Re-Defining Rape: A Bipartisan Goal

By now many of you may have heard about H.R. 3, the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act". According to legislators, the purpose of this bill is only to make existing limits on abortion in federal code, such as the Hyde Amendment, permanent. However, the law goes further than permanently codifying these restrictions on women's privacy, and drastically limits the definition of both rape and incest.

The text of the bill lists that the only exceptions to the ban of federal funding for abortions include when the pregnancy endangers the mother's life and:

"[I]f the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest..."

Forcible rape? What does that even mean? One major reason for concern is that the term 'forcible rape' is not defined in the federal code, nor do many states have a definition. To me, the term 'forcible rape' sounds like the only time rape is really 'rape' is when your attacker has a gun or a knife to your head. It would be interesting to see how we decide whose rape qualifies and whose rape doesn't for a federally funded abortion.

The incest exception is also being drastically changed. Federally funded abortions would only be allowed if the victim of incest was under 18. Because that makes sense. (?!)

I was surprised to learn that this bill, introduced by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ4), has bipartisan support. Nine 0f the 173 cosponsors are Democrats, including Daniel Lipinski (D-IL3) and Nick Rahall (D-WV3).

But to be clear, I wasn't surprised that some Democrats would support pro-life legislation. Rather, I was surprised they would support legislation that would only really accomplish demeaning women, restricting their rights, and perpetuating harmful myths about rape.

Want to take action? Join the Twitter campaign. Stand up for survivors everywhere. #DearJohn

Yet Another Study Raises Concerns for BPA

Just this past week a study was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives raising new concerns (and supporting past concerns) about the negative effects of BPA on human health.

One of the major research findings was that humans are exposed to higher levels of BPA than previously predicted.

In an effort to protect our health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency determines reference doses for chemicals. A reference dose is the maximum daily exposure level, which is expected to not cause any significant risk for human health.

For BPA, the EPA determined a reference dose of 50 µg/kg/day. However, the study published by Taylor et al demonstrated that in order to achieve the levels of biologically active BPA that have been detected in human serum, the rhesus monkeys had to be given a dose that was 8 times the EPAs reference dose.

The results bolster scientists’ concerns that we truly do not know all of the sources of BPA exposure. Aside from plastic bottles and canned goods, there are new routes of exposure that continue to be identified such as thermal (carbonless) receipts.

The study also directly compared BPA studies using mice and rhesus monkeys, and demonstrated that, in fact, rodent studies are a valid model for human effects. To date, the biggest argument used to discredit the massive amount of data showing BPA can have negative effects on human health, had been that rodents were not a good model.

With all this new evidence, I wonder how long until a real regulation gets put into place to protect consumer health. I’m also excited to see what the counter argument will be. Stay tuned!

[Image credit: brian.gratwicke]

Congress Introduces Legislation to Protect Public Health

Recent events, such as the BP oil spill, highlight the danger posed by regulatory agencies that aren’t properly doing their jobs of, well, regulating. The BP oil spill happens to be one highly visible and very dramatic example, in which we learned too late that MMS was actually allowing companies to drill without proper permits and overruling findings of staff scientists.

However, oil is not the only industry escaping proper regulation. Surprisingly, the cosmetics that women use are not being regulated at all by the U.S. government. The FDA spells it out clearly on their website, that the responsibility of ensuring the safety of ingredients actually falls on the cosmetic industry:

Safe and Fun Summer Sun

This past Monday, June 21st, was the summer solstice, which marked the start of summer and is the day each year that has the longest period of daylight. And with the warmer weather and longer days of summer, many of us spend much more time in the sun.

Different cultures and periods in history have had different opinions of tanned skin. But today in the U.S., the majority of people find a suntan to be attractive. But what does tanning actually doing to our skin? We have all learned that a suntan is our body’s attempt to protect the skin from the sun’s harmful UV radiation. But the key message is that we tan in response to damage, and a tan is just a signal that damage has occurred. Excess exposure to harmful UV lights will age our skin and put us at risk for developing cancer. Yet despite our understanding the risks, we still go in search of the perfect summer tan.

Skin cancer is on the rise, and melanoma has become the most common form of cancer among Americans age 25-29. But it is highly a preventable form of cancer. A major reason the rates are on the rise is the increased popularity of indoor tanning beds. Research has finally confirmed suspicions that indoor tanning increases the risk of developing skin cancer. In fact, indoor tanning almost doubles the risk of melanoma, with risk being directly related to the number of hours spent tanning.

But what about those of us who try to buy products to protect our skin from the harmful UV rays?

Reflections on Sanjay Gupta’s Toxic America

Image credit: A6U571N

Toxic America.

We use a number of products every day from cleaning supplies to cosmetics. But how often do you think about the effect these chemicals could be having on your health?

We expect that the government regulates consumer products and exposures to ensure safety, but Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s two-night special Toxic America pushes us to question these assumptions. (If you missed it... You can watch replays this week or on CNN.com)

Environmental Health News: Oil Continues to Flow

Image credit: The National Guard

In early May, I wrote about the tragic BP oil spill. It has been over a month since the explosion, and oil is still leaking at an incredible rate. I wanted to take a look at recent news, attempted steps taken to correct the problem, and potential health implications.

Rumors have been spreading like wildfire about scandals in the Mineral Management Services (MMS), which is the agency that oversees offshore drilling. As of Thursday, Director Elizabeth Birnbaum is no longer in charge of the MMS. Bob Abbey, the Director of the Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management has been named as the interim director.

But the greatest scandal is still the risk posed to the health of humans and the environment. BP has tried a number of strategies to plug the leak that have failed. The most recent approach is called 'top kill', which involves the use of materials such as densely packed mud to plug the leak. Friday was the third day BP attempted to use top kill, but by the end of the day not much progress was made.

Thursday, estimates confirmed worst fears that the leak in the Gulf of Mexico is now the largest oil spill in U.S. history. Federal officials suggest that the rate of oil is 2 to 5 times higher than they previously thought, with between 12,000 to 19,000 barrels a day leaking each day.

This realization of the sheer magnitude of oil that is pouring into the Gulf increases the urgency of remediation efforts to protect fragile ecosystems and the health of Americans. However, we must also be certain that remediation strategies themselves are safe. Clean-up attempts have been made using booms to trap the oil, controlled burns, and chemical dispersants.

However, all methods have the potential to impact on our health and the environment if not used correctly. One key example, is recent discoveries of problems associated with the chemical dispersants. Several workers have complained about health effects, such as nausea and elevated blood pressure. Just last week, the EPA told BP to stop using one of the dispersants and to switch to a safer alternative. One person I spoke with who visited the spill told me that the smell of the chemicals were actually worse than the smell of the oil.

It is now up to the Obama administration to ensure that the clean-up efforts are not a greater health problem than the initial spill.

Abortion Rights in the News: Health of Mother Not a Justification and Laws in Response to Healthcare Bill

This week in Phoenix, Arizona, a bishop excommunicated a nun for approving an abortion. The only catch is that it was a LIFESAVING abortion. The woman was 11 weeks pregnant and developed pulmonary hypertension, and the abortion was needed to save her life. The nun only approved the abortion after speaking with the family and healthcare providers, and for her service was promptly expelled from the church.

According to the bishop who declared the nun excommunicated:

We always must remember that when a difficult medical situation involves a pregnant woman, there are two patients in need of treatment and care; not merely one. The unborn child's life is just as sacred as the mother's life, and neither life can be preferred over the other.

We all need to recognize that an 11-week fetus is not able to survive on its own. So in this case, if the abortion were not performed... both mother and child would have been likely to die.

In other news, Obama's healthcare bill has created some opportunities for abortion opponents to restrict access. Arizona and Tennessee, are two states that have enacted new laws that would restrict access for people who receive their insurance through exchanges (which is estimated to be about 30 million people). So this would extend beyond federal plans if private plans operated in the exchange. You can read more about this and other laws attempting to take away women's rights from an AP article.

Femonomics reads the internet: Environmental Health and New Lows for Victimization of Victims

I've been pretty impressed with a series of articles being published by TIME. One issue I have consistently written about (i.e. here and here and here), are chemicals in plastics and our health. Early April, Bryan Walsh published a solid article called the Perils of Plastic, which hit all of the key points. Just this Thursday, Tiffany O'Callaghan recapped a report from the President's Cancer Panel determining that environmental chemicals are a larger factor in the rising burden of cancer than they previously thought.

In Australia, the successful use of the 'Skinny Jeans Defense' in a rape case has terrifying implications. Recap: A man (Nicholas Gonzales) was acquitted of rape in Australia using the argument that the tight fit of the jeans would make them "difficult... to be taken off by someone else unless the wearer's assisting, collaborating, consenting." But believe it or not, this is not a new defense. In 1992, the same argument was used successfully to overturn a guilty verdict in an Italian rape case. That case served as an inspiration for an annual event called Denim Day that is held in April every year and asks people to "wear jeans as a visible means of protest against misconceptions that surround sexual assault." I'm going to stop there before I start to rant and rave and redirect you to a round-up of posts and articles by Alex Eichler at the AtlanticWire on just how wrong this defense is.

The High Cost of Black Gold

Image Credit: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images

On April 20, 2010 there was an explosion on a BP oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico. When the accident first happened, the main news story was about the potential victims. Reporters monitored the search for 11 people who were missing after the explosion.

Search crews have since given up hope to find those missing 11. But the tragedy continues to unfold. The oil continues to leak at an incredible rate, creating a massive oil slick approaching the U.S. coast. The barriers being used in an attempt to hold the oil are not doing their job, and the Coast Guard has resorted to using controlled burns to contain the oil.

According to BP, the worst-case scenario is that the leak could take 2 to 3 months to correct. However, the amount of oil that would be spilled at that point is estimated to surpass the Exxon Valdez, the current worst oil spill in U.S. history.

The vast resources consumed by a clean up of this scale are staggering, but they will never completely contain the damage. Oil is a poison, and countless birds and marine wildlife are going to die from this oil spill. A commercial fishing ban has already been put in place to protect Americans, but there are so many other ways the oil can impact our health, through contaminating water and land.

Is there a silver lining? The only positive I can see is that this could serve as a wake-up call for all stakeholders supporting continued U.S. dependence on oil. What can you do? Contact your Senators and Representatives and demand they support energy independence initiatives that also protect U.S. health, such as wind and solar power.

Is the U.S. Going Crazy? New Laws Suggest Maybe...

There have been a lot of laws these days increasing the number of hurdles between a woman and her right to choose. As Recovering Economist noted there have been some especially concerning changes in Oklahoma.

The second law was the one that really concerned me. The law that protects doctors from being sued if they had withheld information of birth defects they knew the baby had during the pregnancy. It's one thing as a doctor to chose not to preform an abortion because you do not believe in it, but that does not give you the right to lie to a patient, and therefore, make decisions for them. I hope this law makes it to court.

But Oklahoma does not seem to be stopping there. As McKinley of the NYT reported, there are still some other bills on the move:

One would force women to fill out a lengthy questionnaire about their reasons for seeking an abortion; statistics based on the answers would then be posted online. The other restricts insurance coverage for the procedures.

To lighten the mood, Talking Points Memo has a great roundup of some other crazy laws being passed in America these days.

BPA Update: EPA to Investigate Environmental Impact of BPA

Image credit: ToastyKen

In January, I wrote about the FDA’s reversal on their safety ruling for bisphenol A (BPA) which is used in the production of plastic water bottles and the lining of aluminum cans.

Late March, the EPA announced it will be beginning an investigation to determine if BPA should be added to the list of chemicals of concern.

Why Is the EPA Investigating?

Erykah Badu Strips to Make a Statement Which is Largely Unheard

In her recent video Window Seat, Erykah Badu shed her clothes on a busy street in Texas, and sparked debate across the blogosphere. The dominant reaction has been outward criticism of her public nudity and her mock assassination near the location John F. Kennedy was killed.

I first watched the video to try to figure out why she had chosen to strip naked for this song. I watched Badu’s discussion of the video posted at the WSJ, and felt at the end that a major problem was that Badu had a great message about conformity, but I wasn’t sure that nudity served a real purpose or that the exact topic was of sufficient gravity to justify the imagery of JFK’s assassination. However, I also noticed that not many people seemed willing to listen to her explanation because they decided they were offended after their initial viewing of the video.

My impression is that people were mostly upset with the nudity because they did not believe it was essential to communicate her artistic message. However, I think this controversy creates a great opportunity to open the discussion of the way women are portrayed in music videos. Women are often filmed semi-nude and portrayed in ways that are truly exploitative. I wonder why this video, which did not (in my opinion) overly sexualize her naked body, has sparked such outrage while there are numerous music videos, advertisements, and shows that portray women in a demeaning way and are only a blip in the public consciousness. Why is nudity/semi-nudity in these cases not met with equal outrage?

Basically, I found the nudity inoffensive but sadly did not feel it successfully strengthened her message. If this video discussed the implications of the way women are represented in pop culture, I would have felt the assassination imagery was more warranted. But either way, Badu is an interesting artist, and I'm glad she's willing to take risks and express herself in different, sometimes controversial, ways.

Health Care Reform Passed the House of Representatives (again)… Now what?

Image Credit: ThomasThomas

Last night, the House Democrats voted to pass the Senate’s comprehensive health care reform bill. In the end the vote was 219-212. The vote, as expected, was pretty much along party lines. The Republicans all voted Nay and all Yea votes were from Democrats. However, 34 Democrats went against their party and voted Nay. Eric Kleefeld of Talking Points Memo put together a spreadsheet looking at how their districts and political ambitions may have affected their vote. The chart showed that 26 of the Representatives came from districts that voted for McCain in 2008.

The House then voted by a similar margin, 220-211, to pass a companion bill making several changes to Senate bill that were needed to gain enough support from the Democrats.

What Is Next?

15 Years Since Beijing: Is It Still the Same Men's Club?

Fifteen years ago, the U.N. held the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. Representatives from 189 countries adopted the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action unanimously which identified what they viewed as major obstacles to gender equality.

This year the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women held a two-week meeting to review what countries had done to implement this landmark declaration. At the end of the meeting, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered remarks reminding us that, while we have made real progress over the last 15 years, our work is not yet finished.

Femonomics reads the internet so you don't have to: anti-gay high school policies and jail time for your miscarriage

How do you remember your high school prom? Was it the most magical night of your teen years or was it a night full of drama? A school in Mississippi has decided that Constance McMillen (and consequently her entire class) isn’t going to get to have one. When she found out that she was not allowed to bring her girlfriend to prom, the ACLU got involved and reminded the school that it was a violation of her rights. So in response the school outright canceled the evening.

As Coca Colo reported late February, Utah legislators passed a bill to charge women who engage in ‘reckless’ acts to terminate a pregnancy with criminal homicide. I can’t even begin to imagine what a 17 year-old girl would have to be going through to pay a stranger to beat her in an attempt to miscarry. The bill has now been signed by the governor, but with slightly revised language. They dropped the word ‘reckless.’ A major concern is the potential to make every miscarriage fair game for investigation.

Femonomics reads the internet so you don't have to: International Women's Day

Every year, March 8th is International Women’s Day. The first International Women’s Day was held in 1911. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the holiday, The Nation has a brief video on the history.

Raising awareness about the continued threat women face from sexual violence, the theme this year is "Women and men: United to end violence against women". I truly believe that men are a vital part of the solution.

To celebrate the important role women have played throughout history, March has been designated as Women’s History Month. This year the theme is “Writing Women Back Into History”, which will include a look back on the women who have been honored in the past and looking at women’s impact on history through the years. Here is a post from the Women’s Media Center highlighting 30 women who are making history.

National Children's Study: An Investigation of What Makes Our Children Sick

The National Children's Study is attempting to determine how genetics and environmental toxins play a role in the health of our children.

A Different Kind of Safe Sex

Valentine’s Day is approaching, so I thought I’d take the time to provide some serious information of ways you can practice safe sex both with the one you love or flying solo.

Click through for information on safe choices in sex toys.

The Antithesis of Consent: Mackenzie Phillips' Sexual Relationship with her Father

Mackenzie Phillips released her memoir High on Arrival in September 2009 and prompted confusion across the blogosphere when she described her sexual relationship with her father as ‘consensual’.

Jezebel was quick to ask the important question: ‘Is that even possible?”

Sex-Offenders Can Now Access Victims' Medical Records?

This should have been just another story of girl sues boy for sexual assault.

Multimillionaire Jeffery Epstein is being sued by women alleging he paid them to give him massages (while nude) when they were as young as 14. Some of the women also reported being sexually assaulted by Epstein.

To defend his client's irreparable emotional damage to these ladies, Epstein's lawyer is digging through their painful memories and (better yet) their medical records. The judge on the case, Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Donald Hafele, decided this was totally OK. He agreed that the lawyers could subpoena the women's abortion records... as long as the women had priorly been questioned about their abortion history.

This precedent could mean you have to wave goodbye to your right to privacy. Also, these lawyers are trying to win this case by arguing that if you have had a traumatic life event, you can't suffer further psychological damage from being sexually assaulted by an adult when you are 14. I have just one question: Why are the victims on trial here?

For clarity, this is the civil suit following his criminal conviction and incarceration.

Hat tip to V.M. for sending me this link.