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
An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.
TIPS
Did we miss something? Email Amanda.
BLOGROLL
STAY CONNECTED
Get our monthly eNewsletter, action alerts, & environmental tips. [Privacy policy, About EWG]
Perverse ethanol incentives breed more gas-guzzlers
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
7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs
Ask EWG
Is there eco-friendly jewelry?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
SEARCH
Archive
March 30, 2007
The rising cost of breathing
Consumer Affairs reports the new availability of environmentally sensitive asthma medication, prompting an FDA mandate to discontinue the production of traditional Albuterol inhalers by 2008. Up until now, these inhalers used ozone-depleting CFCs as a propellant, but avoided prohibition under the Montreal Protocol due to medical necessity. The new inhalers use a more benign propellant known as hydroflouroalkane (HFA), but are expected to cost an average of $26 more per prescription and have a significantly reduced shelf life. As one of the most common drugs prescribed in the United States, Americans are expected to spend an additional $1.2 billion per year on the new inhalers.
Meanwhile, there is mounting evidence that asthma rates increase with exposure to environmental pollutants, such as ground-level ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, lead, and particulate matter. In the United States, much of this outdoor pollution comes from automotive emissions, coal-fired power plants, and other forms of carbon combustion.
According to a report by the Asthma Regional Council, asthma rates have increased in the past decade, costing an estimated $16 billion per year in medical costs and lost productivity. New England states fare worst in the nation; 14% of New England children have been diagnosed with asthma at some point during their lives.
I happen to fall within that 14 percent. While growing up in the state of Maine, I too developed mild asthma at the age of eleven. While there is no conclusive research on the cause of Maine’s mysteriously high asthma rate, some sources suggest it may be influenced by prevailing winds that blow coal plant pollutants from Mid-western states over to the eastern border.
It’s enough to make me wonder whether or not my personal health has been compromised for the sake of energy profits. If so, should I really have to foot the bill for more costly inhalers to cut down on atmospheric pollution? Or should we make the real polluters pay for the health damage caused by their own eco-neglect?
Guess That Acreage: How much corn will be planted in 2007 ?
According to USDA 2007 will see the highest acreage of corn planted since 1944--smashing last year's 79 million acres out of the park. If you want to know how much you'll have to click through to Ken Cook's blog, Mulch. I can tell you this, though: Over 96 percent will be sprayed with weed killers, all will get fertilizer, and almost 70 percent will be GMOs.
Just to keep this in perspective, the last reported certified organic corn acreage, in 2005, was 138,000 acres.
Click here to learn how much corn will be planted this year.
March 29, 2007
Quick picks from today's NY Times
Burger King to start buying eggs and pork from non-CAFO suppliers [Link]
'We poisoned the dog food' says Deborah Blum, science journalism professor [Link]
"A former top auditor at the Interior Department accused senior officials on Wednesday of prohibiting him and other investigators from recovering hundreds of millions of dollars in underpayments from oil and gas companies that drill on federal land and in federal waters..." [Link]
March 28, 2007
Perverse ethanol incentives breed more gas-guzzlers
President Bush and other ethanol proponents claim that pushing alternative fuels will reduce U.S. gasoline consumption. By developing a fleet of flexible-fuel vehicles that can burn E85—a fuel that consists of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline—some say that the United States will be able to replace many of its gasoline imports with domestic fuel production.
But the Alternative Motor Fuels Act established in 1988 may negate these perceived benefits by allowing lower mile-per-gallon standards for E85 compatible vehicles. Since it is often cheaper to produce flexible-fuel vehicles than to produce fuel-efficient ones, American automakers have eagerly jumped onto the ethanol bandwagon. According to BusinessWeek, a larger proportion of gas-guzzling “alternative” vehicles could result in more gasoline consumption, not less.
A lack of E85 filling stations only adds to the problem. If consumers only have gasoline to choose from, it does not matter whether or not their cars can burn ethanol. Less than one percent of U.S. gas stations currently sell E85.
March 27, 2007
UCBP: Update
In my inaugural post, I wrote that the integrity and independence of the $500 million biofuels research partnership between BP (formerly British Petroleum) and UC Berkeley would depend on whether the university "can build in rigorous safeguards against corporate influence." Too late. On HuffPo, Al Meyerhoff, a former NRDC attorney with experience taking on corporate influence at Berkeley, reads the fine print:
The BP deal even takes this questionable marriage one step further than most. After shameful disclosures in the LA Times and elsewhere about their giving up millions in patent royalties, Universities now usually hold the intellectual property rights to their research. And they license their results to more than one company. Not this time. BP will actually co-own and may even get exclusive rights to these licenses paid for with your tax dollar. They will also get to charge you monopoly prices for resulting consumer products. But why shouldn't they?After all, 50 of their own scientists will be working right on campus.
Corporate science-for-hire dominates the private consulting world, and has already seriously eroded the integrity of both government and academic research. The loss of public trust in science is the tragic result.
Ethanol 'not a silver bullet'
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is wary of the President's ethanol plans and warns of increased food costs and the need for a broader approach to our energy crisis, with a greater focus on conservation.
Editorial: The limits of ethanol. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 25 Mar 2007
March 26, 2007
First Class to Nairobi and 2 tons of carbon credits, please
The London papers are nailing the British diplomat whose job it is to lobby other countries to reduce global warming gases – but whose frequent-flier lifestyle produces a staggering 22.3 tons of carbon pollution a year, 30 times more than the average Brit's. John Ashton has racked up more than 80,000 air miles in 10 months on the job, flying to Washington, Nairobi, Tokyo and beyond "to engage with major developed and developing countries to drive forward the international response to climate change." The government said the trips were necessary and that all emissions were offset "as part of the department's commitment to become carbon neutral."
The jet-set world of the international envoy, tycoon and celebrity has been invaded by an inconvenient truth: Air travel produces vast amounts of global warming gases – up to 5 percent of all CO2, and three times as damaging as ground-level emissions. So what's an eco-conscious member of the Beautiful People to do?
Last month Hollywood not only gave Al Gore an Oscar, but proudly presented the first "carbon-neutral" Academy Awards. Business Week reports that "each performer and presenter received a glass statue representing the elimination of the amount of greenhouse gas associated with a celebrity lifestyle over the course of a year." The Motion Picture Academy purchased the carbon offsets from Terra Pass, a Silicon Valley startup that buys industrial emissions credits and then resells them to offset the greenhouse pollution of traveling (including daily commuting).
Sounds great, but it's checkbook environmentalism, no different than the indulgences popes once sold for permission to commit certain sins. You keep right on emitting the same amount of carbon; you just pay for the "right" to do so. You're a rock star or captain of industry, so you can afford it. But as always, you can't consume your way to sustainability: Business Week found that some Terra Pass credits come from polluting facilities that would have been required by law to clean up anyway. Let's not even mention the whole loathsome idea of emissions credits trading, which creates pollution markets and "rights" to pollute.
Here's a better idea: If you feel guilty about the global warming gases your lifestyle produces, change your lifestyle. Executives and government officials can make better use of video conferencing. Travelers should try to use trains and buses when possible. As for rock stars . . . Is another farewell tour of the Eagles worth all that hot air?
A global warming quick fix?
What do carbon-sucking artificial trees, an ocean floor carpet of iron dust, a man-made sulfur volcano, and a global umbrella all have in common?
According to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, these are some of the more bizarre climate proposals circulating in the scientific community. Stanford University professor Stephen Schneider described these measures as desperate responses. "It's planetary methadone for our planetary heroin addiction. It does come out of the pessimism of any realist that says this planet can't be trusted to do the right thing.”
Indeed, sometimes it seems easier to send 16 trillion flat discs into orbit to reflect a percentage of the sun’s incoming rays than to get people and politicians on the earth’s surface to change their carbon habits.
“Sunshade” researcher and University of Arizona astronomer Roger Angel stresses that this multi-trillion dollar project “is no substitute for developing renewable energy, the only permanent solution.”
What's in my shaving cream?
Wired.com's Patrick Di Justo gives us the breakdown of 11 different chemicals commonly found in shaving cream, and the functions they each serve. I've reprinted the full text below. To see what's in your shaving cream and how it stacks up to others out there vist EWG's Skin Deep Cosmetic Safety Database. Womens's shaving creams compared here.
Thick, rich, velvety – and chock-full of ingenious chemicals, by Patrick Di Justo
• Palmitic acid: This long-chain lipid is found in palm oil and animal fats. A major component in soapmaking, it helps create a thick, stable lather that enfolds follicles and holds them upright.
• Triethanolamine: A thickener and wetting agent, TEA allows water to flow more freely by reducing the surface tension that holds droplets together. It's also a precursor chemical for the blistering weapon nitrogen mustard gas.
• Sunflower oil monoglycerides: This plant oil has seemingly magical properties. Its fatty acids attach to a carbon backbone and keep the product in gel form. But rubbing the gel in your hands introduces air. Voilà: foam.
• Stearic acid: Commonly used in cosmetics, this waxy lipid softens the skin. Combined with TEA, it becomes a powerful thickener for luxurious lather.
• Isopentane: In shaving cream, this degreaser breaks down sebum, the oil your skin produces. (It also smells like gasoline.) That helps whiskers stand up, the better to mow them down with a razor.
• Sorbitol: In food, this sweetener causes diarrhea. (Luckily, shaving cream is not for eating.) Here it's a cheap stand-in for glycerine, a skin moisturizer.
• Aloe barbadensis: You know it as aloe vera – the gooey stuff inside the plant. It's yet another skin softener and probably helps accelerate the healing of nicks.
• PVP: Polyvinyl pyrrolidone sticks to the keratin in hair shafts and, like isopentane, makes the hairs stand up straight for a clean shave.
• Isobutane: A compressible aerosol propellant, it helps the gel squirt out of the can. Pyromaniacs take note: It's also extremely flammable.
• PEG 90M: Polyethylene glycol is a versatile polymer used in laxatives, sexual lubricants, and lots of medications as a binding agent. In nanotech, it serves as a lattice on which biological cells can grow. In shaving cream, it's a lubricant and stabilizer.
• Blue #1: So that's what gives the gel its electric blue tint! When the ingredients are worked into a lather, tiny bubbles indiscriminately scatter all wavelengths of light and the blue disappears.
March 23, 2007
Outdated cosmetics can cause bacterial infections
Did you know that many cosmetics have a shelf life of only one year, and the applicators of some products, like eyeliner, need to be washed or discarded even more frequently? According to the FDA, failing to do so can lead to bacterial infection.
Oklahoma State's Daily O'Collegian reports here.
Students surprised to learn about products’ short shelf lives, by Amber Fulton. Daily O'Collegian.
March 22, 2007
Katrina IMAX feature glosses over reality
I left the Smithsonian's IMAX Theater after seeing Hurricane on the Bayou wondering how the film's producers managed to make such a colorfully feel-good movie about the devastation of Katrina. The Washington Post's Philip Kennicott apparently had the same questions and went digging. Read what Philip found.
For those in a hurry, here's the gross oversimplification:
1. The film was partially funded by Chevron, Dow Chemical Co., and Dominion Exploration and Production, as well as a nonprofit group known for working to ease wetland regulations.
2. The nature of the IMAX lends itself better to beautiful hyper-realistic imagery and entertainment than education.
Rose-Colored Lens, by Philip Kennicott. Washington Post (22 Mar 07)
Liveblogging the farm bill teach-in
Siel of Green LA Girl attended Food Fight: A Teach-in On the 2007 Farm Bill last night at Berkely, moderated by author and farm bill critic Michael Pollan.
The panel included Ann Cooper, Director of Nutrition Services for the Berkeley school system; Dan Imhoff, author of Food Fight: The Citizen’s Guide to a Food and Farm Bill; Carlos Marentes, Director of Sin Fronteras Organizing Project; and George Naylor, Iowa corn farmer and president of the National Family Farms Coalition, and EWG's own president, Ken Cook.
Get the details on what went down at Food Fight from the 5-post live series at Green LA Girl.
Ask EWG: Lead in lipstick?
Question:
There's an internet rumor that says you can check for lead in lipstick by rubbing a gold ring on the lipstick. If the lipstick turns black, it contains lead. Is there any truth to this?
Answer:
We wish it weren't so, but lead has recently been found in lipstick. Two television news programs--Los Angeles’ KCBS-TV and Pittsburgh’s WPXI-TV--both tested several brands and reportedly found lead in some at levels between 0.2 and 0.4 parts per million. That sounds like a insignificant amount, but that's two to four times the FDA limit for lead in candy. Cosmetics companies claim that the lead in their products come from background pollution--meaning the lead in the air gets folded into their products during the manufacturing process. The common sense answer is that you should avoid lead, especially when you're putting it in or around your mouth.
So which lipsticks tested positive? The KCBS test found the brands AM Cosmetics (no longer in business but still in stores) and Cover Girl to have lead, while WPXI did not list brand names. If you want to find out about the ingredients in your favorite lipstick, look it up in Skin Deep, the EWG cosmetics database, for its toxicity rating. Skin Deep also has extensive information about lead.
Unfortunately we can't confirm or deny the ring part of this question because we've never tested it ourselves. The web-at-large, however, denies its factuality.
Got a question for our researchers? Send it in! We'll select one (or a few) for next month's edition of Ask EWG.
Want Ask EWG sent to your inbox? Sign up for our monthly bulletin.
March 20, 2007
UCBP?
Last month, when BP (formerly British Petroleum) announced a $500 million partnership with UC Berkeley for biofuels research, the company was hailed as a leader in pushing the oil industry toward cleaner energy. University officials were jubilant over the deal, which would establish Cal – and the Bay Area, where venture capitalists are funding energy startups at a level unseen since the early Web days – as a world center of alternative-energy research and development.
But a few weeks on, not everyone is happy with the shotgun marriage between the nation's most prestigious public university and the world's third-largest oil company. Berkeley faculty and students are asking loudly and impolitely if the Energy Biosciences Institute will be a vehicle for independent research that produces technological and policy change, or for BP to to greenwash its well-earned image as a notorious global polluter.
On a campus known for '60s-style dissent, Berkeley students have staged teach-ins and demonstrations, including a direct action in which protesters in BP lab coats poured gallons of black, sticky "oil" – later found to be organic molasses – at the entrance to California Hall.
At a special Academic Senate meeting, big-name faculty members, including former Clinton Administration Labor Secretary Robert Reich, questioned whether the university could retain its integrity without letting BP's money influence the work. None was so critical as Ignacio Chapela, a professor in the College of Natural Resources.
“We are losing the trust of the people,” he said, "and the people are losing their trust in science. . . . The university has been penetrated and transformed from the inside.”
Chapela speaks from experience: Following his outspoken criticism of an earlier UC deal with chemical giant Novartis, Chapela was denied tenure and lost his job. (He has since been rehired and earned tenure.)
The same questions are being asked across the Bay at Stanford University, which has its own $100 million deal with ExxonMobil for research into global warming. Although faculty or student opposition hasn't been as strong as at Berkeley, last week one of the university's major donors canceled a $2.5 million gift to the school in protest.
The donor, millionaire film producer (The Polar Express) Steve Bing, last year put $50 million into a state initiative to tax oil company profits, which was defeated in part due to an advertising campaign funded by ExxonMobil. Bing's spokesman told the Guardian of London that the final straw was a cute-kids TV spot boasting that ExxonMobil has teamed with Stanford to find ways to deliver more energy while reducing greenhouse gases.
I'm not quite sure where I come down on this. Once I would have automatically and vociferously denounced anything that smelled of greenwashing. But it certainly is right that the companies that created the global warming crisis help bankroll the search for solutions. The remaining questions are whether the corporation has a meaningful commitment to change – ExxonMobil made $39 billion last year; BP about $22 billion, and against that a few hundred million seems paltry – and whether the universities can build in rigorous safeguards against corporate influence.
March 19, 2007
Coal combustion faces controversy
A recently released MIT report found that coal contributes more to global carbon dioxide emissions than any other energy source. Coal’s high carbon to hydrogen ratio makes it a larger CO2 polluter per unit of energy than other fossil fuels. Coal combustion also emits a variety of other pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates, and mercury.
The MIT study shows that the average American is willing to pay 50 percent more to reduce global warming than they were willing to pay three years ago. Despite this trend, cheap and dirty coal power continues to account for half of our nation’s electricity production.
But the pursuit of coal power may be slowing. According to an article in the Toronto Globe and Mail, Texas utility giant TXU Corp chose to abandon construction plans for nine of eleven proposed coal power plants after facing opposition from environmental groups, state politicians, and investors.
Under current political and economic conditions, the MIT report does not predict a decline in coal combustion. The report encourages technological improvements to increase production efficiency in existing plants and reduce coal-based CO2 emissions.
Project Bottled Water:
Help build our database
EWG is about to embark on a new study about bottled water--where it comes from, how it's "purified," and if it's even worth the expense. A big part of this project is just compiling the data, so we need your help to gather information from the labels of whatever bottled water you have at hand.
In order to help, we'd like for you to tell us:
- What brand?
- Where did you purchase it?
- How much did you pay?
- What type of container?
On the first day, Project Bottled Water netted over 1,000 labels in under four hours, and we've got about 3,000 now--that's more than halfway to our target of 5k in about four days. Nice work, folks! With your help, we'd like to get those 2,000 more by Thursday, March 22rd.
Also, if you'd like to use the button pictured above on your blog or website, use the following code:
<a href="http://www.ewg.org/issues/bottledwater/"><img src="http://www.ewg.org/temp/pbwbadge.gif" width="100" height="150" border="0" ></a>
March 14, 2007
Quote of the day
There’s one Lord, but not just one issue. I am as much against abortion as Jim Dobson and the others, but I want that baby to live in a healthful environment, inside the womb as well as outside of the womb.
-Rev. Paul de Vries, president of the New York Divinity School
-from Evangelical Group Rebuffs Critics on Right, by Laurie Goodstein. NY Times. 14 Mar 2007
March 13, 2007
'Consumer-friendly' reporting on antioxidents misleading
The following post is from our guest blogger, who prefers to remain
anonymous to protect his professional affiliation:
It turns out that someone finally looked and found that not only are antioxidents not helpful, but some may be harmful. This really underscores the problems of trusting partial science and also speaks to problems with how sloppy reporting by medical journalists can lead to widespread public mis-information.
Taking a look at what happened is instructive: Studies show that people who have diets high in veggies, especially green veggies, tend to have less of certain diseases. Scientists take guesses as to what it means: '"Well, veggies, especially green ones, are high in antioxidents. That might be it'." Off and running go the media, forgetting the the actual findings and publishing something that's "consumer friendly" -- code for either the journalist didn't understand, or he/she assumes that the public doesn't understand or want complexity. We see where that led: Millions of people taking supplements and vitamins that may harm them.
It's interesting that the fat-soluble vitamins are the ones that may be harmful and that the easily excreted, water-soluble ones have no effect. This seems plausible, and a good rule for consumers to follow, but it really wasn't the question tested.
March 12, 2007
Glass baby bottle auction to support EWG
By now you've likely seen some of the national attention EWG’s recent report about Bisphenol A (BPA), an ingredient used in plastic bottles and in the lining of food cans, has generated. BPA has been shown to be toxic in low doses, and has been linked to breast and prostate cancer, diabetes and infertility. Pregnant women and infants are most at-risk, and yet there are currently no safety standards established. [To learn more, visit here. ]
After a recent report by Environment California and a blog post by Julie Deardorff, the top manufacturers of glass baby bottles have had their supply completely depleted.
So, we here at EWG have come up with a plan to make several more glass bottles available, and hopefully raise a few bucks to put toward our continued research and advocacy to keep kids safe from toxic chemicals.
Currently listed on Ebay, here, here, here, and here, are gently used, 4-oz glass breast milk collection and storage bottles made by Lansinoh. They were used by an EWG staffer, who realizes the importance of non-plastic alternatives for collecting and storing nature's best food for babies--breastmilk.
Bid on one today!
March 7, 2007
Toxic plastics compound in baby bottles
Chicago Tribune health columnist, Julie Deardorff, blogs about bispheniol A in 'Toxic baby bottles.' The article that prompted Julie's post was published on February 27th. Since then Natural Baby and their manufacturer, Evenflo have sold out of glass baby bottles and nipples. The number of glass baby bottle orders has increased by 1000% within the last week.
Julie's Health Club, hosted by ChicagoTribune.com is one worth bookmarking. Her blog is a great resource for wellness issue particularly involving toxics and infants' health.
Trading green for more green
The economic viability of alternative energy looks more promising than ever. According to a new report by Clean Edge—a research and consulting firm specializing in clean technology—annual revenues for solar, wind, biofuels, and fuel cell technology increased by 39 percent in 2006. The industry value of these four markets totaled $55.4 billion in 2006, with industry growth expected to quadruple in the next ten years.
High oil prices coupled with the emerging success of the alternative energy sector also spurred record levels of venture capital investment in clean technologies, totaling $2.4 billion last year.
As new project funding becomes easier to secure, wind and solar producers continue to improve cost effectiveness by taking advantage of economies of scale. According to the New York Times, wind power companies can reduce their average cost per megawatt by building bigger turbines. Solar companies are also looking into innovative methods of streamlining installation procedures to reduce costs.
The United States should take note of the increasing availability of low-cost clean technologies and increasing levels of alternative energy investment and revenue. With these encouraging trends, there is little economic justification to adhere to outdated energy policies that support environmentally destructive patterns.
A real step toward conflict disclosure
According to EWG VP of Research, Jane Houlihan, would be for The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to prohibit Sciences International's involvement in the evaluation of any chemicals related to its industry clients and develop a conflict of interest policy for all contractors.
The temporary suspension of Sciences International from the BPA review panel is neccessary but is not a comprehensive solution for dealing with cinflicts of interest at the federal health agency.
Industry consultant suspended from BPA review panel
Pressure and publicity from EWG, has prompted the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences announced Monday that Sciences International has been temporarily removed from overseeing the Institute's bisphenol A evaluation while the company's ties to chemical manufacturers are investigated. We will keep you posted on further developments, but do check out these articles for more background.
LA Times (Mar 7)
Toronto Globe and Mail (Mar 7)
Star-Ledger (Mar 6)
LA Times (Mar 4)
New Standard (Mar 2)
March 6, 2007
China’s economy heating up
China is expected to surpass the United States as the largest global polluter of greenhouse gases within the next two years. The San Francisco Chronicle states that the country’s fossil fuel consumption increased by 9.3 percent in 2006, as compared to an annual increase of about 1.2 percent in the United States. Inefficient coal power plants supply about 70 percent of the country’s energy output.
The Bush Administration points to emissions increases in China and other fast-growing poor countries as justification for not taking more aggressive steps to curb greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Meanwhile, the United States contributes more per capita to global climate change than any other nation. According to the New York Times, a recently released United States Climate Action Report predicts an 11 percent growth in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in the decade between 2002 and 2012, a mere 0.6 percent reduction in growth from the previous decade.
As the richest country in the world, the United States should lead the way in combating global climate change. We need to hold western industrialized countries accountable for the damage that has already occurred, while providing clean technologies and environmental assistance to China and other developing countries.
Not just for biodiesel anymore
Used cooking oil may find a second life in cosmetic products.
via New Scientist. (5 Mar 2007)
March 5, 2007
LA Times on industry consultant running federal agency
Public health agency linked to chemical industry, by Marla Cone. 4 Mar 07
March 2, 2007
A 'special' kind of risk assessment
from a 'special' kind of firm
Yesterday I pointed you to the newest EWG investigation exposing the dubious relationship between the Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) — an agency under the auspices of the National Institutes of Health — and the consulting firm Sciences International (SI).
EWG found that Sciences International has collaborated with Dow Chemical Co., a major manufacturer of a widely used industrial chemical the agency will evaluate next week, and has also worked for the tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds. Look at this excerpt of a 1999 letter [PDF] from Elizabeth Anderson, president of SI, to R.J. Reynolds, extolling the benefits of her company’s ability to wear many hats—both public and private sector—to wade through regulatory muck.
However, we are different from most other consulting firms in that we also currently serve government agencies . This government work is generally limited to furthering the sciences of toxicology and risk assessment and currently includes contracts with: the Environmental Protection Agency to provide innovative toxicological and risk assessment methodology support ; the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Control and the Food and Drug Administration to provide state-of-the-art toxicological support; and, as noted above, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to operate the Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction . Our experience in supporting these governmental agencies in the advancement of science gives Sciences a unique credibility to negotiate with regulators on behalf of our private sector clients, to speak authoritatively in the scientific community, and to be accepted in legal proceedings and by the public.
March 1, 2007
Industry consultant runs federal health agency
A federal agency that evaluates the causes of birth defects and other reproductive problems is run by a consulting firm with ties to companies that make chemicals the agency is charged with reviewing, an EWG investigation found. Chairs of House and Senate Committees are investigating. [more]