There’s just something about watching the slow painful death of a massive ecosystem to make you pessimistic about the future of our species. If a higher power was looking to send a message to the human race about its dependence on fossil fuels, an anvil to the head couldn’t be much clearer. But I wonder, will it change anything?

Over the weekend, I was reading my son Dr. Suess’ The Lorax. I got to this part, which I have always loved, and could hardly keep reading:

And all that the Lorax left here in this mess

was a small pile of rocks, with one word…

“UNLESS.”

Whatever that meant, well, I just couldn’t guess.

That was long, long ago.

But each day since that day

I’ve sat here and worried

and worried away.

Through the years, while my buildings

have fallen apart,

I’ve worried about it

with all of my heart.

“But now,” says the Once-ler,

“Now that you’re here,

the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.

UNLESS someone like you

cares a whole awful lot,

nothing is going to get better.

It’s not.

This has always made me feel optimistic about our potential as individuals to affect meaningful change through collective consciousness and action. But this book was written in 1971. I was 1! Forty years later, the bottom line is this: not enough people have cared a whole awful lot because nothing has gotten better.

It hasn’t.

It’s gotten worse.

And it fills me with dread and worry about the world we will leave our children. I have visions of Cormac McCarthy’s The Road, in which father and son scramble for survival in the decimated landscape of a post-apocalyptic world. At my most pessimistic, I can almost see the fatalistic appeal of the argument, made by Princeton philosophy professor Peter Singer in The New York Times, that perhaps we should just stop reproducing:

Most thoughtful people are extremely concerned about climate change. Some stop eating meat, or flying abroad on vacation, in order to reduce their carbon footprint. But the people who will be most severely harmed by climate change have not yet been conceived. If there were to be no future generations, there would be much less for us to feel to guilty about.

So why don’t we make ourselves the Last Generation on Earth? If we would all agree to have ourselves sterilized then no sacrifices would be required — we could party our way into extinction!

But small things still give me hope (perhaps irrationally so). The faces of my children. And movements like this: www.360.org. I heard founder Bill McKibben speak on Alternative Radio and found it profoundly inspiring to hear about participation in the movement from every remote corner of our planet.

The goal of the group was get world leaders at last December’s climate summit in Copenhagen to agree to lower the concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere to 350 parts per million, which scientists say is the safe upper limit.

They failed.

But they’re not done trying. On Oct. 10, 350.org is organizing a Global Work Party. This is McKibben’s message:

In every corner of the world we hope communities will put up solar panels, insulate homes, erect windmills, plant trees, paint bikepaths, launch or harvest local gardens. We’ll make sure the world sees this huge day of effort — and we’ll use it to send a simple message to our leaders: “We’re working — what about you? If we can cover the roof of the school with solar panels, surely you can pass the legislation or sign the treaty that will spread our work everywhere, and confront the climate crisis in time.

Go to http://www.350.org/oct10 to learn more.

For our children, we must do something.

If we don’t, nothing is going to get better.

It’s not.

Meet the newest members of our family and check back shortly for the tale of how we made the leap to become backyard chicken farmers.

Today, guest blogger Stephanie Harris, a local mom and chiropractor, brings us some important information about cell phones, kids and radiation. I’m delighted that she’s chosen to write about this topic because I find it very concerning (though I admit to having resorted to handing over my Blackberry to entertain my 18 month old while eating out — it still has smudges from the Thai restaurant a relative recently treated us to). It’s hard to believe a device so widely used could be dangerous, but one need only look at the concerns surrounding plastics to know that prevalence provides no assurance of safety. And on cell phones, I would add the obligatory reminder that they are most hazardous when used while driving (which I also acknowledge having done).

Cellular phones are not childʼs play

In our modern world where we rely increasingly on technology in our daily lives, what parent doesnʼt regularly use a cell phone? They are so convenient for sending a text that you are late for a play date, for catching up with a friend while sitting and nursing your baby or for coordinating child care responsibilities with your spouse. What was almost unheard of two decades ago has now become an indispensable utility in our lives today.

As a mom of young children and a cell phone user myself, I have drastically changed my cell phone habits in the last six months after encountering some warnings about the use of such devices around small children. As a parent and a chiropractor, I feel obligated to gently disclose these warnings to other parents, for the sake of our childrenʼs safety. This article is not meant to scare you, but is meant to increase your awareness about how we may be unknowingly subjecting ourselves and our families to radiation through the excessive use of cellular phones.

Cell phones emit electromagnetic radiation when in use and even to some degree when idling in “standby” mode on the countertop. During a call where the user holds the phone to his head, radiation can penetrate the skull and affect cellular electrical activity in the brain. This is particularly concerning when the user is a child, whose skull is much thinner than an adultʼs, so the radiation can penetrate more deeply into a childʼs brain. There are studies coming out which are linking cell phone use to an increased risk of brain and/or salivary gland cancer. Some are referring to cell phones as todayʼs “cigarette”, saying that it is only a matter of time before research shows a direct link of their ubiquitous use to cancer.

Like all things, it is possible to use a cell phone with moderation. Here are a few steps you can take to reduce your familyʼs exposure to cell phone radiation:

- Buy a low radiation phone. Visit www.ewg.org/cellphone-radiation for a list of phones and the radiation levels they emit.

- Use speakerphone mode whenever possible.

- Text instead of talk. Texting uses less radiation than talking.

- Turn off your cell phone when at home and use a land line to make and receive calls.

- Children should avoid holding a cell phone to their heads unless it is an emergency.

- Avoid talking on a cell phone while holding or wearing your baby.

This is not a comprehensive list, and this article is really just the tip of the cell phone iceberg. For more information, please visit the Environmental Working Groupʼs website, www.ewg.org. There are also many articles on the subject at www.mercola.com (type in “cell phone” in the search box).

Stephanie Harris, D.C., has a family wellness practice in downtown Durango. She can be reached at drstephdc@gmail.com.

The other day I was flipping through a family-oriented magazine and came across something that astounded me. It was an advertisement for Chiquita Apple Bites Singles. These are “fresh, crisp apples: washed, sliced and ready to eat; only 30 calories per serving; individually packaged in stay fresh pouches.”

Individually packaged in stay fresh pouches??? Nature already has the perfect “stay-fresh pouch” — it’s called a peel. This is taking something that makes sense, i.e. eating whole, unprocessed food, and turning it on it’s head, i.e. wrapping it in a wasteful, unnecessary package. It may be good for Chiquita’s bottom line, but not for the environment and, I would argue, not even good for families. 

Believe me, I know how busy we parents are and I understand the allure of a healthy snack made incredibly convenient. But buying into that misses the whole point. Eating healthy isn’t easy. Food preparation is inextricably linked to eating healthy. When we take time to prepare food, we are less likely to scarf it down, more likely to savor the taste, more likely to feel satisfied by what we eat and less likely to overeat. Anyone unwilling to take the time to even slice an apple simply isn’t going to get there. And not to mention the waste. I’m not going to say I’ve never fallen prey to convenience foods. But if we don’t teach our kids that we don’t live in a disposable world who will? There are so many ways to do this that are really not that hard. Using reusable bags and providing snacks and lunches in reusable containers are just a couple of small things that can make a huge difference when multiplied over our lifetimes. And eat your apples the old-fashioned way!

Sorry if I’m sounding like a broken record on this issue of toxins in our environment, but here’s a great article on the subject that appeared in today’s newspaper. I wrote an article two years ago for the paper on the same subject. Researching it was truly an eye-opener. I found there is very little regulation of the chemicals that go into personal care products. You can’t assume that just because it’s on the shelves or marketed as natural or formulated for babies that it’s safe. Lotions were the most consternating to me. Almost all of them have chemicals. But a blurb I read from a Spanish fashion model in a magazine gave me the perfect solution: olive oil. Now it’s my moisturizer of choice for myself and my children. It absorbs quite quickly, is inexpensive and is so pure you can eat it!

The cost of beauty: Most personal-care products are toxic

by Nancy Utter

Is beauty only skin deep? Maybe, but the creams, lotions and shampoos we put on our skin daily go deeper than the skin and into our bloodstream and organs.

The toxicity of body-care products is an important health issue. There is a cumulative, toxic effect from products most of us use every day.

The toxicity of body-care products is an important health issue. There is a cumulative, toxic effect from products most of us use every day.

Your skin is like a sponge and will absorb what you put on it. Substances absorbed from the skin go into the bloodstream, which carries them throughout the body. Most toothpaste, skin lotions, sunscreens, shampoos, conditioners, soaps and cosmetics contain toxic substances you do not want in your body. All of these products also end up in our waterways to affect us a second time when we use the water. Any plants or animals that come into contact with the water also are affected.

The following three chemicals are so common in body-care products that you will have to work hard to find products without them. This list is a small sample, and there are many more. Resources that can help you find safe personal-care products are listed at the end of this column.

Oxbenzone – This chemical is found in sunscreens, lip balms, lipstick, facial moisturizers, conditioners, anti-aging creams and fragrances. It is called a “penetration enhancer” because it helps other chemicals enter into the skin. It has been linked to allergies, hormone disruption, cell damage and low birth weights in babies exposed in utero.

Parabens – They’re found in shampoo, moisturizers, shaving gels, toothpaste, personal lubricants, topical pharmaceuticals and tanning sprays. Parabens are preservatives that have anti-bacterial and anti-fungal properties. Parabens have been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency as having estrogenic activity in the human body. They belong to a dangerous class of chemicals called endocrine disruptors. Parabens have hormone-like effects in body tissues.

Most of the products that contain parabens end up going down the drain and into our rivers and oceans where they affect the reproductive systems of every being they come into contact with. The EPA has stated that “continual introduction of parabens into sewage-treatment systems and directly into recreational waters from the skin is a serious risk to aquatic organisms.”

Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) – This detergent is found in almost all beauty-care products, including shampoo, soap, toothpaste, hair coloring, tooth-whitening products, foundation, body washes and most cleansers. SLS has been proven to cause canker sores and dry mouth. It is an irritant and drying agent that builds up in heart, liver, lung and brain tissue from skin exposure.

There are some great resources you can use to assess the toxicity of products you are using and to find products that are safe. The Environmental Working Group (www.ewg.org) has a site called Skin Deep (www.cosmetics database.com) that rates many body-care products according to their toxicity levels. It is information you can use to choose safe body-care products. Using safe products will protect your health and nourish your body and the environment.

drnancy@durangonaturalmedicine.comNancy Utter is a naturopathic doctor who completed a five-year training program at Bastyr University in Seattle. She works in Durango with people of all ages and varying illnesses. Green Medicine appears the second Monday of each month.