Health effects of environmental hazards can be seen firsthand in Las Vegas

Until now, it never occurred to us that we might feel compelled to defend the Environmental Protection Agency and its mission. We are both mothers of young children, nurses and, of course, hopelessly busy trying to manage our lives.

However, the prospective cuts at the EPA alarm us and have motivated us to try to bring awareness to this issue, in hopes of changing its trajectory. Our concern is not only for the health of our environment, but also for the physical health of our community and generations of Nevadans to come.

The Trump administration has proposed a “back-to-basics” approach to funding the critical duties of the EPA. But with over $2 billion in budget cuts, this approach may be interpreted, instead, as bare-bones funding. Certain EPA-funded programs and environmental research projects will be dismantled entirely, including one designed to protect Americans from radon and provide incentives to use energy efficient appliances.

These programs have helped inch our way to a more environmentally conscious future, now threatened with the current administration’s shortsighted agenda.

The EPA funds many programs that directly benefit the health and productivity of Nevadans. The work of the EPA creates $82 million in health benefits for the state, including a decrease in pediatric visits to the emergency room related to acute asthma attacks.

The EPA also leads protective programs and sets safety standards for toxic-waste management, such as that surrounding Yucca Mountain. Although regulations are not always desirable, without them large companies are less accountable for the disposal of toxic waste. In addition, the EPA helps to insure continuity between states lines, as pollution knows no boundaries. What we legislate on a state level in Nevada will not make much difference if what is being legislated by our neighboring states is not held to the same standard.

Furthermore, the EPA contributes to the research and mitigation of climate-related concerns, such as rising temperatures, wildfires, devastating superstorms and compromised water supply, which are all of critical importance to Nevadans and the nation as a whole.

The proposed budget cuts to the EPA slash the agency’s budget by one-third, which could have significant, negative impacts on the health of our community. This means defunding access to things like radon meters and testing kits, as well as regulation of mercury levels.

Funding for clean-air regulation would be reduced by 24 percent. Often, air pollution and exposure to radon (a natural byproduct of uranium), are linked to the mutations that can create malignant lung tumors, and according to the American Cancer Society, radon exposure is the second-leading cause of lung cancer.

Air pollution in Nevada is linked to increased asthma attacks, birth defects, respiratory and cardiovascular disease as well. Poor drinking water is a threat to us all, and as with any environmental impacts, our children, elderly, and disenfranchised populations will bear the brunt. It is no surprise that environmental protections promote healthier families and healthier communities.

Personally, our experience in the nursing profession has given us an intimate perspective into environmental-related health consequences. We see increases in emergency room visits and hospital admissions corresponding with low air-quality days.

When the air quality is poor, some patients cancel important treatment visits to stay home. Downwind smoke or increased smog constricts breathing, and everyday activities become impossible tasks — even those needed to treat chronic or terminal illness.

Our cancer patients often have serious comorbidities such as COPD and heart disease; these conditions are exacerbated by polluted air and excessive heat. Excessive heat leads to dehydration in this patient population, which in turn leads to an increase in hospitalization.

To be clear, these environmental concerns affect the entire community, not just our patients. Within our own families, we have felt the effects of air pollution and climate change — asthma, allergies, late nights awake with children struggling to breathe and missed days of work causing the inevitable economic stress on the family. Fueled by our devotion to our children, our health care training and our dedication to the betterment of health, for both our patients and our community, we stand fervently against the proposed budget cuts to the EPA.

Somehow, environmental and human health have become entangled in party lines. The health and well-being of our community is not a partisan issue. Clean air and clean water are basic human rights, and it is imperative that we begin to take ownership as a community of this idea, in order to continue to further sound legislation that meets the environmental and health needs of our most vulnerable populations.

The money allocated to the EPA is just a small drop in the bucket of the overall federal budget. The EPA budget accounts for less than 1 percent of total government spending. Are these cuts really worth endangering the health and welfare of millions of Americans?

We must speak out against the EPA budget cuts to protect our health from the devastations of toxic air, toxic water and unmitigated climate change.

Lisa Abrahime, RN, BSN, OCN, has eight years of nursing experience. Laura Beauregard, RN, OCN, has five years of experience.