seri- ous issue.TSS is not a thing of the past. TSS can be fatal and its symptoms in- clude fever, diarrhea, rash, loss of hair, aching muscles and organ failure. It is associated mainly with tam- pons, especially those that are highly absorbent. At any given time, one to three per cent of women have the toxin- producing version of _ the staphylococcus aureus bacterium (a normally friendly micro-organism) in their vagina. This version of the bacterium is very comfortable in environments like those provided by highly-absorbent tampons. As many know, the longer you where a tampon, the higher the risk of TSS; you should never wear a tampon more than four hours. Young women are at highest risk to TSS because they have not yet de- veloped a strong immunity to the bac- terium. Other health issues are related to the production of tampons and pads. For example, most tampons and pads are chlorine bleached. When chlorine combines with the organic molecules of the trees used in the production of these menstrual prod- ucts, a toxic chemical called dioxin is formed. Dioxins are one of the most potent chemicals known to humans. When dioxins are released into the environment, they are attracted to fats and through this medium, move up the food chain. This can have an effect on the whole ecosystem, including human beings. The physiological effects of dioxins include damage to the liver, re- productive and developmental impair- ment, infertility, birth abnormalities and cancer. Trace amounts of dioxins have been found in tampons. To put this in perspective, Liz Armstrong and Adrienne Scott write in Whitewash that rainbow trout experience death 28 days after exposure and changes to growth and development at 38 parts of dioxin per quadrillion. Magnesium, acids, alcohols and waxes can also be found in tampons. The environment has not been spared the negative effects of these products. The chlorines and dioxins produced from the manufacture of men- strual products are poisoning many of the areas around pulp and paper mills. Second, enormous amounts of bulk waste result from the uses of these products. A typical North American woman throws away an average of 250 to 300 pounds of tampons, pads and applicators in her lifetime. Third, plas- tic applicators are often flushed and can be found strewn on many beaches. Last, the excessive packaging, overwrapping, and applicators accompanying men- strual products are simply not necessary. But don’t despair! There are things the average woman can do. There are {please turn to "Tampons," page 23} Developing our future A look at the proposal to build floating homes in Queensborough by Niki Kaloudas Debates between private interest groups and environmen- talists are a dime a dozen these days. This is why a heated controversy over a development in a small part of New West has gone largely unnoticed by the mainstream media. The New West controversy surrounds a developer’s pro- posal to build floating homes in an environmentally sensitive part of the Annacis Channel. The two development proposals for Queensborough at first seem quite small and unimposing. One is called Queensgate for 17 homes. The other one, called Brightwater, is for 49 float homes and 28 pier homes. The size of these development proposals may be disarming, however it is not the size that has environmentalists worried, but the location. If this plan goes ahead, the homes will be built in the center of one of the most environmentally sensitive areas of the Fraser River Estuary. — Annacis Channel is of such vital importance to fish and wildlife that some of it was declared a ‘red zone’ by govern- Floating Homes proposed | in Queensborough ment biologists. The red zone designation was used to set out areas which were deemed to be the most productive habitat. This preservation of red zone areas was seen as a priority since only 20% of the Fraser Estuary remains intact. Urbanization and pollution have destroyed much of the Estuary already. Of what is left, the Annacis Channel is of particular impor- tance because it provides a rich habitat for wildlife and fish in the area. With its slow moving water and sheltered marshes, it is an ideal resting spot for young salmon fry making their way to the ocean. It is also important as a transition zone for these salmon fry and allows them to acclimatize to the sudden change from fresh to salt water. Development may seriously affect the quality of this area and the salmon stocks that use it. In spite of all this, the Annacis Channel is being considered for development. Some of the Queensborough development will actually be built on an area that was once a red zone. This spot was downgraded to a green zone which makes it acceptable for development. This down- grading of red zones is not just happening in New West. It is occur- ring all over the Fraser Estuary. Environmentalist and fisher Terry Slack compared the North Fraser Harbor Commission Habitat maps from 1986 to 1990. In this period of four years he found that 18 red zones had been down- graded. Slack is opposed to this downgrading and argues, ““We should really be looking at rehabilitating these few vital areas rather than giving them up for development.” There is also a great deal of concern over the precedent which this type of downgrading sets. Slack warns, “What they have done is set a very serious precedent here, the rest of the river is under threat. Now the gate is open to development in red zones.” Proposals for development do not stop at the New West bor- der either. Further up the river other municipalities are grappling with these same conflicts over land use. Richmond has a similar floating home development planned. Unfortunately, decisions concerning development in the Fraser Estuary are being made on a city to city basis. No one party is looking at the overall impact that these projects will have on the environment. As a result, each municipality sees it’s encroach- ment on sensitive environmental areas as an isolated issue. There is a great deal of concern over the cumulative impact each of these small projects will have. Environmentalist and long time Queensborough resident Lorne Elliot worries about the legacy this type of blind develop- ment will leave behind. He says, “There’s enough applications right now to make a solid wall of floating homes all along the Fraser.” Many critics argue that bit by bit, our natural environment is being destroyed for the sake of development. In the Fraser River Estuary, this definitely seems to be the case. The Other Press is in the midst of establishing an environ- mental section to compliment our usual fill of news, arts, et al. "Developing our future" is the inaugural voyage for this concep- tual ship. We'd like to hear your comments: We need story ideas, writers, photographers, etc. Hey, we even need a name for it. Come on down to the OP, or write us today!