Hi,
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled the Second Amendment does protect an individual’s right to bear arms, striking down the Washington, D.C, ban on handguns. This is a historic decision that we have to wonder what kind of an impact it is going to have on the already over-the-top problems we have with gun violence in this country today.

The Associated Press reported, “Silent on central questions of gun control for two centuries, the Supreme Court found its voice Thursday in a decision affirming the right to have guns for self-defense in the home and addressing a constitutional riddle almost as old as the republic over what it means to say the people may keep and bear arms.” The Washington Post reports the “landmark 5 to 4 decision split along ideological grounds and wiped away years of lower court decisions that had held that the intent of the amendment, ratified more than 200 years ago, was to tie the right of gun possession to militia service.”

The New York Times reports in a front-page story that the court “rejected the view that the Second Amendment’s ‘right of the people to keep and bear arms’ applied to gun ownership only in connection with service in the ‘well regulated militia’ to which the amendment refers.”

This brings up the question and outrage that has broken out in this country as a result of the ruling; where do we draw the line to protect the safety of the citizens of this country while at the same time protecting ourselves as a country? With so many other methods of self protection available why does the Supreme Court Justice see the need to open the doors to more gun violence?

For self protection, technology has advanced tremendously allowing for many avenues of personal safety without having to carry a gun. For example, we have CCV camera’s to alert us to intruders, we have mace, we have technological advances, like laser guns, light ray guns to temporarily blind an intruder that are safer and less life threatening.

Additionally this puts the police at a greater risk of injury. With so many people carrying guns now, legally, those that work for enforcing the laws and serve to protect us are now in a battle zone people who could be under the influence of drugs and alcohol with legal personal handguns. Domestic violence is a huge problem with this handgun law in affect. Clearly this ruling has enormous ramifications for the safety of the public.

The second amendment states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The Supreme Court, in its ruling, says that means it’s every American’s right to keep a gun for self-defense.

But what will the consequences be and is this what it really means? I believe that more violence, more killings, more road rage, more police shootings, more families ripped apart by violence is going to the aftermath of this Supreme Court Decision. I for one, believe that the Forefathers of this nation, Authors of the words of the Constitution, wrote for a community that were still hunters and conquerors of a new land. They had no consciousness of the new nonlethal weapons and surveillance technology we have today. Perhaps our Present fathers, the Chief Justices are not up on the viable new technologies either. Hopefully our future fathers will have the fortitude to hold the hand gun regulation in check on a City by City basis or reduce the incidences of employee rage; symptomized by random shutting in the workplace; school shooting; children in the homes while parents are at work accidental shootings; jealous passion shootings by siblings, parents, spouses, partners. As a police walks up the driveway to help in a domestic violence scene, he has to wonder where the shot will come from more vigilantly than ever before.

How do you feel about this ruling? We want to know your thoughts on this historic ruling by the Supreme Court. As always, we are here for your safety and thought provoking comments.

Yovette Mumford,
Safetyissues.com

Hi,

Safety permeates every aspect of our lives so much that we take it for granted. I think we should take “safety” much more seriously. Therefore I am going to write a series of blogs on why we as a society should add to our vocabulary and thus redefine our consciousness on the science of safety. I think we should in fact develop a Science of Safety just as all of the other Science disciplines. Science is defined by Webster’s as, “an area of knowledge that is an object of study.” It goes on to further specify, “Knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific methods.” Safety is defined by Webster’s as, “freedom from danger; security-a protective device.” Thus one could conclude that an area of knowledge that is an object of study is “Safety”. Science of safety would be the discipline of studying all knowledge that is focused on the art and science of safety. I can not understand why safety has not become more of a science discipline of its own.

There is a journal published monthly called Safety Science. This journal serves as an international medium “for research in the science and technology of human safety. It extends from safety of people at work to other spheres, such as transport, leisure and home, as well as every other field of man’s hazardous activities.” Safety Science - Jan. 2008.
The journal is encouraging in its efforts to develop safety as a discipline of science. It covers the physics and engineering of safety with all the aspects, risks and control techniques taken into account to form a science of safety and then publishes articles. It is truly fascinating work and one we are thrilled to see!

Let’s look at a specific hypothetical example of the science of safety in action. For example, we all know that if you smoke cigarettes, according to the World Health Organization, your chances of developing lung cancer during your lifetime increase 68% (WHO Feb. 2008) from one who does not smoke. Applying scientific methods to this example, it is clear that by smoking you are increasing your chance of developing lung cancer. This is proven, methodical, factual information.

Another example, if you cross a street without looking both ways, you increase your chance of becoming a victim of an accident; getting hit by a car or truck. If we applied safety scientific methodology to this hypothesis, we would come up with a percentage of times these accidents are likely to happen. We then use safety science methodology to research human behavior and come up with “best practices” to reduce the percentages of such an accident. We would have a factual, proven piece of safety science information to share with the general public to increase their safety awareness and justify on a consistent basis behavior modification techniques to have a safer environment.

Without a doubt, safety is a science. Whether or not it ever becomes a recognized discipline remains to be seen.

Next week….. the politics of safety and safety consciousness in propaganda.

Living safe,
Yovette Mumford

Hi,

The warmth and beauty of summer brings with it safety factors that we want you to consider. As we are more and more outside in nature, we must be aware of our surroundings and the safety issues involved. I was recently on a picnic and found myself within a swarm of bees that were after the same food we were trying to enjoy. It was quite annoying and somewhat nerve racking; knowing that the sting they can put on us all can be extremely painful and to some life threatening.

Bee stings can be dangerous and life threatening to some. Many people are allergic to the venom found in bee stings and can have serious reactions if not treated quickly. There is a theory that by placing a penny or any type of coin on the bee sting, the venom will dissipate. The theory is based on the iron found in our monetary coins. Supposedly the iron “pulls out” the venom from the sting and stops a possible reaction. Certainly not proven by a scientific method, however this theory has garnered enough positive results and evidence to result in being a well-known, widespread conjecture.

Bee stings have been a nuisance since prehistoric times. Drawings of bee’s have appeared on caveman dwellings as found by archaeologists. They biggest factor in their existence is that they are insects that feed on food meant for human consumption. Thus at most cookouts of any type, bee’s can and are usually present.

To avoid attracting bees, try the following:
• Avoid fragrances, including hair spray, scented soaps, lotions, and oils. Bees usually approach children with a sweet scent.
• Don’t wear brightly colored clothing, particularly floral patterns, i.e. don’t look like a flower patch. Bees also see in the ultraviolet range. If the pattern lights up under black light, it is particularly interesting to bees.
• Be very careful with food. Cans of soda are notorious: Bees climb in unobserved, and are frightened into stinging when the child drinks. Something as small as a forgotten raspberry jam stain on a sweater can be a problem.
If a bee does land, take steps to avoid frightening it:
• Hold still. Tell kids to pretend they’re statues. Rapid movement startles the bee and encourages stinging.
• Try blowing gently on the bee. This can encourage it to move on while not startling it.
• Wear shoes. Bees will of course be frightened if you step on or near them. Shoes don’t make them less frightened, but they do protect feet from frightened bees.
• Wear long pants when you know you are going to be in an area that is likely to have bees in it, such as a field.

Keep in mind, the bee’s stinger is barbed. In the act of stinging, the stinger is torn from the bee, along with the venom-filled poison sac and attached muscles. The barbs continue to work the stinger deeper into the flesh for several minutes, while venom continues to be injected. Once stung, doctors recommend removing the stinger by with a scraping motion by using the rigid edge of a credit card or a dull butter knife. Never attempt to pull out the stinger using fingers or tweezers, since this will result in the injection of more venom.

If you are stung, treat the wound in the following ways:
• Remove the stinger with all haste, in whatever manner is most convenient. If you see a little black dot in the wound, part of the stinger is still present.
• Clean the area with soap and water.
• Consider applying an antiperspirant to the site. An ingredient called A aluminum chlorohydrate may reduce the effect of bee venom.
• Apply cold. Use ice or cool water for 10 to 30 minutes after the sting. This blunts the body’s allergic response.
• An antihistamine such as Benadryl, taken by mouth, can give some added relief, and help prevent the reaction from spreading.
• A shake lotion such as calamine can be helpful. A paste made of baking soda and water can have a similar effect.
• Topical hydrocortisone can also provide some symptomatic relief.
• Give acetaminophen or ibuprofen for systemic pain relief.
Cooking outdoors is a big part of summer, but so are bees. Keep this information handy; it will help you prevent and if you fall prey to a bee sting, treat the area in the safest and best way possible.

Safe living,
Yovette Mumford

Hi,

As we continue in our summer safety series, we must consider poison ivy. Let’s take a closer look at what it is, prevention and treatment techniques.

There is a saying among campers and outdoorsmen that we should all pay head to, “leaves of three, let them be.” This refers to poison ivy. Poison Ivy has three leaves and contains oil called urushiol. This oil is found in the sap of poison ivy and is the cause of the break out of an itchy, painful rash that develops as a result of just brushing up against poison ivy.

Poison Ivy grows almost everywhere in the United States and nearly 85% of all people can and do develop allergies to it when they come in contact with the plant.

This brings up the question, with such a high percentage of people that have a reaction to poison ivy in addition to its vast presence in our nature, why doesn’t the National Forestry Division do something to get rid of it? Simply put, humans are the only living creatures that have this negative reaction to it. Contradictory, moose, elk, deer and birds seem to be immune to the urushiol in the plants and in fact use the plant as a good source of nutrition. Further, getting rid of poison ivy is very difficult. Trying to burn it only causes the urushiol to travel in smoke which in turn gets inside of peoples nostrils and lungs, thus causing the negative reactions. Finally, because of the vast presence of poison ivy in nature, people are forced to stay on paths. Environmentalists call this “protecting nature by keeping people on paths.” They believe this is important in contributing to help protect our delicate ecosystems.

Clearly the best course of action is to stay on paths and avoid coming into contact with poison ivy. Wear long sleeves and long pants tucked into your hiking boots when out in nature, wear leather gloves, avoid inhaling smoke from an outdoor fire if you suspect poison ivy may be in the area and wear a barrier cream.

If you do come into contact with poison ivy, however, in keeping with our goal of safety, I have included treatment techniques to help ease and relief you of the symptoms of poison ivy.

• If you believe you have inhaled smoke from burning poison ivy, see a doctor immediately. The allergic reaction can be very serious.
• If you come into contact with poison ivy, wash the area as soon as possible with lots and lots of cool water. The sooner you wash and the more water you use, the less likely you will be getting a rash.
• If you do develop a rash, apply calamine lotion to the rash or rub the rash with an ice cube. These remedies may or may not work, but they certainly are worth a try since they will not harm you.
• If the rash covers more than 20 percent of your body, or develops in sensitive areas like the eyes, mouth or genitals, see a doctor immediately. Physicians can prescribe steroids in either cream form or by injections that may decrease the allergic reaction. Extremely sensitive people may have to be hospitalized.

Summer is all about being outside and having fun. But we must always keep our safety in mind. Follow these guidelines and make this information a part of your knowledge bank; hopefully avoiding having to deal with the repercussions of an outbreak of poison ivy.

Safe living,
Yovette Mumford

The World Health Organization (WHO) is an agency of the United Nations whose responsibility is “to attain by all people the highest possible standard of health” and whose mission is “to improve people’s lives, to reduce the burdens of disease and poverty, and to provide access to responsible health care for all people” (World Health Organization. Jan. 2008).
In regard to our water consumption safety, the WHO considers that “drinking-water” should be “suitable for human consumption and for all usual domestic purposes including personal hygiene” (World Health Organization. Jan. 2008). Further, the WHO goes on to submit that drinking-waters should be safe for lifetime use, taking into account of differing sensitivities that occur across life stages, including drinking water that is safe and suitable for individuals suffering from certain specific immune compromising disorders. Keep in mind, the WHO holds this accountable not just to public drinking water from the tap but also includes bottled water taken from springs and community wells.
In regard to specifics, the WHO presents first and most strongly that drinking water should be treated and that the control of fecal contamination in drinking-water systems and sources, where it occurs, is of primary importance. Fecal-specific indicator bacteria such as E. coli are the parameters of first importance in monitoring fecal pollution in both bottled and tap water. Additionally, bacteria and micro organisms that require treatment and elimination are contained in the definition and requirements of the WHO for both tap and bottled water. All of these requirements are found in the WHO’s Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality :

Guidelines for drinking-water quality, Volume 1

So how do these requirements and expectations of the WHO compare with what we are buying in bottled water and drinking from our taps? First we will look at bottled water.
The WHO’s Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality as we have already determined applies to bottle water, not just tap. Is bottle water measuring up to these guidelines and if so, is there any discrepancy within the consumer product? Research has found that bottled water, because it often sits a period of time before consuming, often times contains a specific growth situation for microbial flora; a harmful bacteria found in untreated water. Further, although bottled water is derived from “pristine” sources, they many contain or have added carbon dioxide to eliminate the bacteria’s however this often times leads to elevated temperatures while waiting to be sold and consumed. This is not good. Naturally occurring micro organisms found in all water is often times found to be higher in bottled water because of this than water that is treated and reaches us through our taps.
In regard to municipal treatment facilities (tap water), because of privacy issues, the World Health Organization cannot list what they may consider the “best” municipal treatment facilities within the United States, however, they do require each municipality to produce and distribute to the public an annual report of the water quality for human consumption. Additionally, if a facility fails to meet the Guidelines for Drinking Water standards, immediate intervention is taken.
The horizon holds many new technologies in the filtering and cleansing of the waters we ingest. Included in these new technologies are advances in: hydrological analysis, geological assessments and land use inventories to determine potential chemical and radiological contamination sites to avoid.
In conclusion, while bottled water may seem more glamorous or appear due to its marketing techniques, to be safer than tap water, the opposite may in fact be true. Consider this research when deciding on which water source you will use for yourself and your family. As always, we are here for your safety and safety education.

Safe living,
Yovette Mumford