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.
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.
ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
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
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
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
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
« The Disappearing Male documents concerning issues | Main | 12th Annual Heinz Women's Health and the Environment Conference »
There are studies. And then there are studies.
By now you're probably familiar with the controversy around the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) failure to consider all available, credible scientific evidence before it reassured the public that chemicals used in baby bottles and other plastics were safe. In other words, it relied on industry-sponsored studies to reach a conclusion that its Science Board has since rebuked.
So I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did the very same thing when deciding whether to regulate perchlorate in our drinking water. In this case, agency leaders chose to ignore authoritative studies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and instead relied on a chemical industry-funded consulting firm. Sounds all too familiar, doesn't it?
And it makes me more than a little upset because perchlorate interferes with normal thyroid function (right, my kids), may cause cancer and persists indefinitely in the environment, but is currently unregulated by state or federal authorities. Terrific! And the evidence that it's a health risk is strong:
In 2006 the CDC published the results of a study of 1,100 women that showed clear clinical signs of perchlorate toxicity at real-world exposure levels. When pressed by congressional allies of perchlorate polluters at a hearing of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, the CDC said that decreases in critical thyroid hormone levels in women exposed to perchlorate were "consistent with causation" -- in other words, that perchlorate probably caused their hormone deficiencies.
As someone who was pregnant twice and breastfed two children at length, I'm angry that perchlorate is unregulated in our food and drinking water. As a mother, I couldn't be more serious about promoting my children's optimum health; it's tragic that these days that job requires more protecting than promoting. Risking their thyroid function by giving them food and water laced with perchlorate is outrageous, especially when the EPA is clearly ignoring the facts.
So I couldn't be happier that EWG is calling them out on this. Loudly. Here's a few snippets of what we said in a letter we sent to the EPA just yesterday:
EPA’s decision not to regulate perchlorate in drinking water in the face of such compelling facts is irresponsible and indefensible given the strength of the evidence for stringent regulation. In fact, EPA reached its decision by using flawed models and methodology.The scientific evidence clearly points to the need for EPA to set a health protective drinking water standard for perchlorate – that is, a standard lower than the level shown to be associated with altered thyroid hormone levels in American women with low iodine intake. Unfortunately, EPA has relied on questionable science, an even more questionable computer model, and circular logic to justify its proposal to not regulate this harmful contaminant at all in our nation’s drinking water. This is inexcusable.
EWG urges EPA to overhaul its poorly crafted assessment according to the points described in detail below and to live up to its mandate of protecting public health by setting a stringent drinking water standard for perchlorate.
Why? Because our health depends on it, and we parents can't do it all ourselves. Can we?
[photo courtesy of flickr creative commons]
Leave a comment