Think Dirty: A Review

Photo by on Unsplash

Post By: Molly Esselstrom, Upstream Research™ Marketing Manager

During my time at Upstream Research, I have learned more about environmental risks than I thought existed. The water, soil, air, socioeconomic, and cancer data that drive Reports all have a slew of consequences, impacts, and corresponding actions. There isn’t a day that goes by that I am not researching something to do with these risks and possible ways to abate them. A passion project of mine that has spun off from this, and in working with Amy Ziff at Made Safe, is advocating for non-toxic products.

In that vein, this blog serves as one part of the environmental health web: personal health. Recently, I discovered an app called Think Dirty that, in my opinion, could be a game changer for anyone looking to increase their personal health. The app allows you to scan any cosmetic product that has a barcode (or look it up by name if not) and it gives a ‘dirty’ score on a scale of 0-10, with 10 being the dirtiest. The three categories for the score are Carcinogenicity, Developmental & Reproductive Toxicity, and Allergies & Immunotoxicities.

Similar to our Upstream Reports, they use green, yellow and red to indicate the risk associated with each ingredient and how these ingredients contribute to the overall score. Think Dirty even offers an “Our Picks” section where they link ‘clean’ products to sites where you can buy them. I would most liken this Upstream’s new Action Steps. Since downloading, I have thrown out 90% of my cosmetic products because of their dirty score and switched to products that I believe are better for my health. The system, like Upstream, is hyper-personal, lays out why certain things put the user at risk, and offers a direct solution for consumers. It’s a powerful mix.

Personal health is one factor of overall health with genetics and the environment of course playing a large role as well. Furthermore, these clean products do not contain the harmful chemicals and are consequentially better for the environment by way of production, use and disposal. That’s what I call a win-win. 




Upstream Research™ original post

Taking Action

Image from Upstream Reports

Image from Upstream Reports

Post By: Molly Esselstrom, Upstream Research™ Marketing Manager

When something is on fire in front of you, wouldn’t you throw water on the flames? What about if your child was in danger; you’d do everything in your power, right? Of course, these are extreme examples so let me put it in a slightly less-dire context.

If you knew there was something in your environment – air, water, soil, etc – putting you and your family at risk and you knew how to help, wouldn’t you?

Our Upstream Reports now provide users with Action Steps where they can view advice and further information about what they can do to improve their health and the health of their family. The risks outlined in Reports are multidimensional and can come in the form of water violations, lead risk, soil contamination, cancer in the area, air toxicity, etc. Our Action Steps help users mitigate risk based on the results of their Report, an important step in empowering users who may be shocked by what is in their personal environment. 

While some actions may be straightforward, such as using sunscreen to avoid skin cancer and having children wash their hands after playing in soil, others can be more complicated. Some even suggest users purchase DIY test kits for their water or soil and, even, to contact their local agencies to speak with them about risk in their area.

The main goal with these Action Steps, however, is to make sure people who see risk in their area are also able to see a way to fix the situation and take their health into their own hands.

See an example of these actions steps here.


Upstream Research™ original post

The Importance of a Healthy and Safe Environment for Refugee Populations: A Case Study in Northern Greece

The following is our first Guest Blog from Caitlin Scarpelli about her time abroad. 

Where you live matters. We all know that. But when people must flee their homes because of persecution or conflict, they often do not get a choice in where they want to live. They do not get a choice if the country they end up in speaks their language. They do not get a choice if their kids can attend school. They do not get a choice if they live in healthy and sanitary conditions. Often, their entire autonomy is stripped from them.

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 1 in every 113 people globally is now either an asylum-seeker, internally displaced or a refugee. In addition, they are typically displaced from their normal lives for 20 years. Often, they never find a permanent settlement and may be subject to deplorable living conditions for a large chunk of that time. In recent years, a “crisis” of displaced people has been shown in the news, especially in Europe. However, displacement has always been present, but not often shown, as it mainly affects the global south. The UNHCR recorded the most displaced people from conflict in history in 2016. Weather disasters also increase displacement numbers. As climate change is predicted to increase both disaster intensity and frequency, human displacement is sure to be an important and concerning topic for the future of humanity and human rights.

Earlier this summer, I participated in the Oxford Consortium for Human Rights, a workshop program designed for students to engage in the topics of human rights, global conflict, humanitarian aid, and peace building. I had the opportunity to study human migration, humanitarian law and refugee policies with some of the leading experts in those fields. Then, I deepened the connection of policies to people through service learning in Greek refugee camps and community organizations. Through this program, I was able to hear firsthand the experiences which refugees and asylum-seekers have had during their journeys to safety.

During these journeys, they travelled from their home countries and many ended up in Turkey. A majority of asylum-seekers chose to pass from Turkey to Greek islands via overcrowded boats. This method is extremely risky, and as the news has often shown, these boats can capsize, plunging the passengers into the rough sea. 

Image Source: BBC

Image Source: BBC

Once the asylum-seekers landed on the Greek islands, they often had lost all their belongings during the journey, whether that was as a debt to a smuggler or simply because of the rough travel. During the Consortium, I met Ayesha Keller, co-founder of Together for Better Days, a nonprofit organization that worked both on the Greek island Lesvos and the mainland. She recalled how no one ever had shoes once they came off the boats. In addition, many passengers developed hypothermia.

When Keller first arrived on Lesvos, she was shocked by the condition of Moria, the refugee camp there. Because people did not want to stay on the island too long, no one bothered to clean it up. Trash covered the ground and people would huddle around fires fueled by burning waste for warmth. With no safe way for the smoke to be filtered, people would breathe it in.

Image Source: The Wall Street Journal

Image Source: The Wall Street Journal

Through determination and dedication, her organization helped to clean up the camp and make it more welcoming to the asylum-seekers who arrived there. They even built a sign at the entrance to the camp reading “Welcome” in over a dozen languages and “Safe Passage” in the same languages on the other side.

Once refugees moved on from the islands, they would go to the mainland and then predominantly move to Europe through the Balkan route after typically spending time in another camp. During peak passage, about 10,000 people each day would pass through towns in northern Greece which normally housed around 2,000 people. These towns could not support the new population pressures. However, this crisis was small in comparison to when the Balkan route’s countries closed their borders in early 2016. These closing borders left tens of thousands of refugees stranded in Greece. In addition, around the same time, the European Union made a deal with Turkey to stop allowing refugees to cross over into Greece. Any refugees who tried to cross the border would be immediately sent back, increasing violence along border lines.

In Idomeni, Greece, near the Macedonian (FYROM) border, a makeshift camp was created because people were bombarded by the news of the closing borders. They had nowhere to go. They set up camp in empty parking lots, along train tracks, or in field.

Image Source: BBC

Image Source: BBC

Image Source: NBC News

Image Source: NBC News

When I went to Kilkis, a town in northern Greece, I heard the testimony of a refugee who had lived near Idomeni in Cherso camp. His testimony for Cherso could be applied to many other camps, not only in Greece but also other parts of the world, especially the global south. He referred to Cherso as “the miserable place.” Sanitation was terrible, with only 4 or 5 toilets for over 2,000 people. Since they had nowhere else to play, children would play in the sewage that spread all over the ground. The tents, which provided them “homes,” were cold and flooded in the winter months. They had no beds, so they slept on the grass, even when it was soaked. The camp was also set up in a field where there was no protection from the sun during the summer. However, they could rarely go into the tent either, as the inside was about 122 ºF. He explained how, because of the conditions, “diseases were getting worse and worse,” especially for children and the elderly. In addition, many residents got depression because there was nothing to do during the day, they could barely communicate with volunteers or government workers, and the conditions were difficult. Health care was extremely limited as well. Overall, he said they “felt like animals in camp.”

As residents in northern Greece saw what was happening, they knew they needed to help out because they understood the area and that international organizations would be slow to accomplish things. An organization called Omnes, which means “all,” was dedicated to closing some of the camps and setting families up in apartment living in local Greek communities instead. By working with the Greek government, they were able to resettle 601 people in apartment living while they waited for their relocation decision, which Omnes lawyers also helped with. These apartments gave refugees privacy, autonomy, and safe living conditions. In addition, the housing project helped integrate refugees into the Greek community and likewise helped the Greek community become more accepting of refugees. Omnes is also working on providing refugees with sustainable jobs on organic farms. All of the products are produced without chemicals. Some of the products are shown below, including olive oil, herbs, flour, and body products.

Image Source: Caitlin S.

Image Source: Caitlin S.

Other refugee camps are now closing because of funding issues with the government, including Elpida Home, which I was able to visit during my trip. Elpida was dedicated to creating a community built by the residents and providing better living conditions for families. Elpida was set up in an abandoned warehouse, supplying residents with protection from the elements, private rooms, safe spaces and learning environments for children, and better food. The residents from Elpida are transitioning into apartment living as well.

While the number of displaced people from war and conflict is increasing, the international relief response to them should not remain in crisis mode. For those who flee danger, the places they go to should not also be dangerous for them. People deserve places that support their dignity and autonomy, not ones that make them feel like animals. People deserve the choice in where they live, even if they are fleeing their normal homes. Where they live matters. As organizations in northern Greece show, there are sustainable, healthy and safe ways to assist those who are in need of places to live.

– Caitlin Scarpelli


If you would like to learn more about or support organizations mentioned in this article, please see the following links:

Together for Better Days:



Other organizations:

Psychosocial support: Médicins du Monde:

Medical assistance: Kitrinos:

Legal assistance: Advocates Abroad:

Back to School? Here's What You Shouldn't Forget

Photo by Scott Webb on Unsplash

Photo by Scott Webb on Unsplash

Post By: Molly Esselstrom, Upstream Research Marketing Manager

Back to school means many things to parents and their children. It’s the anticipation of a new year, grade, or look. The leaves changing from green to hues of yellow and red. And a never-ending checklist of things to do before the academic calendar begins once more. However, part of the checklist that often gets ignored is health. Below are four things parents should move to the top of their list this back to school season:

1) Check Air Quality: Clean air is constantly on environmental agendas on the local and international levels. A child’s symptoms are perhaps the first indication of poor air quality, including headaches, eye/nose/throat irritation or soreness, and congestion. While these are not hard and fast rules to poor air quality, when combined with widespread symptoms and sudden onset in a community, it may be time to speak with a doctor and contact your child’s school district.

2) Check Water Quality: In recent national newswater pollution has been a scare for parents sending their children to school. Besides contacting the school district to check water toxicity levels, parents can monitor their own water if it becomes discolored (rusty, green, blue), has a metallic taste, or low water pressure is combined with prolonged discoloration.

3) Asthma Risk: While often related to poor air quality, asthma deserves a bullet point of its own. Upwards of 25 million people in the US have asthma with rates often more prevalent in children than adults. Seeking an allergist to aid in the treatment of asthma will help children once again be physically active and healthy.

4) Lead Paint: Yes, even the paint in your house or child’s school should be on your checklist. Lead-based paint is a toxic metal that can pose a serious threat in and around houses, especially to young children. While many houses built before 1978 often used lead-based paint, the best way to be sure your house is free of this materials is to hire an inspector to do a risk-assessment.

For a complete environmental Report on any address, as well as Action Steps, click the button below: 


All sources linked

Upstream Research™ original post


Lead in the Right Direction

The following is the second in our Guest Blog series from a Rhode Island mother of three who is concerned about the environmental health of her area. 

As hard as it was to watch the MisLEAD: America's Secret Epidemic documentary, it is what everyone should see; especially every mother. This documentary is the embodiment of raw truth and was hard for me to watch because of how much I could relate it to my own experience with lead exposure. 

In the film, Tamara (the filmmaker and star), talks about the affects lead has had on her family and how preventable it can/should be. It broke my heart to see her son who was poisoned at a young age talk on film about the struggles he faces as a result of the poisoning. How preventable his struggles have been! 

Then my sadness turned into rage because of the lack of knowledge mothers – and everyone else – have about lead. The smallest amount of lead causes permanent brain damage. Yes! Brain damage, like going head first through a windshield. This example from the film stood out to me. I'll reiterate: lead is so toxic that the damages of its poison are compared to going headfirst through a car windshield.

Why isn't this breaking news? 

Why aren't companies practicing lead-safe procedures? Why are some products (consumer products that often include children's toys) still being made with lead as an ingredient? Why isn't lead testing more important, more urgent? And more importantly why are the dangers of lead not expressed to mothers as a part of "baby-proofing" your home?

When I was pregnant, lead in my home was never brought up. Yes, I had several lab tests done because of the nature of being pregnant but I my opinion I should have been educated on this subject. Along with lactating or child birth classes, mothers (and all parents!) should be offered a class that teaches us how to lead-proof our homes, test our homes, buy lead-free products, etc. And, if our home tests positive, we should be taught ways to make the environment safe for the newborn. 

In reality before this film, before I even heard about Upstream Reports, I wasn't worried about lead. The reason? I wasn't educated. I thought "well my kids aren't eating paint chips, licking the walls, or chewing on window sills" so I was golden. The truth to the matter is, you don't know if you're exposed until you test. Now I've learned that playgrounds could be contaminated, advertised lead-free products use the legal level (which is still unsafe), and daycares could be exposing my child.

After watching this film I was more aware, more educated, and more cautious. I ask the right questions at daycare, observe the inside and outside when my kids play to see if it's safe, I'm more cautious when buying that cutely painted toy at the dollar store, and I test my home. I have tested my home and it has came back with lead positive in the old kitchen sink and the kitchen wall. I knew to test and I took proactive action and covered the wall and use a bucket in sink. I plan on epoxying the sink soon as well. Without this knowledge I wouldn't have known! 

Mothers when this film comes out, watch it please. Be proactive and protect your children from the hidden dangers of lead!

Post by Lauren M. 

Watch the trailer below: 



If you are a parent of young children and have stories about lead or other environmental risk, please email your stories to 

The Mom Test

The following is the first in our Guest Blog series from a Rhode Island mother of three who is concerned about the environmental health of her area. 

Over these past months I have learned about lead. What it is, where to find it, and how toxic it truly is! The fact that I didn't know anything about it before is a travesty. I wonder why it isn't talked about more, why it seems like hidden information. The truth is that, yes, it's 2017 but water still has lead in it, most housing in my city still contains lead in the walls, and products that we buy still use it as an ingredient. Lead is in way more places than we think. 

As most moms have, I have heard these phrases repeatedly: "Don't let your kids chew on windowsills," or " Don't let them lick the walls!" But what the phrases should be are: "Test your water," or "Test the walls for lead exposure!" Why aren't mothers being told this? 

Lead exposure is a serious deal and being a mother of three children the severity is tripled. I have tested my water and I was curious about the walls due to the fact that my apartment was built in the 1920s. 

Last Monday I took it upon my proactive motherly-self to test the walls just to feed my suspicions. After dropping my kiddos off at daycare I drove right to Walmart hoping to find the test swabs to test the paint. Surprisingly, they told me that they did not have them in-store, only online. This news was mind-blowing to me! These swabs should be accessible in every shopping market. So, then I drove to Lowes and, thankfully, they had the swabs. The swabs were $10 for two Q-tip sized swabs. $10! Again I was shocked at the price. For me to test every wall in my apartment I would have to buy more than 10 swabs, totaling $100. Being a single mom $100 is food for the week, clothes for the summer, or gas to bring my kids to daycare. So, I bought a pack of two and swabbed the wall that was most suspicious and, instantly, the swabs was pink – a clear indication of lead. 

How the test works:

Open the swabs up and take them out. The packaging says to crush the back and the front where A and B are printed. After crushing these places you shake the swab and squeeze A as you rub the surface of choice (in my case, the wall pictured below). If lead is present in the surface, the swab will turn a bright pink color and if none is present it will stay orange – the liquid in the test reacting with lead immediately. 

After rubbing the wall and getting a positive read I felt instantly anxious, worried, and helpless. I started planning my move out of my apartment (unrealistic, but a normal holy-shit reaction). If this wall has lead, have my kids been exposed? Should I call for them to be tested for lead poisoning? What do I do now? These questions bombarded my brain and I was worried about my children. After the shock subsided a feeling of strength overwhelmed me. I had to do something. These are my babies and I had to protect them! 

Being proactive is key. The best option for me was to cover the wall, conceal the toxic lead underneath and, soon after, cover it further with wall paper. 

I had a will, so I made a way! 

Post by Lauren M. 



If you are a parent of young children and have stories about lead or other environmental risk, please email your stories to 


Image from Unsplash 

Image from Unsplash 

Post By: Molly Esselstrom, Upstream Research™ Marketing Manager

According to a Wikipedia page, there are about 1,300 Superfunds sites in the United States. And these are the ones that are confirmed.

A recent article by Sharon Lerner for The Intercept, “Donald Trump’s Pick for EPA Enforcement Office Was a Lobbyist for Superfund Polluters,” is a well-researched piece focused on the contamination of Superfund sites and the negative consequences of improper cleanup.

Lerner’s piece focuses on Hoosick, NY, a small town whose water has been contaminated with PFOA (a synthetic chemical) from the nearby Superfund site that is associated with cancer and thyroid diseases. Lerner goes on to show that the contamination from the site and the corresponding ill-health of the community are closely linked and, because clean up has been “halted” in recent years, disease and cancer rates have increased.

The larger picture of fewer Superfund cleanups is startling with a domino effect of negative health consequences. To make matters worse, let’s go back to the title of Lerner’s article: “Donald Trump’s Pick for EPA Enforcement Office Was a Lobbyist for Superfund Polluters.” Susan Bodine is the new assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance but is a former lobbyist for superfund polluters. In addition to this, Albert Kelly (chair of Superfund Task Force) has reportedly no experience with environmental issues at all. Both are in charge of superfund cleanups, like the one in Hoosick, NY.

The same Wikipedia article that outlines the known Superfund sites lists them by state here. It’s important for citizens to be aware of a site’s location relative to where they live, where their children play and where they work or spend their days.

Articles like Lerner’s are helping to raise awareness and give background to a complex issue but they are one piece of the equation. It takes individuals and communities to learn about this information and become empowered to make a difference. Upstream Reports is, in part, trying to do exactly this by displaying terabytes of crucial environmental data in a readable and actionable way, even by reaching out directly to a government official responsible for the area.


The first step is, always, awareness. The second is action.

All sources linked

Upstream Research™ original post

Children at Risk

Screenshot from MSNBC piece

Screenshot from MSNBC piece

Post By: Molly Esselstrom, Upstream Research™ Marketing Manager

If you knew something was bad for your health, would you change your habits or behavior? Perhaps this is something that you eat/drink or it’s a behavior, like smoking. But what if this something bad was where you lived? More than ever, we are becoming aware that the environment can harm us – especially if it is unmonitored.

 A March 31, 2017 MSNBC piece, “Inside a ‘Super Polluter power plant,” focused on a small county in SW Indiana that is suffering from the devastating effects of the nearby power plants. MSNBC journalist Jacob Soboroff’s reporting of the Rockport Generating Station is a disturbing look at big polluters and their big consequences.

 While two men from the plant mention they are working to reduce emissions, Soboroff has to prompt them about the consideration of the public’s health in the area. Their reply? “Public health is a concern of ours” as they go on to list how they are abiding by all regulations.

 Yet the journalist sees a different side of the public health story when he waits outside a clinic and interviews a couple with a young child. Their 2-year-old had been to this same clinic for the same asthmatic issues over 50 times. Again, he’s only two. When interviewing the pediatrician, Dr. Norma Kreilein, she is visibly upset by the lack of regulations and the simultaneous ill-health of the surrounding community. Especially the children. At one point in the video, she begins to cry as she speaks about the lack of monitoring at the power plants. “They don’t have to take care of these kids,” she says.

 Unfortunately, this gap is a problem that is all too common. The first step? Monitoring. With proper reports from sites like the Rockport Generating Station, communities can be informed about what is in their air, water and soil and they can make the best decisions for the children. With accurate data, real change can begin.


Report for Rockport, IN: where the power plant is directly located

The Report shows an extremely high industrial pollution number, air pollution in the 84th percentile, 6 Superfund sites with 26 schools within 10 miles, and asthma in the 79th percentile.

Report for Washington, INwhere the pediatric office is located

The Report shows that air pollution risk is in the 84th percentile, there are 6 superfund sites nearby, 19 schools within 10 miles, in the 89th percentile for lead risk, and, perhaps most harrowing, 10 out of 1,000 children die before their first birthday (far above the average rate for infant mortality in this country).


Upstream Research™ original post

 Other resources:


Touch the Earth

From Google Images

From Google Images

Post By: Molly Esselstrom, Upstream Research™ Marketing Manager

What children learn usually stays with them into adulthood. When children learn about the environment, they become earth advocates.

Julian Lennon (yes, he's John Lennon's son) and Bart Davis recently released a children’s book called “Touch the Earth.” The book is geared toward 3-6 year old readers (and their parents of course) and is about an educational journey on a plane called the White Feather Flier. Fun fact: Julian created The White Feather Foundation for the “conservation of life” by focusing on humanitarian and environmental issues. The name is in part inspired by his father and symbolizes connectivity and peace. 

In the book, the White Feather Flier can transport readers anywhere in the world so they can help save the planet. The goal is to bring children closer to the environment and teach them to love the planet and its people. Even better? The book is interactive (not digital for a nice change) and readers are meant to ‘fly’ the plane by tilting the book to steer and zoom in as well as press buttons that have positive environmental implications in the storyline.

The book is the first in a trilogy and all proceeds will support the efforts of the White Feather Foundation.

Buy it on Amazon here.


All sources linked

Upstream Research™ original post

3/3 – Visualizing Environmental Risk: Upstream Toxicity Index

Mockup of an Upstream Report

Mockup of an Upstream Report

The power of protecting your family from environmental concerns begins with awareness and an understanding of what the environmental risk is. Upstream Research has aggregated terabytes of already-available data and put it into a web application that anyone can use to see clearly what’s in their area. These are our Upstream Reports.

And, given the recent changes in the EPA, we have included an Upstream Toxicity Index to even more seamlessly outline the risk in a given area. When someone inputs the address of their choice into the web-app, the system generates a ‘score’ on a scale of 0 to 10 that helps visualize risk in this area. For example, this sample Report in NYC gives a score of 6.3 out of 10, which is “higher than 99 percent of American neighborhoods.”

Index values of 0 or 10 represent extreme cases, and currently no locations in the U.S. have such an extreme index value.  The Upstream Toxicity Index will be updated as new data becomes available and as we refine our indexing methods.

It is important to understand the caveat we include under every Toxicity Index score:

“This risk index gives an idea of the relative risk of toxic exposure in this location by boiling down multiple toxic exposure factors into a single number. Ranging from 0 to 10, a high number means that there is some cause for concern, while a low number means that few risk factors have been uncovered. The national average is 4.1.”

And, while the environment is not the only factor of good health, it is still a factor.


Upstream does not seek to outline correlation or causation with our datasets; we simply wish to inform and empower the public. Get your own 5 free Reports by clicking the button below.

2/3 – Visualizing Environmental Risk: Lead Exposure

Image from Unsplash

Image from Unsplash

As we have talked about many times in our blog posts, lead poses a big risk to our country. Flint’s crisis was only the beginning of a conversation that should have started long before it did. Our first words on the subject should have been about prevention of lead in the water, not just eradication. Now, the fact remains that we must do something to make sure that we do not have more crises like Flint’s water.

Unfortunately, in the datasets Upstream have input since our company’s beginnings in mid 2015, we have realized that there are many areas of high lead risk – some places where it’s even higher than Flint’s. On our website, we have added a two tabs to our risk mapLead Risk Exposure and Children Under 5 – that people can use to track their exposure. Lead Risk Exposure is self-explanatory and can be used to see in what percentile of risk someone’s area is. The Children Under 5 tab speaks to our mission of fighting for children’s environmental rights and outlines how many children in a given area are at a high risk for lead exposure.

The main point of these tabs on our risk map is to make people aware of their personal environment – with knowledge leading to empowerment.

Upstream does not seek to outline correlation or causation with our datasets; we simply wish to inform and empower the public. Get your own 5 free Reports by clicking the button below.

1/3 – Visualizing Environmental Risk: Chlorpyrifos

Image from Unsplash

Image from Unsplash

After the EPA announced the reversal of its decision to ban the harmful pesticide, Chlorpyrifos, Upstream Research took action. Chlorpyrifos is a toxic pesticide that attacks the nervous systems of insects and humans and is especially harmful to young children and pregnant women. The below excerpt from the National Pesticide Information Center outlines its harm:

“Researchers studied the blood of women who were exposed to chlorpyrifos and the blood of their children from birth for three years. Children who had chlorpyrifos in their blood had more developmental delays and disorders than children who did not have chlorpyrifos in their blood. Exposed children also had more attention deficit disorders and hyperactivity disorders.”

However, despite these findings the EPA still has decided not to ban the pesticide. Upon learning of their reversal, our team at Upstream Research worked to add a new dataset into Upstream Reports – presence of chlorpyrifos. Our website’s risk map now also includes an easily-searchable section on the agricultural use of the pesticide, which may be useful to people trying to find out if they or their children are at risk.

Upstream does not seek to outline correlation or causation with our datasets; we simply wish to inform and empower the public. Get your own 5 free Reports by clicking the button below.

Where You Live Matters

It’s the tagline to our company, but where you live truly matters to your health. In some studies, life expectancy in certain areas is linked to the environmental concerns.

In fact, a case study titled “Life Expectancy and the Environment” from 2009 by Fabio Mariani et. al has the following abstract:

“We present an OLG model in which life expectancy and environmental quality dynamics are jointly determined. Agents may invest in environmental care, depending on how much they expect to live. In turn, environmental conditions affect life expectancy. As a result, our model produces a positive correlation between longevity and environmental quality, both in the long run and along the transition path. Eventually, multiple equilibria may also arise: some countries might be caught in a low-life-expectancy / low-environmental-quality trap. This outcome is consistent with stylized facts relating life expectancy and environmental performance measures. We also discuss the welfare and policy implications of the intergenerational externalities generated by individual choices. Finally, we show that our results are robust to the introduction of growth dynamics based on physical or human capital accumulation. “

Below are 5 cities with the lowest life expectancy in the U.S with the corresponding Upstream Report. And 5 cities with the highest life expectancy. We do not seek to make direct correlation, simply demonstrate that environmental risks play a role in health.

Lowest Life Expectancy:

1. Gadsden, Alabama - 72.9 years

2. Beckley, West Virginia - 73.4 years

3. Florence, South Carolina - 73.8 years

4. Hammond, Louisiana - 73.9 years

5. Columbus, Georgia - 74.4 years

Highest Life Expectancy: 

1. Naples, Florida - 83.5

2. Sunnyvale, California - 83.3

3. Corvallis, Oregon - 82.1

4. Norwalk, Connecticut - 82.1

5. Ames, Iowa - 82.0