Articles by Sarah K. Burkhalter

Beware, ye Halloween pirates and princesses.

We just received a timely pre-Halloween press release from the Sierra Club, warning about the dangers of toy jewelry. Not the choking hazard, or the dressing-like-Mr.-T-for-the-fourth-year-in-a-row hazard, but the leaching-toxic-metals hazard.

Toy jewelry, apparently, can have high amounts of lead. It also, according to the Sierra Club, has become a popular trick-or-treat item in recent years. (Thanks, but I'll take the candy. Unless you have a locally grown, organic apple sans razor blade?)

Lead is bad for you, particularly if you are a trick-or-treating-age tot -- even more particularly if you are a trick-or-treating-age tot with a propensity for putting anything and everything into your mouth.

Here comes the stretch …

It would be easier to write a sports column on an environmental blog if the athletic world was actually doing anything helpful to the earth. (I'm a busy girl with limited time for Google searching, people.) That being the case, some folks think we should rethink our way of sporting altogether. I say, when we've tackled the large-scale social and political adjustment that will allow us to effectively combat climate change, then we can move on to athletic-supporter adjustment. Hee hee hee.

So, right. Not much in the sporting world to write about today. So in the spirit of trying to make a connection where there isn't really one, here comes the stretch, and the pitch, from Tim Haab over at Environmental Economics.

Something’s fishy here.

From The New York Times:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration commissions report by Institute of Medicine on risks and benefits of eating fish. Institute of Medicine obliges, states that marine-life consumption "may" reduce risk of heart disease, but further study is needed per risk of exposure to PCBs, dioxin, and other nasty stuff. Meanwhile, Harvard School of Public Health conducts different study and declares fish to reduce risk of coronary death by 36 percent. Coauthor of Harvard study declares fish-eating risks to be "greatly exaggerated." NOAA sponsors press conference for release of Harvard study, much to surprise of Institute of Medicine. Why? Why would NOAA support the study they didn't commission?

"We're just trying to make consumers feel good," said William T. Hogarth, assistant administrator for fisheries of the National Marine Fisheries Service, part of NOAA.

Feeling good trumps awareness of risks to my health any day!

From Hatcher to Hogan

Trailer of beers We wouldn’t put it beyond Brit and K-Fed to shack up in a trailer park — have ya seen him not in a ‘beater? But we bring […]