Here are some quick points drawn from this first group of stories:

Nanotechnology has an increasingly pervasive place in everyday life. The National Science Foundation, for instance, estimates that up to $70 billion of nano-containing items are sold in the U.S. each year. Along with that growth comes research showing that nanomaterials pose significant and potentially fatal health risks.

The nanomaterial most widely used in consumer products is nano-titanium dioxide. It’s used in cosmetics, sunblock and toothpaste.  A UCLA study found that ingesting nanotechnology can damage and destroy DNA and chromosomes.

Carbon nanotubes are the most commonly used nanomaterial in industrial applications. Research shows that they can penetrate the lungs faster and more deeply than asbestos.

The Food and Drug Administration, which does not regulate cosmetics or nutritional supplements containing nano-titanium dioxide, says no nano-containing food is sold in this country. But some of the FDA’s own risk assessors say otherwise.

Also, though the Obama administration argues that it has increased the federal government’s investment in nanotech safety efforts, the 2011 budget shows a continued and striking disparity between funding for nanotech development and risk assessment. Just $117 million, or 6.6 percent, of the $18 billion allotted for nanotech overall is for safety-related initiatives.

As one expert put it: “How long should the public have to wait before the government takes protective action? Must the bodies stack up first?”

The “shot czars” on the Centers for Disease Control’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices have called for equal access for everyone seeking the protective inoculation.

The panel of immunization experts voted to expand the recommendation for annual influenza vaccination to include all people aged 6 months and older, a move meant to remove real and perceived barriers to getting the flu shots.

In the past, the same panel had ruled that seasonal influenza vaccination would only be given to higher-risk persons; children 6 months through 18 years of age; and those caregivers, teachers, healthcare workers and others in close contact with higher-risk populations.

They say their action “signals the importance of preventing influenza across the entire population.”  While that may be true, the action may also end (or at least diminish) widespread confusion among the public–and staff at doc-in-a-boxes, pharmacies, public health departments and other sites that actually administer the vaccine.

Early in the flu season, I was in a grocery store and came upon a traffic jam of shopping carts. In the center was a woman holding the hand of a young child on one side and her (I assume) elderly mother on the other. She was arguing with a pharmacist, saying that both of her charges were entitled to flu shots.  Some in the crowd booed as the white-coated would-be shot-giver waved a piece of paper she said was “the official list” and scooted back behind the pharmacy counter.

Inoculations being sold with the milk, eggs and frozen pizza?  That’s probably worth another story.

But back to CDC in Atlanta.

Of greater medical significance is that the panel admitted that there were also clinical reasons for changing who should get the shots. They said that information gathered during the frightening early days of last year’s H1N1 pandemic showed that some people who did not fall in the must-have list for vaccination may also be at higher risk of serious flu-related complications. This included those people who are obese, postpartum women and people in certain racial and ethnic groups.

One last bit of info. The  Food and Drug Administration recommended that the concoction blend for protection against the 2009 H1N1 virus be added to the seasonal influenza vaccine.

The one-shot mixture will handle all the known flu strains and will become available in time for next Fall’s flu season. Don’t let on to the kids yet, but younger children who have never had a seasonal vaccine will still need two doses.

–Andrew Schneider

That, said CDC Chief Dr. Thomas Frieden, makes inoculation for the highest risk Americans even more important.

CDC says 48 states have major flu outbreaks

But many people wanting protection are stymied because  manufacturers  of the H1N1 flu vaccine produced far fewer of the doses than promised. This comes as no surprise to the tens of thousands of people who waited hours for the medication this weekend.

Every community has its own story.  In my neck of the woods – the Pacific Northwest – people from as far away as Canada and Oregon lined up in eastern Washington and in counties north and south of Seattle long before dawn Saturday. Five hours in a line creeping at a snail’s pace was the norm.

Remember, these recipients of the first doses made available were supposed to be in high-priority groups, including health-care providers, children, and people with medical conditions that put them at risk.

With the exception of the needle, the process is relatively painless: a short form and a couple of questions. If your age, underlying medical condition or profession met the criteria, you were ready for the shot or the snort.

Police on both sides of Washington state said the crowds were orderly, but frustrated at the wait and concerned that the vaccine might be gone when their turn came.

David, Axelrod, President Obama’s senior advisor, admitted on the talk shows Sunday that the vaccine makers had missed their target of 40 million doses to be delivered by the end of October. However, he said that the U.S. will have all the vaccine it needs “soon.’’

The Centers for Disease Control said Friday that is has another 26.6 million doses of the vaccine available for shipment.

That’s not soon enough for some. Many state and county health departments  – the groups actually distributing the government-controlled supplies – have been forced to cancel or reschedule inoculation clinics. Clinics that were to distribute vaccine or nasal sprays by late October or early this month are being postponed until after Thanksgiving and even into early December.

While some people insist they will not take the vaccine because they fear sinister side effects, most people are anxious for it. A peek at the numbers may explain the basis of their concern.

Epidemiologists from the World Health Organization have calculated  the “clinical attack rate” — in this case, the proportion of a population affected by H1N1 — is far higher than the regular seasonal flu, which attacks 10 percent to 15 percent of the public.

WHO estimates that H1N1’s attack rate is as high as 50 percent. If correct, that means one out of two people may get the virus.

According to the CDC, 48 states are now reporting widespread influenza  activity. Remember, we’ve yet to hit the traditional flu season of February and March, when the weather drives people indoors and closer to one another.

What may get the attention of even more people is the death rate among children.

On Friday, CDC reported another 19 deaths among children, which is the largest one-week increase.

“This is a younger people’s flu,” said Frieden, the CDC director.

In a typical flu season, 90 percent of the deaths are among people over the age of 65,  he explained.  In H1N1, 90 percent of the deaths are in people under the age of 65.

Frieden described a “certain rhythm’’ of flu spread in a community:

First, there is an increase in the number of cases.

Children generally succumb first, then older people. As the ill develop complications, there is a marked increase in hospitalizations.

Then, “tragically,”  said Frieden, a peak in deaths occurs two or three weeks after the hospitalizations.

“So we are expecting to see, sadly, increasing numbers,’’ CDC’s top doc said. “And that’s one of the reasons we’ve emphasized that only half of the people who have underlying conditions have even sought care for their influenza-like illness.”

(NOTE:  Remember please, we do not post the ads on this site.)

Around the world, scientists are studying odor trying to determine a variety of possible applications.

For example, does each human have an odor print as uniquely distinctive as a fingerprint? Can it be quantified and catalogued so it can be used by law enforcement or as evidence in court? The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is putting out bids for a study to determine if human odor signatures can serve as an indicator of deception.

Photo ABC.au

In the clinical arena, does body odor reflect the health of a person?

This is going to get a bit gross, but there are some medical researchers who insist they can identify certain disease patterns by differences in the smell of stool, vomit and bodily gases.

Scientists already have identified odors in human breath and skin associated with diabetes, cancer, and other diseases, reports Ivan Amato, a senior correspondent for the American Chemical Society’s Chemical & Engineering magazine.

Researchers at several medical centers are pursuing the link between a person’s body odor and anxiety. This is not as far-fetched as you might believe. Remember, there are specially trained service dogs that can alert their owner to an approaching seizure.

In the current issue of the magazine Amato writes that  each of the 6. 7 billion people on this globe of ours has a signature body odor – a fingerprint, if you will – and scientists are tracking down those odiferous arches, loops, and whorls in the “human odorprint.”

Not all of the scent research is new.

Amato writes about an exhibit at the Stasi Museum, in Berlin. It chronicles the practice of the former East German secret police organization of surreptitiously collecting odor samples—from specially designed seat cushions, for example—with the notion of using these stored odors to identify and track suspect citizens by way of sniffer dogs.

Kenneth Furton, a scientist from Florida International University is searching for machine-detectable patterns in the volatile chemicals emitted by people.  Amato writes about a study funded by the Netherlands’ National Police Agency, where Furton swabbed the hands of 60 individuals with specially cleaned pads and placed these inside glass vials.

Then, using cutting edge sampling techniques that can measure the vapors in the vials, the samples were run through a gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, which identified 63 compounds. By applying a pattern-recognition technique, the researchers reported that they could distinguish the individual from whom the swabs were taken.

Significant advances are in the pipeline, researchers say.

Infectious disease specialists say that in these patients the virus directly infects the lung, causing severe respiratory failure.

Survival for these patients depend on highly specialized and demanding care in intensive care units, usually with long and costly stays, the WHO flu experts said yesterday.

This comes at the end of a week when the international health group predicted that half of us will be infected with H1N1 this season.

Several U.S. colleges are already reporting outbreaks of the flu in students returning for the Fall session.

On the other side of the globe, health researchers who surveyed 2,255 healthcare workers in Hong Kong hospitals reported that the majority of them say they won’t take the protective shots.

In Friday’s briefing, the WHO emphasized what it called “important differences” between patterns of illness reported during the pandemic and those seen during seasonal epidemics of influenza.

One of the main differences is that those affected by the pandemic are generally youngerMost severe cases and deaths have occurred in adults under the age of 50 years, with deaths in the elderly comparatively rare. With the traditional seasonal influenza, about 90 percent of severe and fatal cases occur in people 65 years of age or older.

So get in line early when the vaccine becomes available.  October is now the best guess.

If you want more details, here is a link to the WHO.

You’ve got to love it when three white-hat-wearing senior scientists skirmish over a study written by three other presumed good guys.

Last week, I wrote about the study released in Washington during the annual “we’ll-publish-anything-because there’s-no-real-news doldrums.”

The study was another peek at what is happening in the world of nano-safety which, in my mind, is a much-ignored topic.

The report  – “Manufactured Nanomaterial and Sunscreens: Top Reasons for Precaution” – was compiled by Friends of the Earth, Consumers Union and the International Center for Technology Assessment.

Here is a link to my earlier post, which has a link to the actual study. (How many degrees of separation is that?)

The authors weren’t putting it up for a Nobel and they  admitted that much more work was needed on the health implications of nanomaterial.

But Richard Denison, a senior scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund, found fault with the study and blogged about it.

He said the researchers “cite the small size of nanomaterials as the driving concern, failing to recognize that the organic molecules used in other sunscreens are typically far smaller – not to mention specifically designed to be absorbed into the skin.”

Jennifer Sass, senior scientist with the Natural  Resources Defense Council who has done extensive research on nano and safety, countered on Denison’s blog.

“Nanomaterials do not improve the efficacy of sunscreens, so why have them? Let consumers make informed choices by labeling sunscreens and other products where the ingredients are ‘nano’ scale,” she explained.

Also joining the cyber debate was Andrew Maynard, the chief science adviser at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies.

Maynard, an international lecturer who has skillfully used the Twinkie to teach the world about nano, came down firmly in the middle.

“While there are questions that remain unanswered over the safe use of nanomaterials in sunscreens, the overwhelming balance of current information is in their favor. Some degree of judgment is needed here, precisely because the science is not conclusive,” Maynard commented.

My only question is: Why are three brilliant scientists staying in Washington in August?

To read more of the comments on this topic, here is a link to Denison’s blog.

Denison

It seems that everyone who was ever a reporter or writer of any stature has already pontificated about the lion of the senate who will roar no more.

I actually covered the man – his presidential run and more senate hearings than I can count.   He always seemed to care about stuff that I felt was important to the nation – rich and poor.

I even got a couple of hundreds words hammered out this morning and I thought they were okay.  But then I read what Kimberly Hartnett posted about the man  on her blog Typelikethewind.com and I concluded why bother?

She said everything that needed to be said far better than everything else I’ve read or can even start to write myself.

Here’s a link to what one of the best writers I know wrote about Kennedy today.

Mining companies have had it good for over a century.

The 1872 Mining Law exempted them from paying extraction royalties or taxes, unlike petroleum companies, even though they made enormous profits.

They were also not taxed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, which, by taxing the chemical and petroleum industries, created a trust fund for hazardous site cleanup, known as the Superfund.

To top it all off, many mining companies end up not paying for mine cleanup, or they pay very little.

Zortman-Landusky mine photo from MEIC

Companies like the worldwide mining giant Pegasus Gold Corporation and W.R. Grace established their claim and extracted all the ore they could. Critics accused both companies and many others in the Northwest with cutting environmental and human health corners in favor of the bottom line.

They shut down when prices or demand dropped and eventually declared bankruptcy. Since the companies were thus protected from cleanup responsibility, the state and federal government were left footing the bill.

Companies such as Pegasus have created the conditions that are spurring reform of the 139-year-old mining law. The reform legislation would establish a fund, similar to the Superfund, to pay for massive cleanup efforts when mining companies go bankrupt.

The Beal Mountain mine, 30 miles southwest of Butte, Mont., is one example of this situation. Earlier this month, the U.S. Forest Service held a public meeting to present cleanup proposals for the site formerly operated by Pegasus.

Pegasus used heap leach mining, now banned in Montana, to extract gold from Beal Mountain from 1988 to 1997, but declared bankruptcy in 1998.

The $6.2 million that Pegasus contributed to a cleanup bond was insufficient to begin to do the job.

Heap leach mining is almost always an environment-destroying process of extracting almost invisible flecks of gold from rock and mine tailings. The rock is shoved into a leach pad or lined holding area where a fine spray of cyanide is trickled over it to extract the gold.

Mike Browne, Beal Mountain on-scene coordinator for the Forest Service says because of errors in how Pegasus constructed the leach pad bottom liner, contaminated water seeps out to the groundwater and the local creek.

Because Beal Mountain site doesn’t pose a direct human health threat, the Forest Service has been tapped with closing it, instead of the EPA.

But unlike with Superfund sites, the Forest Service has no trust fund to dip into to close the mine, and   Browne said they don’t know what they will do if they can’t come up with the funding.

What Pegasus left behind at Beal Mountain is leaking toxic chemicals, including selenium, arsenic, copper and cyanide. The same situation happened about 340-miles northeast at the Pegasus-run Zortman-Landusky mine in Montana.

The Bureau of Land Management is running up against the same fiscal barriers at this mine near Harlem. Mont.  The mine, last owned by Pegasus, is on mountains considered sacred land of the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre Indians.

The Montana Environmental Information Center said the preferred cleanup plan will cost an estimated $63.5 million, but Pegasus posted only $30 million in the cleanup bond for that site. If Congress doesn’t appropriate the money, the state will be left to do what it can to limit the contamination already polluting the water used by the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation.

This is exactly why mining reform is overdue.

Mining companies no longer work with picks and shovels as they did in the late 19th century. They have upgraded with modern technology that allows them to destroy a mountain in a decade and walk away when they run out of money.

The law needs to be upgraded to compensate for the 21st century capability for destruction by requiring companies to pay the end costs up-front.

Here is a link to a short video produced by Montana environmentalists that explains more on the use of cyanide and what Pegasus did to the sacred tribal land and water.

Dr. Charles Arntzen

Scientists have used a new production technology to develop a vaccine for norovirus, the unpleasant package of diarrhea and vomiting that has destroyed the costly holidays of thousands of cruise ship vacationers.

Charles Arntzen today told the 238th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society that norovirus, the second most common viral infection in the U.S. after the flu, “can spread like wildfire through passenger liners, schools, offices and military bases.”

Arntzen, with the Biodesign Institute, Infectious Diseases and Vaccinology of Arizona State University, said the new vaccine was “manufactured” in a tobacco plant using an engineered plant virus.
Researchers are enlisting plants in the battle against norovirus, swine flu, bird flu and other leading infectious diseases.

“This plant biotechnology opens the door to more efficient, inexpensive ways to bring vaccines quickly to the public, especially critical in times when viruses mutate into unpredictable new strains, said Arntzen.

Here is a link to other comments Arntzen made at the ACS conference in Washington, D.C.

From mycell.com

It’s the strongest warning yet from one of Australia’s best known fertility researchers: men who want to have children should not wear cell phones below their waists.

This issue, says research leader John Aitken, “deserves our immediate attention.”

Microwave News reports that Aitken’s research group at the University of Newcastle in Australia has found that human sperm exposed to mobile phone radiation for 16 hours had reduced vitality and ability to move. Both are key to fertility.

Here is a link to the story.