Categories
Toxic Tuesdays

Acrylamide

Toxic Tuesdays

CHEJ highlights several toxic chemicals and the communities fighting to keep their citizens safe from harm.

Acrylamide

Acrylamide is a clear, odorless chemical. It has many industrial uses, including treating waste water
discharge from water treatment plants. It is also used in the production of industrial products like dyes,
paper pulp, grout, plastics, and construction materials. Many consumer products are also produced
using acrylamide, such as contact lenses, cosmetics, fabrics, textiles, and sugar. When acrylamide enters
the environment, people are most likely to be exposed to it by drinking contaminated water. Acrylamide
can enter drinking water through the water treatment process or through improper disposal from
industrial facilities that use it to manufacture products.

Exposure to acrylamide can have serious effects on the brain, causing numbness in the hands and feet,
disorientation, loss of balance, and muscle weakness. Skin contact with acrylamide can cause irritation,
dermatitis, and nerve damage. Studies in laboratory animals have found that acrylamide exposure can
also cause defects in the male reproductive system, but it is unknown if it has the same effects in
humans. Based on studies in laboratory animals, the US Environmental Protection Agency classifies
acrylamide as probably causing cancer in humans. The International Agency for Research on Cancer
classifies it as likely causing cancer in humans.

In 2002, acrylamide was discovered to form when foods rich in starch are grilled, baked, or fried above
250°F. This includes foods like potato chips, French fries, and breakfast cereals. The resulting acrylamide
can be found in the dark brown or burnt areas of these foods. Since this discovery, many regulatory and
public health agencies across the world have called for more research into whether this dietary
exposure to acrylamide increases the risk for cancer. The American Cancer Society says that based on
existing studies in humans, dietary acrylamide exposure is unlikely to be linked to increased cancer risk.
However, the ACS says that more research on this topic is needed to fully know if dietary acrylamide
poses a cancer risk. This research will be crucial in understanding how widespread cancerous acrylamide
exposure may be.

Learn about more toxics

Benzidine

Pyrethrins are a class of naturally occurring compounds derived from chrysanthemum flowers. They have been

Read More »
Categories
Toxic Tuesdays

Styrene

Toxic Tuesdays

CHEJ highlights several toxic chemicals and the communities fighting to keep their citizens safe from harm.

Styrene

Styrene is a chemical compound that can be linked together with itself or other compounds to create strong, flexible polymers that make up plastics, rubbers, and resins. Many products such as foodware containers, printer toner, shoes, plastic pipes, carpeting, fiberglass insulation, and automobile parts contain styrene.

Styrene can enter the air, water, and soil through manufacturing and disposal of styrene-containing products. Styrene is a colorless liquid but it readily evaporates, so a large portion of styrene that enters water or soil ends up in the air. While manufacturing and disposal can cause exposure, most people are exposed to styrene through their use of styrene-containing products.  For example, people inhale it indoors because styrene-containing building materials and printers release styrene vapors. In addition, the styrene in foodware containers can migrate into the food they hold, causing people to ingest styrene.

Once inhaled or ingested, styrene can have many adverse effects on the body. Many of these effects are in the brain, such as impaired vision, impaired hearing, loss of coordination, slowed reaction time, fatigue, and difficulty concentrating. Studies in laboratory animals have found that styrene exposure can also cause damage to the liver, though it is unknown if it has this effect in humans. The US Department of Health and Human Services classifies styrene as being reasonably anticipated to cause cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies styrene as probably causing cancer. The pervasiveness of styrene-containing plastics in consumer and industrial products makes these adverse health effects particularly concerning. Decreasing the reliance on plastics – through government regulation, scientific innovation, and consumer education – would help protect people from styrene exposure and its associated health effects.

Learn about more toxics

Benzidine

Pyrethrins are a class of naturally occurring compounds derived from chrysanthemum flowers. They have been

Read More »
Categories
Toxic Tuesdays

Linking Exposure and Health Outcomes

Toxic Tuesdays

CHEJ highlights several toxic chemicals and the communities fighting to keep their citizens safe from harm.

Linking Exposure and Health Outcomes

One of the hardest things for a public health scientist to do is to link a specific health problem that a person is suffering from to a specific exposure to a toxic chemical(s). People who have been exposed to toxic chemicals, whether they lived at Love Canal, NY, Flint, MI or East Palestine, OH, want to know if their cancer, diabetes or other illness was caused by exposure to toxic chemicals. This is a reasonable question for people to ask, and it is one we hear all the time from people in the communities we work with. Unfortunately, the answer is not so clear. 

The problem is that scientists know very little about how and why the body responds to toxic chemicals the way it does. While we know a great deal about the mechanism of action for some chemicals such as dioxin and lead, we do not know what is going to happen to an individual who is exposed to 5 parts per trillion (ppt) of dioxin in their food. Or to a child who eats lead paint chips for 3 months. In some cases, scientists can predict what symptoms to expect, but it is rare that they can confidently link specific health outcomes to specific exposures even in obvious situations like the drinking water disaster in Flint, MI.

In fact, there are only two chemicals – asbestos and vinyl chloride – out of the more than 80,000 chemicals in use today, that scientists have been able to clearly link between exposure and specific health problems. In the case of asbestos, if you were exposed to asbestos in the shipping industry and develop a rare cancer of the outer lining of the lungs called mesothelioma, scientists are 99% confident (as close to certain as one can get) that the asbestos caused your lung cancer. In the case of vinyl chloride, if you were exposed to vinyl chloride in a PVC manufacturing plant and develop a rare cancer of the liver called angiosarcoma, scientists are 99% confident that the vinyl chloride caused your liver cancer. In both cases, it was an observant clinician who noticed that the people with these rare cancers all worked at the same place and had similar exposures.   

There are several factors that determine what happens when a person is exposed to chemicals. These factors include an individual’s susceptibility (this varies greatly from person to person), how long exposures occur, how many chemicals a person is exposed to, the concentration of these chemicals, and the toxicity of the chemicals. Add in the reality that people are often exposed to more than one chemical at a time and often repeatedly over time, then the certainty over what is known becomes significantly less. Even if you knew all these factors (which is rare), it is still almost impossible to predict what will happen when a person is exposed. We’ve touched on many of these factors in previous issues of Toxic Tuesday.

In addition, there is no way to fingerprint an exposure to tie it to a specific health outcome. And many symptoms or diseases are not specific to a particular chemical. In most instances, there can be many causes of the symptoms that people are having. And few physicians have experience with exposure to toxic chemicals. Meaning they cannot distinguish whether the headache you are suffering from resulted from the chemicals you were exposed to or whether you had a hard day at work. Often this inexperience leads to blaming the victim for their situation rather than looking at chemicals as a possible explanation. Another problem is determining what the “normal” rate of illness or disease is in a community. Scientists simply cannot decide what is normal. This is in large part because of the many uncertainties already discussed.

Despite the many scientific uncertainties, linking cause and effect has become the standard to achieve before government will take action to address a pollution problem or protect a  community. Over the years, this has meant endless studies and years of research gathering data that has resulted in little or no action on the part of government to protect people and communities exposed to toxic chemicals. This has been the government’s approach since before Love Canal more than 40 years ago. This is what is happening now in East Palestine, OH. This is no longer reasonable nor acceptable.

It is time to acknowledge that scientists do not know very much about how or why exposure to toxic chemicals, especially at low-level mixtures, leads to adverse health outcomes. Instead of trying to link cause and effect, which is virtually impossible to achieve because of the lack of information and understanding, it is time to consider whether there is enough information and evidence about exposure and adverse health problems in a community to take action to protect people exposed to toxic chemicals.

Learn about more toxics

Benzidine

Pyrethrins are a class of naturally occurring compounds derived from chrysanthemum flowers. They have been

Read More »
Categories
Toxic Tuesdays

How the Duration of Exposure Affects Toxicity

Toxic Tuesdays

CHEJ highlights several toxic chemicals and the communities fighting to keep their citizens safe from harm.

How the Duration of Exposure Affects Toxicity

CHEJ has previously written about the importance of considering multiple chemical exposures when assessing the toxicity of exposure to toxic chemicals. In addition, it is also important to consider the duration of exposure. How long was a person exposed? What was the concentration of the substance(s) during this period of time are critical to truly understanding the cumulative effects that a person has suffered? Without this information, we can only partially understand the risks of exposure to toxic chemicals. 

Yet when evaluating whether exposures to toxic chemicals pose risks to human health, the government’s approach is usually very narrow: it assumes there is a single chemical from a single source at a single point in time with a single exposure pathway causing a single health effect. This approach makes risk assessment more feasible and understandable, but it does not reflect the reality of our lives.

In reality, we are exposed to multiple chemicals at a time and exposures can happen over a long period of time. This means that considering the potential effects of a single exposure to a single chemical isn’t sufficient for evaluating public health risks. We need to include cumulative risks that account for both multiple chemical exposures and exposure over time in order to begin to understand the risks to public health. But incorporating these parameters into a risk assessment poses significant new challenges that  requires more estimates and generates additional uncertainty than the traditional risk assessment approach.

In many cases, exposure assessments assume that exposure to a chemical happens in a single instant in time. In some cases – like cancer risk – EPA assumes that risk is proportional to the lifetime dose. In general, longer exposure means greater risk, but the relationship between duration of exposure and health risk is complicated. The risk depends on the effects an exposure has on the body and the body’s response to it. In some cases, the body may adapt to exposure and the threat over time may be less than additive. In other cases, the body may become more sensitive and the threat over time may be more than additive. Repeated exposure can also influence health risk: past exposure to some chemicals can make us more vulnerable to subsequent exposure. And how do you consider the effects caused by exposure to multiple chemicals that target the same organ in the body can cause more damage than exposure to any of those chemicals individually?

The effect of exposure over time is important to consider in risk assessments, but agencies like EPA and ATSDR do not have comprehensive frameworks for how to assess this cumulative risk. Part of the reason for this is a lack of data. The guideline values we use to evaluate risks are driven by data generated from exposures to a single chemical for a defined period of time. For common chemicals and chemical mixtures that people are exposed to, we need to know how different concentrations and durations of exposure affect health. There is a need for more scientific study on how exposures to chemicals over long periods of time can impact our risk for adverse health effects. Once people have been exposed to chemicals, we also need better tools to measure their past exposure so it can be accounted for in risk assessments.

While more research and data is crucial, there will always be uncertainty in science and data, and we cannot let uncertainty stop us from taking action to protect health. In addition to more scientific study, we need clearer guidelines from federal agencies regarding how to consider cumulative risk – both from multiple chemical exposures and exposures over time – in evaluating if an environmental hazard is a threat to human health. We also need to acknowledge how poor the tools we have are at considering cumulative risks caused by exposures to multiple chemicals over time.

Learn about more toxics

Benzidine

Pyrethrins are a class of naturally occurring compounds derived from chrysanthemum flowers. They have been

Read More »
Categories
Toxic Tuesdays

1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-D)

Toxic Tuesdays

CHEJ highlights several toxic chemicals and the communities fighting to keep their citizens safe from harm.

1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-D)

1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-D) – also called ethylene dichloride – is a clear, oily liquid with a sweet smell that is man-made and not found in nature. It is used in the production of plastic and vinyl products like polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes, upholstery, automobile parts, and housewares. It is also added to the leaded gasoline used in airplanes and racecars. 1,2-D was previously used in some household products like carpet cleaners, but most of these products are discontinued. 1,2-D can enter the environment during its production, disposal, or use. It can enter the water and soil, but because it is volatile (meaning it readily evaporates), most 1,2-D ends up in the air. Once in the air, it can persist for many months and travel long distances.

Because most 1,2-D in the environment ends up in the air, people are most likely to be exposed to it by breathing contaminated air. Exposure can cause damage to many organ systems: brain dysfunction such as nausea and blurred vision; gastrointestinal dysfunction such as vomiting, gastritis, and colitis; respiratory dysfunction such as difficulty breathing and bronchitis; immune system dysfunction such as decreased ability to fight infection and decreased blood clotting; liver damage; and kidney damage. In extreme cases, exposure can cause heart attack and death. In studies of laboratory animals, exposure also caused lung, liver, brain, and reproductive cancers. Based on this research, the US Environmental Protection Agency has determined that 1,2-D probably causes cancer in humans.

1,2-D is known to be a very dangerous chemical with multiple harmful effects on human health. It is a positive development that household products with 1,2-D are largely discontinued. However, its continued use in products like PVC pipes and leaded gasoline mean that 1,2-D and its threats to human health remain pervasive in both household and industrial environments.

Learn about more toxics

Benzidine

Pyrethrins are a class of naturally occurring compounds derived from chrysanthemum flowers. They have been

Read More »
Categories
Backyard Talk Homepage

A Look Back on CHEJ’s PVC-Free Program

Sam Suds and the Case of PVC: The Poison Plastic

By Gregory Kolen II.

In the early 2000s, CHEJ identified PVC or polyvinyl chloride, a common plastic material used in school supplies, as a significant source of health risks for children. PVC contains toxic chemicals that can cause serious health problems, such as cancer and hormone disruption. CHEJ launched the PVC-Free schools campaign, led by Mike Schade, to raise awareness among parents, teachers, and school administrators about the dangers of PVC and to encourage schools to switch to safer alternatives. The program’s approach was a mixture of advocacy and education, aiming to empower communities to take action and create change.

The PVC-Free campaign was successful in building a large grassroots network of parents, teachers, and advocates who shared the vision of a healthier and safer school environment for children. CHEJ provided free resources and training to help schools assess their PVC use and find safer alternatives. Moreover, the program put pressure on major companies to reduce or eliminate their use of PVC in products through consumer campaigns and lobbying. 

Because of the success of the PVC-Free schools campaign, many students attend schools that have eliminated PVC materials or products. Additionally, the program has increased public awareness of the risks associated with PVC, prompting people to take safety measures in their homes as well. This created a ripple effect on the industry, encouraging schools’ suppliers to find alternatives to PVC, thereby, reducing the overall demand for PVC.

The PVC-Free schools program is just one of the many initiatives that CHEJ has undertaken to address environmental health and justice issues. One in a long history of advocating for vulnerable communities and neighborhoods affected by environmental pollution and hazards, supporting communities in the fight against toxic chemicals and influencing policies on environmental health regulations.

CHEJ’s PVC-Free safe schools program has effectively raised awareness of the dangers of PVC and paved the way for safer alternatives. The success of this campaign has demonstrated the power of community-led efforts to create change and protect children’s health. As we look forward, it’s essential to continue advocating and educating the public to minimize exposure to toxic chemicals. 

Categories
Backyard Talk Homepage

Keep Your Family Safe: Top 5 Toxics to Avoid When Going Back to School Shopping

School supplies on blackboard background

By Gregory Kolen II.

As the return to school approaches, parents and children alike are gearing up for a busy shopping season. While it can be fun to get new school supplies, clothes, and accessories, it’s essential to keep health and safety in mind. Unfortunately, many common products sold for school use contain harmful toxins that can jeopardize your family’s well-being. Here are the top 5 toxics to avoid when shopping for back to school items.

  1. Phthalates – These chemicals are commonly found in plastic-based products like backpacks, lunch boxes, and water bottles. While they may help the products last longer, they also interfere with the body’s endocrine system and can cause hormone imbalances. Instead, look for products made with natural or organic materials.
  2. Flame retardants – These chemicals are often added to items such as bedding, carpets, and school uniforms to prevent fire. Unfortunately, they can have serious health risks, including endocrine disruption and developmental problems. To avoid them, look for products labeled as flame-retardant-free.
  3. Lead – Lead can be found in older school supplies such as ink and painted pencils. Be sure to check each item for lead paint or materials. If possible, choose newer products with quality markings and certifications.
  4. Formaldehyde – Commonly used as a preservative and adhesive, formaldehyde can cause respiratory irritation, headaches, and even cancer. It is often used in furniture, clothing, and classroom supplies. To avoid it, look for products labeled as formaldehyde-free or made from natural materials like solid wood and cotton.
  5. Bisphenol A (BPA) – BPA is another chemical commonly found in plastic items like water bottles, lunch boxes, and food containers. It can disrupt the endocrine system and lead to developmental problems in children. Look for BPA-free products made of glass or stainless steel instead.

Keeping your family safe and healthy while shopping for back to school is essential. By avoiding harmful toxins such as phthalates, flame retardants, lead, formaldehyde, and Bisphenol A, you can be more confident in your school supplies purchase. Look for natural, organic, and high-quality products, and always read labels and certifications to ensure you’re getting the safest option. Shop smart and start the new school year off right!

Categories
Homepage Water News

Environmentalists take petrochemical giant Formosa to court over plastics pollution

For years, Diane Wilson has tried to get Formosa Plastics Corp. to stop discharging plastic pellets from its sprawling petrochemical complex on the Central Texas coast. This week, she’s getting her day in court. Read more ...

Categories
Backyard Talk

FIGO Pushes Against Toxic Environmental Chemicals and Champions Environmental Justice

“Exposure to toxic environmental chemicals during pregnancy and breastfeeding is ubiquitous and is a threat to healthy human reproduction.”

That’s a pretty direct and bold statement. It is also a statement that outlines the stance of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) in a report recently published in the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Suffice it to say it is not sugar coated.

The report, titled “International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicals” and authored by experts from the US, UK and Canada, makes a strong argument that prenatal exposures to toxic chemicals in the environment such as pesticides, plastics and metals are strongly related to health problems that develop throughout the lifespan of affected individuals. This means that problems like fertility issues, stillbirths, miscarriages, cancer, and attention problems are all strongly associated with exposure to unwanted chemicals during gestation and early child development.

This information is nothing new – the literature on the topic of cumulative chemical exposures during childhood development is comprehensive. But it is a new and powerful statement coming from an organization that is the leading global voice of reproductive health professionals in over 125 countries/territories.

Gian Carlo Di Renzo, leading author of the report, put it quite eloquently: “We are drowning our world in untested and unsafe chemicals and the price we are paying in terms of our reproductive health is of serious concern”. These chemicals account for tremendous losses. According to the report, ambient and household air pollution results in at least 7 million deaths a year, costs of pesticide poisoning in the Sub-Saharan region are estimated to be $66 billion, costs attributable to exposure to only a select few endocrine-disrupting chemicals was conservatively estimated to be on average €157 billion per year… the statistics go on an on.

FIGO takes a strong stance against toxic chemicals, offering health professionals four recommendations: “advocate for policies to prevent exposure to toxic environmental chemicals, work to ensure a healthy food system for all, make environmental health part of health care, and champion environmental justice.” These suggestions are in line with CHEJ’s mission and vision, and we congratulate FIGO for developing and actively pursuing this policy stance

Categories
Backyard Talk

The End is Coming – Market for Phthalates Continues to Shrink

Last month, the nation’s third largest home improvement chain – Menards – agreed to phase out the use of phthalates in its vinyl flooring by the end of the year. In a statement in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Menards spokesperson Jeff Abbot said, “We are still aware of the phthalate concern and have been working diligently with our vendors to eliminate any flooring products that contain phthalates.” Menards, which follows the lead of Home Depot and Lowes, has roughly 285 stores in 14 states.

This announcement follows a report by the Health Building Network (HBN) that the world’s largest flooring manufacturers, Mohawk and Tarkett, are also phasing out the use of phthalate plasticizers. Rochelle Routman, VP of sustainability for Mohawk, told HBN that it “long ago” phased out the use of ortho-phthalates in all the vinyl floors that it manufacturers, and is working to eliminate them from third party manufactured floors. HBN reported in April that Tarkett, the world’s second largest flooring company, has phased out the intentional addition of phthalates to its flooring.

The decisions by these major retailers and by global manufacturing companies portends an end to the use of phthalates in consumer products. Consumers simply do not want to take risks, especially with their children, that they can avoid.

The August 2015 issue of Consumer Reports makes clear what parents should do if they have vinyl flooring in their home – regularly mop vinyl floors that contain phthalates and wash toddlers’ hands, especially if children crawl on the floors. Consumers Union tested 17 vinyl floors and found small amounts of phthalates on the surface layers – enough however to warrant action by parents. “Although phthalate levels are very low, we recommend that parents of toddlers wet-mop often and wash those little hands after they’ve been crawling on a vinyl floor,” it reports. Frequent cleaning could help remove dust particles which are known to accumulate phthalates commonly used in these floorings.

Phthalates migrate from PVC, can accumulate in people’s bodies, and can cause developmental harm. Some phthalates are carcinogens.

Rather than worry about moping the floor and washing your children’s hands, most parents want nothing to do with vinyl flooring. The risks are too great and the market forces are following this lead.