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]
Confirmed: New shower curtain smell is gross
House bill would ban BPA in food, beverage packaging
Chemical injections in Colorado
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
« A farmer's 'come to Jesus' moment | Main | Not so "natural" after all »
May 21, 2008
Congress takes aim at chemicals in kids
Nice to see some in Congress are moving forward with efforts to force chemical companies to test for safety before their products wind up in babies. Just a couple of years back EWG tested the umbilical cord blood of ten unborn babies and found an average of 287 industrial chemicals. Why?
Under current law known as the Toxic Substances Control Act, unchanged since 1976, most new chemicals are approved with little or no safety testing, and more than 62,000 existing chemicals have remained on the market for three decades despite evidence that some pose serious health risks. The Kid Safe Chemicals Act introduced yesterday would place the burden of proof on the chemical industry to show that chemicals are safe for children before they are added to consumer products.
Comments
Finally! Something needs to be done. Its hard to attempt to keep all these chemicals away from my baby. Especially with all these other relatives around who don't believe me when I talk about chemical dangers.
Posted by: Jessica | May 23, 2008 12:55 PM
to place the burden for the safety of chemicals on the chemical companies themseves is morally and ethically wrong
Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 8:58 PM
Anon, that's an interesting position to take -- care to explain why?
Posted by: Amanda | June 2, 2008 12:47 PM