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.

« Melamine in formula: Another round with the FDA | Main | Greening Santa's Workshop: Eco gifts in the blogosphere »

FDA's moving goalposts on melamine in infant formula

November 26, 2008

Even though the global economic crisis has to be at the top of the incoming administration's agenda, President-elect Obama has signaled he isn't forgetting the other reason so many people voted for change: to do the few essential things we can't do for ourselves. As he put it in a press conference recently, "I think what the American people want more than anything is just common-sense, smart government. They don't want ideology. They don't want bickering. They don't want sniping. They want action and they want effectiveness."

That says it for all of us who believe it's past time to restore credibility to crucial government functions. Obviously, the new White House team must shore up our battered financial security. But close behind is what we at Environmental Working Group call hometown security. We need good policymakers and regulators, acting on the basis of the best science, to assure that we have pure food, clean water, clean air, safe household products, clean, reliable energy and ample jobs devoted to realizing all those basic requirements of a civilized society.

The current bunch of political appointees running the regulatory agencies don't seem to know or care that the taxpayers, not the industries they oversee, have been paying their salaries. Take the leadership at the federal Food and Drug Administration.

Please.

It's been a long time since the FDA front office could make a statement about a food or drug problem without sending our doubletalk detectors (that's the polite term) into red alert.

The latest episode to kick the meter into the red zone started with an Associated Press report last Tuesday that that the FDA had discovered traces of the industrial chemical melamine and a related compound, cyanuric acid, in a few U.S- made infant formula samples. It's hardly surprising that the story, sketchy as it was, made headlines around the globe: everybody who hasn't been living on Mars for the last couple of years knows about the massive melamine tragedy unfolding in China, caused by unscrupulous manufacturers who deliberately spiked baby formula supplies with the chemical to boost their apparent protein levels.

Melamine, a plastics component, is toxic in its own right and when combined with cyanuric acid can cause kidney stones and kidney failure. To date, according to Time Magazine, more than 60,000 Chinese babies have been sickened and at least four have died from drinking tainted formula. The scandal is still spreading as reports surface almost daily that melamine has turned up in Chinese food or animal feed exports.

Flooded with alarmed calls, FDA officials insisted that there was no comparison between the U.S. and the Chinese situations. On Wednesday, the Associated Press reported, Dr. Stephen Sundlof, director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, characterized the levels of melamine found in Nestle's Good Start Supreme Infant Formula with Iron and the cyanuric acid level in Mead Johnson's Enfamil Lipil with Iron as "extremely low" - about l0,000 times less than the levels reported in Chinese infant formula.

But there was nothing reassuring about the agency's bungled handling of the matter.

For one thing, FDA officials didn't make public their own test results in an orderly fashion, with ample information on their website. They ran tests in October, sat on the results for several weeks, then released incomplete and inaccurate data to the AP in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Corrections issued Wednesday only stoked confusion and doubt.

Even more suspicious was FDA's post-Thanksgiving Friday decision to move the goal posts.

On Oct. 3, in the midst of the Chinese scandal, agency officials posted an advisory on their website asserting that "FDA is currently unable to establish any level of melamine and melamine-related compounds in infant formula that does not raise public health concerns." That seemed to be a bureaucratic way of saying that anything more than zero wasn't safe.

The zero-tolerance position lasted only as long as Chinese products were the issue. When U.S. manufacturers' products came under scrutiny, agency officials scrambled to set out a new position. On Friday, they issued an update on FDA's investigation that declared that formula adulterated with 1 part per million of either melamine or cyanuric acid (but not both) was safe. (Two Nestle's samples tested positive for melamine at 0.137 and 0.14 parts per million, and three Mead Johnson samples tested positive for cyanuric acid at 0.247, 0.245 and 0.249 parts per million. Reports from China said that tainted formula contained as much as 2500 parts per million of melamine)

The one part-per-million mark is well above the adulterant levels found so far in U.S. formula. The FDA advisory declares flatly, "FDA's ongoing investigation continues to show that the domestic supply of infant formula is safe and that consumers can continue using U.S. manufactured infant formulas."

We hope so. But as has been said so many times about so many aspects of the Bush administration's governing style - hope is not a policy. If you don't have anything to hide, why hide? If you know what you're doing, why bungle?

Once the new team takes over FDA, maybe we'll find out why the agency handled the melamine issue this way. And maybe we'll learn a lot more about why FDA has been so determined to resist calls for reducing other contaminants that we know are in food and drink. There will undoubtedly be investigations led by members of Congress like Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-CT, who told the Washington Post's Lyndsey Layton, "This FDA, this Bush administration instead of protecting the public health, is protecting industry."

But the first priority has to be the health of our children. They can't wait months or years for Congress and the new administration to turn FDA's file cabinets inside out.

That's why EWG president Ken Cook has written the major formula makers, asking them to tell the public exactly what they know about their products and what they are doing to make sure they're pure. As Cook put it, "When FDA claims there isn't any reason to worry, that's exactly what the consumer should do."

So we're looking for change - real change, not the Washington-revolving-door kind - at FDA. And we're keeping our doubletalk detectors tuned up.

« Melamine in formula: Another round with the FDA |