Fish in Mom's Diet May Alter Kids' Behavior

For pregnant women, diets rich in fish can offer their babies protection against  developing behaviors associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, a new study finds. Yet for most Americans, fish consumption is the leading source of exposure to mercury , which has been linked to a host of health problems, including delays in neural development. However it depends on what kind of fish you eat that determines how much mercury you will consume. After checking different hair samples from different woman it was determined that the higher the level of mercury present, the more diseases the child has/showing signs of. The fish that were proved to have the most amount of mercury present in them are tuna, swordfish, and shark while salmon and cod tend to pick up less toxic metal from the environment. Woman with more than 1 microgram of mercury present were in danger of giving the disease to their children no matter how much fish they actually ate. So basically, if one was to eat only one fish with high levels of mercury, their children would be in as much danger as another mother who ate multiple fish dishes. It all depends on the level of mercury present in the fish. In this study it is revealed that boys are more sensitive to mercury posioning than girls are.


http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/345639/description/Fish_in_moms_diet_may_alter_kids_behavior

Opposition as Aquarium Seeks Import of Whales

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/10/science/earth/strong-opposition-to-aquariums-plan-to-import-beluga-whales.html?ref=earth A proposal to import 18 Beluga whales for popular interactive park attractions in the United States is drawing fierce opposition from animal rights advocates and others who object to their removal from the wild. The museums claim that they would like to take the whales in captivity for captive breeding, research and education. But, if this proposal is granted, it would remove these intelligent and social marine mammals from their native waters and their families, which has been highly controversial and argued over. However, to complicate things, the Federals government's decision will be based not on bioethics but on the language of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which recognizes a benefit in winning the hearts and minds of paying customers who become attached to animals like the Beluga Whale. Such an organization aims to please everyone who is on their bandwagon. Currently, there are 31 Beluga whales on display in the United States; some are too young to breed and others are nearing the end of their 35 year life span. Most attractions offer customers the ability to swim with the mammals, which raises controversy because some claim that such an activity makes the environment highly uncomfortable for the mammals and unnatural. Hal Whitehead, a marine mammal expert, claims that any type of captivity, even if it is high end, does not mimic the whale’s usually long migrations and their variety of changing habitats. So naturally, the whales are being deprived of their natural habitat and "normal" way of life. However, on the other hand, captive breeding does provide the Beluga whales with the numbers they need and it does create the diversity they need to thrive. With the agency covering this conflict, in receiving over 4,000 comments, a majority of them are negative and are asking that more environmental agencies speak out on this topic. Although the aquariums are claiming that they need multiple whales for research in order to find out how they can thrive when their arctic habitat is being destroyed due to climate change, many environment experts believe that they are collecting whales solely for the entertainment for their customers. Right now it is a case of he said she said.

Even After Rains, Facing Long-Term Water Needs

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/us/time-for-west-texas-to-face-long-term-water-needs.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&ref=earth San Angelo, Texas faced a severe drought recently that produced brown lawns, dying bushes and fear. One cause of such fear and dying shrubbery, besides the drought, is the ban on the use of outdoor sprinklers. However, after dealing with such a change in events, it was agreed upon to lift the ban. But it is believed that this will not end the drought; more is too come. People claim that Texans now need to learn how to value water better by building new water-supply projects and easing up on lawns. If they did not receive that large rain storm, it was predicted that they would have run out of water and would have to begin trucking their water. But although the rainstorm helped, the drought is not over yet. 66 percent of the state still remains in drought. But this drought has made Texas officials make tough decisions regarding what to do with the water for swimming pools, carwashes, etc. (purposes that are not necessities). But to solve this problem, the city decided to build a $120 million pipeline project that will be able to carry two thirds of the city’s basic wintertime needs with deliveries increasing over time. This will allow a solid water supply to constantly be provided even in times of drought. But the lesson in this Texas City is that water is not something that should be underestimated or taken for granted because it is very likely that one day the drought may get the best of them.

Paper or Plastic? Some Communities Say Neither

More than two dozen cities in California have implemented a tax on paper bags, and have eliminated plastic bags all together in order to encourage shoppers to carry around reusable bags and decrease the amount of paper and plastic waste. This fee ranges from 5 cents to 10 cents, although the legislators are pushing for a mandatory fee of 10 cents. (The higher the price, the less people will buy the bags) However, although this plan seems only beneficial, those behind the counter are actually getting insulted by the fee. They claim that it is insulting to their customers to pay for all their products, and then have to pay for a bag as well. One diamond retailer says “I won’t ask 10 cents for a bag when somebody spends $10,000. That’s petty”. But in order to prevent such outburst as this one, the government has implemented a fee of $500 dollars for those retailers who do not follow this rule. The whole premise behind this rule is to get people thinking about the wastefulness of single-use products, such as shopping bags. Although plastic companies have tried to fight this rule, saying that reusable bags end up in the same place as plastic bags given some time, their lawsuit was rejected. However, consumers are becoming frustrated because they believe that receiving a plastic bag is a right as a customer and should not be taken away from them. But on the other hand, some enjoy using reusable bags because they can personalize them and become the “next big thing” by carrying around bags with brand names on them. But in the end, a ban on bags will in fact help the environment by eliminating waste and encouraging more green activities. Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/business/energy-environment/communities-curb-use-of-paper-and-plastic-shopping-bags.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&ref=earth