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.

Read about our authors.


FEED

 Subscribe in a Reader

Subscribe by Email


Mixed Greens
An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.


TWITTER UPDATES

    TIPS

    Did we miss something? Email Enviroblg.


    BLOGROLL


    STAY CONNECTED

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


    Consumers to FDA: Be there or be square

    Relax, it's baby safety month

    Toxic cosmetics in teenage girls


    FEATURED

    Elected officials MIA; Instead Wal-Mart and Burger King protecting your health

    Back to school: Are we ready? Are we non-toxic?

    Fire retardants: Disproportionate risk to small children

    Lead: Celebrate its ban, but don't cross it off your list

    Cheatsheet: Bisphenol A

    7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs



    Ask EWG

    What can I do about fluoride in my water?

    What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?

    What is "fragrance"?

    Which infant formula is best?

    Are stainless steel water bottles safe?

    Is mineral-based makeup safer?


    SEARCH


    ARCHIVE

    « Eco-friendly pest control | Main | Scared into action: avoid vampire currents »

    California rocket fuel standards too weak

    By Matthew

    October 30, 2006

    California is years behind schedule in setting safety standards for rocket fuel waste in drinking water, and now there's evidence that the proposed standard is too weak to protect pregnant women and their unborn babies. A new study by the Centers for Disease Control found that drinking water with just 5 parts per billion of perchlorate could disrupt thyroid hormones in women of childbearing age, and for 1 in 10 the condition would be serious enough that they'd need treatment to protect their babies from IQ and developmental deficits. At California's proposed standard of 6 ppb, that means 272,000 women would need treatment. If the same standard was applied nationwide, more than 2.2 million women would be at increased risk.

    Environmental Working Group analysis [ Link ]

    « Eco-friendly pest control |