Photo by laszlo-photo

Monkey mama's milk signals behavior and development

Have you ever wondered what your breast milk provides for your child beyond simple nourishment?  Animal research may expand our knowledge of the power of breast milk.

Studying rhesus macaque monkeys, researchers have found “that a mother’s milk sends a reliable signal to infants about their environment”.

How does one’s environment affect temperament and behavior?  Scientists have long debated environment versus genetics in human development, but rhesus monkeys may give us a new clue at an even deeper connections involving breast mikl.  Physorg explains:

Scientists from the Smithsonian Institution and the University of California, Davis are using this natural variation in breast milk quality and quantity to show that a mother’s milk sends a reliable signal to infants about their environment. This signal may program the infant’s behavior and temperament according to expectations of available resources and discourages temperaments that prove risky when food is scarce.

Published in the American Journal of Primatology, researchers analyzed the milk of 59 monkeys. Katie Hinde, the study’s lead author, expounds:

This is the first study for any mammal that presents evidence that natural variation in available milk energy from the mother is associated with later variation in infant behavior and temperament.  Our results suggest that the milk energy available soon after birth may be a nutritional cue that calibrates the infant’s behavior to environmental or maternal conditions.

Does this trait of rhesus breast milk carry over to humans?  Rhesus monkeys are “more distant from humans than chimpanzees or orangutans;” however, they are often used in disease research because of “genetic, physiologic and metabolic similarity to humans”.  It is also interesting to note that humans are the only primate with a “broader geographic distribution“ than the rhesus macaques. I wouldn’t doubt that human babies receive similar signals from their mother’s milk given the similarities.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Breast Milk “Signals” Infant Behavior and Temperament in Rhesus Monkeys is a post from: Eco Child's Play

The FDA is recommending Gardasil for boys, saying in a memo that it seems to be safe and effective in preventing genital warts in young men and boys. And guess what! None of the boys tested got cervical cancer! Kidding.

The vaccine’s maker, Merck, has been pushing for males to be offered the shot too, and gave the FDA evidence that, according to CBS,

Three studies of over 5,000 boys and men, Gardasil was 89% effective in preventing genital warts.

Check out the entire news story:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/v/J1r_neRVpxU&hl=en&fs=1&]

[social_buttons]

On the CBS news segment, Dr. Holly Phillips also seemed pleased with the new Gardasil recommendation, saying that,

The vaccine cuts down on genital warts, and although those may not be life-threatening, they can certainly be embarrassing.

Soo…we should give our boys the Gardasil shot to prevent their pride being wounded by treatable genital warts? Might teaching them to use protection–which we should do in any case for anyone who receives this vaccine–also protect them from embarrassing STDs?

Later in life, there is also a connection with HPV and throat and anal cancer.

That statement interested me. We could reduce the risk of not just one cancer, but three? Turns out, of the 1,479,350 estimated cases of cancer this year, less than 5,300 of them are cases of anal cancer. The rate of throat cancer is higher, but smoking is the big culprit in those 12,610 cases.

Huh. Sounds like boys getting the shot to prevent these two types of cancers is right up there with circumcising a boy for the 2% risk of penile cancer he’ll someday have.

But what about cervical cancer? If both males and females are vaccinated against HPV, won’t it protect most women against cancer? Well, not exactly.

First, the vaccine only protects against two types (of 15) of the cancer-causing strains of HPV.

Second, we don’t know how long Gardasil is actually effective for. If we give 3 shots to middle school kids, will they be protected once they hit their wild college years?

No word yet on how long-term these studies were. Why might that be an issue? Because recently, one of the top researchers of Gardasil, someone who was very involved in promoting the vaccine, spoke out against it.

Dr. Diane Harper said of the vaccine and its safety:

Gardasil has been associated with at least as many serious adverse events as there are deaths from cervical cancer developing each year.

If we vaccinate 11-year-olds and the protection doesn’t last… we’ve put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit.

This isn’t simply a case of giving boys a vaccine to protect girls against cancer. I believe in the greater good.

But currently, we have no idea if this vaccine protects members of either gender from HPV past 5 years. Is that reason enough to get almost $400 worth of shots into every middle schooler we know?

Follow me on Twitter.

Related Posts:

• The Girls of Gardasil: Brittney’s Story
• Gardasil is “Mostly” Safe, But Is It Effective?
• Gardasil Researcher Cautions Parents
• Gardasil Warnings to Include “Seizure-Like” Reactions
• Teen Faces Deportation over Gardasil

Gardasil For Boys: FDA Recommends Controversial Vaccine is a post from: Eco Child's Play

In the wake of the Sigg/bisphenol-A controversy, a top researcher and CEO of Environmental Health Sciences fills us in on the news: endocrine disruptors such as BPA and phthalates are indeed toxic at low-level doses, too. And they’re toxic in entirely different ways than at the traditional high-dose testing indicates.

The way the tests work today is we think that by testing at high doses we’re gonna see everything. So that once we get to a dose that’s intermediate and we don’t see anything, we’re golden.

But the science is telling us that at really low doses as contaminants mimic hormones. They can have effects that are totally unpredictable by what happens at high doses.

Pete Myers spoke to Living on Earth about the consequences of current testing.

[social_buttons]

We know that by describing a chemical as “endocrine disrupting”, we are saying that it interferes with the normal function of hormones in some way. Currently, the popular notion is that chemicals are only problematic at high doses. After all, we are exposed to a variety of toxins daily and have been our whole lives. That whole, “And I turned out fine” line of thinking. But what does “fine” describe?

What hormones and these contaminants do is at very low doses they turn on and off genes. Genes are being turned on and off trillions of times a second throughout your lifetime. And the orchestration of that is absolutely vital to life. If the genes get turned on or off at the wrong time, that’s gonna lead to a problem. You’re gonna lack a protein that might be important for example in suppressing a tumor or in controlling the growth of your heart.

And the body’s control system for these genes is designed to function at really, really low levels… We’re talking parts per trillion to parts per billion to low parts per million.

Recently, news also came out that there is, indeed, still bisphenol-A in those “BPA-free” baby items. Those who reported it, like myself, were given a hard time by some companies for bringing the study to light. No, the BPA was not put there deliberately. Yes, we are exposed to it via numerous avenues. And yes, the BPA in the Health Canada study is at trace amounts, as ZRecs reported soon after.

But what if a “trace amount” is still harmful?

More research clearly needs to be done at low doses, especially contaminants like phthalates and BPA. Dr. Myers says that while the EPA is finally taking the first steps to investigate these chemicals, this stuff is big business. Especially BPA:

You do the calculation and it’s worth about $800,000 an hour. You can buy a lot of lawyers to defend your product with $800,000 an hour in revenue. But BPA is the poster child of this low dose debate.

Click here to read the whole transcript or here to listen to it via RealPlayer.

Image: Shazari on Flickr under a Creative Commons License.

Follow me on Twitter.

Related Posts:

• “BPA-Free” Bottles–Guess What?–Leach BPA
• Another BPA-Free, Stainless Steel Water Bottle
• Massachusetts Issues BPA Warning to Parents
• Extreme Male Theory: Chemicals in Plastics Cause Autism
• Medical Group Issues BPA Intake Warning

BPA: Low Doses Are Poisonous, Too is a post from: Eco Child's Play

According to the title of an article published in The City of Lancaster’s Outlook (Fall 2009) magazine “The Future Looks Bright for Solar Power in Lancaster”.

My small town,  all 475,000 of us, are at the forefront of solar energy! On August 5, 2009, eSolar unveiled the 5 MW (mega watt) demonstration plant known as Sierra SunTower. The solar power plant has 24,000 mirrors and two giant tower house boilers. The boilers create what’s known as “thermal solar” which is said to be more cost-effective than the standard photovoltaic approach used in solar cells. The process creates steam to drive the turbine generators. The project was completed in 14 month time frame and has already begun to distribute power to Southern California Edison.

eSolar’s site says “Sierra SunTower will supply 5 MW of clean, renewable energy to the grid. This full-scale power plant, the only one of its kind in the U.S., produces electricity for Southern California Edison (SCE) and will power up to 4,000 homes.”

Environmental Facts
The 5 MW output of Sierra SunTower will reduce CO2 emissions by 7,000 tons
per year. For perspective, Sierra SunTower’s annual impact is equivalent to:
• Planting 5,265 acres of trees
• Removing 1,368 automobiles from the road
• Saving 650,000 gallons of gasoline

The CEO, Bill Gross, has been dreaming of making solar energy the leading energy producer since he was young. He calls eSolar power plant an “economic miracle” stating,

“…the sun provides ten thousand times more energy than the whole Earth uses- but solar only contributes less than one tenth of one percent of all the energy the Earth needs.… It is the first solar plant that delivers the lowest cost solar electricity in history and finally competes with fossil fuel electricity directly, we currently compete with natural gas and as we continue to drive down the costs we will even compete with coal.”

The small town I live in is a “shining example” of how it will pave the way in the development of solar energy in America. We have the potential to become “the Alternative Energy Capitol of the World” as Mayor R. Rex Parris stated.

This project is going take our community in a different direction on so many levels.  Outlook magazine also mentioned this is the “first of many clean, green power generation facilities planned for the Antelope Valley”.

“The Antelope Valley may well be on it’s way to becoming the cradle of alternative energy for Southern California”

-San Fernando Valley Business Journal

To top it all off,  The National Geographic Channel recently aired a program about the eSolar facility and it’s construction.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/v/fAW3sXo8F6w&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00]
I’m hoping in the near future, I’ll get the opportunity to tour the facility and share my experience with you. I would’ve never guessed that my small town had the most clear sunny days than any where in the U.S. – Do you think it’s time to get that solar oven we’ve had our eye’s on?

[This post was written by Leslie Quigley.]

Related Posts:

• Growing Up Green: How To Raise an Eco-Aware Child
• Hank D and the Bee: Santa and Coal–Supply and Demand
• Green Schools: Irvine Unified Goes Solar!
• Celebrate the Earth: Tracking Shadows to Become Human Sundials
• Idling During School Pick Up Bad for Kids, Earth

My Small Town Could Become The Solar Energy Capitol is a post from: Eco Child's Play

I first heard of Renee Dufault through Mother Jones print magazine back in June. In their “Children of the Corn” article, they named her as the researcher who first uncovered mercury in high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).

Even before this news came out, you may have already cut the HFCS from your family’s diet. But manufacturers are sneaky. There is the corn sweetener in things you wouldn’t even suspect: ketchup, yogurt, salad dressing. Actually, condiments are the biggest culprits when it comes to the mercury/high fructose corn syrup link.

So what did this brilliant researcher receive for her tireless work? Surely, a commendation, right? Nope. Renee Dufault is currently suffering through early retirement in Hawaii.

She was kind enough to discuss her research with me and the implications of mercury in high fructose corn syrup.

[social_buttons]

–Why were you testing HFCS for mercury in the first place?

In Spring 2004, I was invited by River Network to give a presentation at their annual conference on the mercury cycle. As I was preparing my power point presentation, I started an informal investigation to find the missing mercury from the chlor-alkali industry. I interviewed a guy at EPA who told me Vulcan Chemical company was the only company on record to find their missing mercury. Vulcan Chemical got out the mercury cell chlor-alkali business shortly after my investigation but shared information with me on where their missing mercury went. Some of it went into virtually all of their products.

I interviewed Art Dungan at the Chlorine Institute and he told me that there is always some mercury residue in chlor-alkali products made from mercury cells. He also told me that mercury cell chlor-alkali products were approved for use in food manufacturing and provided me with the Codex Standards that said how much mercury was allowed in the chlor-alkali products used to manufacture foods. That got me to thinking about which food manufacturing processes use mercury cell chlor-alkali chemicals. Vulcan Chemical had a web page that said they sold their products to the high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) industry.

I interviewed a manufacturer of HFCS and was told they preferred to use the mercury grade chlor-alkali or membrane chlor-alkali product in their process because both enhanced food product shelf life. The HFCS manufacturer was appalled when he found out his HFCS could be contaminated with mercury.

–Tell me about the results of your tests. What are the implications for the average American, which I understand gets 1 out of every 10 calories from HFCS?

Long term chronic (low dose) exposure to mercury (any form) will impact the body. How it impacts the body is under discussion. My collaborators and I have another paper coming out that will provide details. That is all I will be able to say at the moment.

–Who might be most affected by mercury in HFCS and why?

Children and babies in the womb will be most affected by mercury exposure in food be it via HFCS, sodium benzoate, food dyes, or any other product manufactured with mercury containing chlor-alkali chemicals. There is no way to know which food manufacturers use mercury cell chlor-alkali products or chemicals produced using mercury cell chlor-alkali chemicals.

The Corn Refiners Association claims they no longer use mercury cell chlor-alkali products in their manufacturing processes. Current international and U.S. regulations allow the use of mercury cell chlor-alkali products in food manufacturing. If HFCS contained mercury for many years as a result of the use of mercury cell chlor-alkali chemicals by the HFCS manufacturers, I believe there was no ill intent on the part of the corn refiners. They were in compliance with current regulations.

Nobody thought to look for mercury in food products manufactured with mercury cell chlor-alkali products.

–Manufacturers are still allowed to call their products “natural” even if they contain HFCS. In fact, after the news came out that there was mercury on high fructose corn syrup, president of the Corn Refiner’s Association, Audrae Erickson said,

They should know that high fructose corn syrup is safe. In 1983, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration formally listed high fructose corn syrup as safe for use in food and reaffirmed that decision in 1996. High fructose corn syrup contains no artificial or synthetic ingredients or color additives and meets FDA’s requirements for the use of the term ‘natural’.

What do you think of this?

HFCS is produced using chemicals through a refinery process. In my opinion it is not a natural product because it is made by man using an elaborate man-made refinery process that uses chemicals.

–Can you tell me about the lab you used for the testing?

I sent HFCS samples to several different labs and they all got the same results. The samples were collected in 2005 when some of the corn refiners were still obviously using mercury cell chlor-alkali chemicals in their manufacturing process.

–What was the FDA’s response to the results, first immediately, and then for your career with the department overall?

The FDA as an agency had mixed feelings about my results. Some individuals were not happy with my findings. I think they were afraid. Some individuals at FDA supported my work and applauded my efforts. There may have been some things going on behind the scenes to put an end to my work but I do not know this for sure. I did not have to retire early but I was discouraged from doing the field work that I liked doing and in fact told not to continue some of the research that I was doing. I found myself with lots of time on my hands. I do not twiddle my thumbs well. I need to be intellectually challenged and I need to feel like I am making a difference. I was no longer able to meet these basic needs doing my FDA job.

–There has been considerable criticism of the FDA following recent food recalls. From your experience there, what most needs to change in that department?

The FDA might better serve the public if FDA employee salaries were not paid by industry user fees. Continued use of industry user fees to pay for the salaries of FDA employees (FTEs) to review drug and device applications or inspect food manufacturers will ensure that FDA continues to operate in the current mode. Congress has allowed and in fact mandated that FDA operate in the current mode.

If taxpayers want a different kind of FDA, then they will need to make Congress change the way FDA is funded. In my opinion, FDA should be solely funded by taxpayer money. Who does Congress work for? If every person of voting age demanded that their Congressperson change the way FDA operates, then you can bet we would see some changes in priority.

We won’t see any changes unless Congress provides enough taxpayer money to pay for FDA operations and we won’t see any changes as long as industry is paying FDA “user fees.” User fees came about because pharmaceutical companies complained that their drug applications were not being approved fast enough. There are plenty of people at FDA that feel the same way that I do.

–Other thoughts?

These are my thoughts:

We need to follow Sweden’s lead and ban the use of mercury in manufacturing processes and products. Congress needs to provide FDA with substantial funding to conduct its own sorely needed research into product safety.

Image: terren in Virginia and Robert Couse-Baker, both on Flickr under a Creative Commons License.

Follow me on Twitter.

Related Posts:

• Gardasil For Boys: FDA Recommends Controversial Vaccine
• Gardasil Warnings to Include “Seizure-Like” Reactions
• The Girls of Gardasil: Brittney’s Story
• BPA: Low Doses Are Poisonous, Too
• Gardasil Researcher Cautions Parents

HFCS and Mercury: An Interview with an FDA Whistleblower is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Sneaky Green Uses for Everyday Things: How to Craft Eco-Garments and Sneaky Snack Kits, Create Green Cleaners, Remake Paper into Flying Toys, Assemble … a Robot Recycle Bin with Everyday Things is a fun and fabulous book for people that love to create their own gadgets.

This book is almost like a science project book. Both my older kids are checking it deciding which fun gadgets and experiments they want to try.

If you do homeschooling this might be a great book for you to get since it is full of green projects, experiments and even some crafty fun.

Not only are their gadgets and gizmos to create, there is some great information in this book like explaining the basics of energy, gas saving tips, plastic recycling, and energy conservation tips.

Some of the really cool projects in the book are: a solar powered motor, a solar cooker, a nuclear energy simulator, an ethanol demonstration, an oil refinery demonstration, an easy electric motor, a hydrogen power demonstration, a solar power generator and so much more.

I know some of these projects sound daunting but most of them use things you have lying around the home like: batteries, paper clips, tape, wire, water, pots and pans, and cardboard. Super great science experiments for the kids. My daughter is getting ideas for her next science fair, perhaps creating an exhibit showcasing alternative energy sources like solar, ethanol and electric using these simple experiments.

For the less scientific crowd there are simple projects made from cardboard boxes, paper and a few other items like the recycle bin sorter, a fun robot recycle bin (great way to make recycling fun for the kids), a flying disk, a mini boomerang, a mouth flapper, a book safe and other easy and fun projects. 

I love that this book isn’t just green and fun, it is also very educational.

[This post was written by Wenona Napolitano.]

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

A Review of Sneaky Green Uses for Everyday Things by Cy Tymony is a post from: Eco Child's Play

The swine flu has been widely believed to eventually become resistant to Tamiflu, an antiviral flu drug administered orally. Many people rely on Tamiflu instead of the vaccine for the seasonal flu to avoid contact with thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative found in most types of flu vaccines. (Though the FDA and CDC say Tamiflu is not a replacement for any flu vaccine, but in the case of the swine flu, has been approved for Emergency Use Authorization.)

The swine flu vaccine, in many cases, will also contain thimerosal.

Now, scientists in Denmark have discovered the first strain of H1N1 that is resistant to Tamiflu. Officials there issued a statement, quoted by Reuters:

It does not constitute a risk to public health and does not cause changes to the recommendations for the use of oseltamivir (Tamiflu).

[social_buttons]

Drugmaker Roche said they are working on keeping up with the ever-mutating H1N1 virus. It was to be expected, they said. The seasonal flu mutates and some strains of that virus are resistant to the drug.

The CDC concurs. In e-mail correspondence with Reuters, spokesman David Daigle said,

It is well known and expected that influenza virus can mutate spontaneously. The resistance has not changed the capability of the virus to transmit or cause disease, and the assessment is still that this is a relatively mild influenza.

While officials don’t seem to worry, this may be a worrisome development for parents of young children (though Tamiflu is not recommended for babes under 1), pregnant women, and breastfeeding mothers, as these groups often try to avoid the mercury-laden seasonal flu vaccine and opt for the seemingly safer choice of pill form.

There’s already the tough choice of getting the swine flu vaccine after the CDC issued its recommendations of who is top priority for this brand new vaccine, currently in test mode, to be available this fall.

The Danish patient in question is now healthy and fully recovered from the swine flu.

Image: Wikimedia Commons.

Follow me on Twitter.

Related Posts:

• The Swine Flu Vaccine and Your Family
• WaPo: Swine Flu Vaccine Will Contain Mercury
• CDC Urges Pregnant Women to Get Swine Flu Vaccine
• The Flu Shot: Kids Who Get It Are MORE Likely to be Hospitalized
• “S” is for “Swine Flu”: Elmo Battles H1N1

Denmark Finds Swine Flu Case Resistant to Tamiflu is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Plastic bags, the bane of human existence.

They were also a huge annoyance to Daniel Burd, who said that they’d come pouring out of the closet every time he did chores.

One day, I got tired of it and I wanted to know what other people are doing with these plastic bags.

So he did what any teen would do. He experimented with bacteria and decomposed a plastic bag in 3 months, winning top prize in the Canada-Wide Science Fair in Ottawa.

[social_buttons]

He ground the plastic bags into powers and mixed them with a concentration of household chemicals and yeast. They indeed became plastic-eating microbes, and he used more of the solution over the course of 6 weeks. He compared them with controls (plastic powder in dead bacteria), and they weighed 17 percent less.

That wasn’t good enough for Burd. He tested different bacteria samples against one another and went with the more effective one (Sphingomonas bacteria). He also had a helper strain (Pseudomonas), which apparently assisted the first with reproducing.

From TheRecord.com:

At 37 degrees and optimal bacterial concentration, with a bit of sodium acetate thrown in, Burd achieved 43 per cent degradation within six weeks.

He also tried it on a larger scale, with 5-6 whole bags, and the results were the same. He thinks that given a bit more time, he could have completely dissolved the bags.

So how cool is that? Plastic bags are a huge problem, but we may be able to do this on a large scale, thinks Burd.

All you need is a fermenter . . . your growth medium, your microbes and your plastic bags.

Amazing! For now, let’s all stick with our reusable cloth bags.

To read his science report, click here.

Source: TheRecord.com with a tip-off on the story from Wired.com

Image: reegmo on Flickr under a Creative Commons License.

Follow me on Twitter.

Related Posts:

• Use a Plastic Bag, Get 5 Years in Jail
• And the Winner of Reusable ChicoBags is….Amber!
• Eco-Friendly Toys: Kidsonroof MobileHome Combines the Love of Cardboard Boxes with Dramatic Play
• Convenient, Conserving Laundry Dropps

Teen Decomposes Plastic Bag in 3 Months is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Like we needed one more reason to keep nasty pesticides away from our homes and children. They’re linked to respiratory problems and asthma. And a recent study shows that children up to age 7 have a harder time ridding their bodies of the chemicals.

Now a new study shows that kids with childhood leukemia have elevated levels of household pesticides in their urine. The study was performed at the Georgetown University Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center.

These aren’t industrial-level pollutants, either. These are everyday chemicals people pick up at the hardware store and use in their very own backyards.

[social_buttons]

In our study, we compared urine samples from children with ALL (acute lymphoblastic leukemia) and their mothers with healthy children and their moms. We found elevated levels of common household pesticides more often in the mother-child pairs affected by cancer. We shouldn’t assume that pesticides caused these cancers, but our findings certainly support the need for more robust research in this area.

While epidemiologists don’t put this as a cause/effect case, they say that there is enough correlation to warrant concern. From the AFP:

Pesticides were found in the urine of more than half of the study’s participants, but levels of two OP metabolites — diethylthiophosphate (DETP) and diethlydithiophosphate (DEDTP) were higher in the children with ALL.

The other thing? Moms with children who had ALL were much more likely to use pesticides around the house–33% versus only 14% of the healthy population.

Which should make us all worried. Even if you live a green gardening life, do your neighbors? If not, how could those pesticides affect your family.

Image: cekrypton2 on Flickr under a Creative Commons License.

Related Posts:

• Civil Lawsuit Filed Against Toxic Water Town
• Spring Sports on Green Grass
• “Myths” of Breastfeeding Researcher Misquoted By The Press: Still Believes in Breastmilk!
• Financial Investors Ask FDA to Reassess BPA’s Safety to Save Their Bottom Lines
• Dude, What’s On My Food?!

Pesticides Linked With Childhood Leukemia is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius has signed a document to provide legal immunity for the manufacturers of the new swine flu vaccine, the Associated Press reports.

As you may remember, the National Institutes of Health has begun recruiting volunteers, some as young as 6 months, to test the new vaccines.

The first time the government had a major round of swine flu vaccines, many complained of adverse side effects and filed claims against the companies. But this time, the government has nipped it in the bud. We’re protecting the companies before we even know what those side effects might be.

That’s because vaccines aren’t as profitable for manufacturers as other drugs, so the makers took a stance that worried government officials, thus leading to the legal immunity. The attitude of the companies was,

Do we really need this?

I don’t know about you, but I’m asking the same thing.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/v/ASibLqwVbsk&hl=en&fs=1&]

The U.S. already protects drug manufacturers from litigation related to vaccines on the Recommended Immunization Schedule. Instead, there is a federal court that determines when to shell out, much to the consternation of many parents.

The CDC says that there have been 40,000 confirmed or probable cases, but estimates that there could already be 1 million Americans affected by the swine flu, many with mild cases. So far, 263 American deaths have been caused by the swine flu.

But health officials worry that this flu could get worse. The CDC estimates that 40% of Americans could be affected, and it’s possible that this strain could strengthen.

So far, about 6-8% of Americans have been affected by swine flu. But don’t kid ourselves, says the CDC’s Dr. Anne Schuchat,

Our planning assumptions for a severe pandemic were that up to 40 percent of the workforce might be affected and not able to work, either because they were ill or because they needed to stay home to care for an ill family member.

U.S. officials hope to have 160 million doses ready for the public this fall.

Image: ZaldyImg on Flickr under a Creative Commons License.

Follow me on Twitter.

Related Posts:

• NIH Looks For Swine Flu Vaccine Volunteers
• “S” is for “Swine Flu”: Elmo Battles H1N1
• The Swine Flu Vaccine and Your Family
• WaPo: Swine Flu Vaccine Will Contain Mercury
• Denmark Finds Swine Flu Case Resistant to Tamiflu

Swine Flu Vax Makers Already Legally Immunized is a post from: Eco Child's Play