ABOUT

Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Enviroblog is a project of EWG Action Fund. (More. . .)

FEED

 Subscribe in a Reader

Subscribe by Email

An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.

TWITTER UPDATES

TIPS

Did we miss something? Email Amanda.

BLOGROLL

STAY CONNECTED

Get our monthly eNewsletter, action alerts, & environmental tips. [Privacy policy, About EWG]

FEATURED

BPA in your body: How to minimize your exposure

Caution: These 7 household items may feminize baby boys

BPA in infant formula: This is not a call to panic

Cheatsheet: Bisphenol A

7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs

Your BPA questions, answered

Ask EWG

What is "fragrance"?

Which infant formula is best?

Is there eco-friendly jewelry?

Are stainless steel water bottles safe?

Is mineral-based makeup safer?

SEARCH

ARCHIVE

select month June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004

Archive

January 6, 2006

Congress Blocks Ideologues From Health Agencies

Maybe President Bush still had a New Year’s hangover when he signed this particular appropriations bill into law on January 3rd. The bill funding the Health and Human Services Agency contained a tiny rider (compliments of Sen. Durbin of Ill.) that means agencies like the FDA, NIH, and CDC may actually get back to using science to protect public health. The rider says that political ideology can’t be a hiring criteria, and that sins of scientific omission and commission in the service of political goals will not be tolerated. The Union of Concerned Scientists breaks the news here.

January 4, 2006

FDA: We Don't Know What's in Tuna Cans

Apparently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relies on the same sources of information as the general public to learn what's in popular foods: the newspaper. Just two weeks after the Chicago Tribune ran a three-part series on mercury in seafood (including findings in locally purchased fish), top FDA mercury official David Acheson admitted that the FDA didn't know that canned light tuna can contain yellowfin tuna, which is especially high in toxic mercury.

The heavy metal mercury gets into our bodies from seafood consumption and harms the brains of developing children and babies. Public health groups have long urged the FDA to provide clear warnings to women of childbearing age about how much seafood they can safely eat.

The Tribune reports: "We will definitely look at it through our office of seafood and determine whether there is something that requires further pursuit," Acheson said. He could not say exactly what the investigation would entail or whether the agency would conduct additional testing of canned tuna.

Environmental Working Group researchers exposed the FDA's coverup of their own focus group results in which Agency scientists warned women about mercury in tuna. To see how much tuna you can safely eat to keep your level of mercury at a safe level, use EWG's tuna calculator: http://www.ewg.org/issues/mercury/20031209/calculator.php

To read EWG's research, please visit http://www.ewg.org/issues/siteindex/issues.php?issueid=5010.

« December 2005 | Main | February 2006 »