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. Written by EWG staff.

Follow ewgtoxics on Twitter

DONATE TO EWG!

Help us protect your health and environment!  Please donate $5 to EWG today.

GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS

Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.


Environmental Working Group's Facebook Page
YouTube

ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL

Delivered by FeedBurner

 Enviroblog in your Reader

Kid-Safe Chemicals Act

Get EWG widgets & blog badges.

Join EWG's live chat with Chef Ann Cooper

School lunch: More fruits & veggies, please!

Texas Schools are Drilling for Dollars

Why do blowouts take so long to fix?

SEARCH ENVIROBLOG

FIND PAST POSTS

FEATURED

Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.

Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?

Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure

So what products CAN we use?

Test Your Knowledge of Cosmetics Safety: 8 Myths Debunked

EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series

EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure

EWG on TV

Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill

Toxic Tub?

Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water

Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen

BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics

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?

Ask EWG Archives

Top Blog Award

Top  blogs award

PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS

Breast Cancer Fund

The Daily Green

Eco Child's Play

Environmental Defense Fund

Green Moms Carnival

Grist

Healthy Child, Healthy World

Huffington Post Green

NRDC's Switchboard

Organic.org

Safer States

TreeHugger

TALK TO US

Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.

« Taking another look at rocket fuel | Main | About that New York Times sunscreen column. . . »

Just a little bit of history repeating: Pollution and sex ratio

July 22, 2008

PCBs alter birth sex ratio
PCBs were banned in the '70s, but not before they had already done their damage. They're linked to problems with the brain, nervous and hormone systems, and although average levels in the human body have dropped, human exposure continues. See, PCBs are persistent contaminants, which means they build up in the environment and in us.

Evidence continues to build that PCBs also affect birth sex. A recent study of blood serum from women who were pregnant in San Francisco in the '60s found that those with higher PCB levels were more likely to give birth to boys than those with low PBC levels. The study puts another nail in the coffin for PCBs, but Dr. Pete Myers brings up an important point in his summary of the report:

The exposure levels observed in the study are high compared to today. Thus if these results are indicative of a causal relationship (never possible to confirm with epidemiological studies) then the simplest prediction would be that the chances of having a boy baby should be increasing because PCBs have been decreasing. That is not the case, at least as of the most recent analysis from Canada and the US.

He's right. Evidence from a large-scale study of four industrialized nations indicates that the sex ratio is skewed, and fewer boys are being born -- and, since PCB levels have dropped, we probably can't blame it on that.

But we can look to PCBs as evidence that in-utero exposure to pollutants can affect a child's sex. There are more than 80,000 chemicals in production today, many of which are known to be persistent or to disrupt hormone systems, and most of which haven't really tested for their impact on human health. And you know what? By the time we get around to cleaning up those culprits, they will have done their damage, too.

How many times must history repeat itself before we get our act together and demand that chemical companies put people before profits?

Photo by Erik R. Bishoff.

« Taking another look at rocket fuel |