Not My Breasts

Congress Talks Phthalates

An important piece of legislation is moving through Congress that would ban toxic phthalates from children’s toys and childcare articles. Phthalates (pronounced “THA-lates”) are chemicals used in many soft, plastic toys like rubber ducks, teething rings and bath books that can leech out of these toys when children chew on them. Scientists have linked phthalates to early onset of puberty in girls (a risk factor for breast cancer) and birth defects in baby boys. Safe alternatives exist. So, it would seem like a no-brainer that Congress would pass this legislation, right?

We hope so.

Right now, a small, bi-partisan Congressional Conference Committee made up of members of the Senate and House is finalizing the legislation—known as the Consumer Product Safety bill. Their job is to reconcile the Senate version of the legislation—which includes a ban toxic phthalates from children’s toys and childcare articles—and the House version—which does not. The House members have a historic opportunity here to support their colleagues in the Senate and vote to include the phthalates ban and, in so doing, protect all kids from these dangerous chemicals.

Enacting this ban on phthalates in kids’ toys is far from a radical move. California and Washington State have already enacted the ban, as has the European Union and 14 other countries. So isn’t it time our U.S. Congress do the same? If you agree, tell them.

Industry influence exposed--finally

A front-page article in the Washington Post yesterday brought to light an alarming revelation: the FDA has relied on just two scientific studies, both funded by a chemical industry trade group, in declaring bisphenol A safe. The agency has ignored the more than 100 peer-reviewed, journal-published articles saying just the opposite: not only is BPA not conclusively safe, it is linked to increased rates of breast and prostate cancer, among other alarming diseases.

It's vindicating to see this in print, but it's been too long in coming. We've known that the FDA relied on industry studies for BPA safety data, as it does for other industries, including cosmetics. But far too many people for too long have blindly followed the FDA and industry party line on BPA, allowing additional years of unnecessary exposure to this dangerous chemical.

I'm not talking simply about individuals buying Nalgene water bottles or Gerber baby bottles; I'm talking about the opinion-makers in the media, regulators unwilling to take the first plunge and companies trying to maintain their brand images.

Rather than inspiring guilt and shopper's paralysis among parents, weekend athletes or fans of canned pasta, we're working to make sure government regulators do their jobs of protecting us all from toxic chemicals. The burden of proof of harm shouldn't be foisted on citizens, nor should advocates and scientists have to point out to the FDA that it's not looking at all the available evidence.

What Goes On Baby Goes In Baby, Too

On Monday, the respected medical journal Pediatrics published a study that could (should) change the way parents use and think about the lotions, powders and shampoos they rub on their babies.

The study showed a correlation between exposure to these typical personal care products and the levels of phthalates in the babies' urine. In other words, the babies who got the most lotion, powder and shampoo on their skin also had the highest levels of these toxic chemicals in their little bodies.

Phthalates, unfortunately for us and our kids, are not harmless. They've been linked to breast cancer, early puberty in girls, reduced testosterone levels, lowered sperm counts, genital defects in baby boys and testicular cancer.

Phthalates are often hidden in the ingredient "fragrance" because a loophole in U.S. law allows manufacturers to avoid disclosing the components of fragrance or perfume in products. The chemicals are also used to keep plastics soft and pliable--for use in products like baby toys and teethers, among other plastics.

In fact, phthalate exposure among kids is of such high concern that California recently banned them from toys intended for children 3 and younger (this bill was co-sponsored by the Breast Cancer Fund and Environment California in 2007), Congress has introduced a similar bill (the Children's Chemical Risk Reduction Act of 2007) and the state of Washington is considering a broader ban that would include phthalates, lead and cadmium in toys as well as personal care products for kids 12 and under.

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, of which the Breast Cancer Fund is a part, expressed concern for both babies and women of childbearing age--baby's first environment. But this groundbreaking study proves what we already knew: what goes on our skin goes in our bodies. With that in mind, it's time we closed the loopholes on cosmetic safety in the U.S.

FEMA Formaldehyde Cover-up Alleged

FEMA is under pressure again, this time from the House Homeland Security Committee, over an alleged cover-up of formaldehyde exposure from trailers provided to hurricane survivors.

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita set down on U.S. soil in August 2005, displacing hundreds of thousands of people. Two and half years later, FEMA says 40,000 families are still living in "temporary" FEMA travel trailers.

From the beginning, trailer occupants complained of fumes and classic symptoms of over-exposure to formaldehyde: headache, chronic nosebleeds, asthma, bronchitis and sinus infections. It turned out that these government-provided trailers were off-gassing toxic levels of formaldehyde.

Formaldehyde, used as a preservative in plywood and other construction materials, is a known carcinogen. So when it came to light that FEMA continued to distribute the toxic trailers to families even after they knew of the formaldehyde issue, the Breast Cancer Fund asked its supporters to write letters to President Bush in August 2007. Our ask then: an executive order to FEMA to stop distributing the tainted trailers and replace those already in use with formaldehyde-free trailers.

Now, FEMA stands accused of stifling the release of information that formaldehyde in the trailers could be harmful, and of ignoring a CDC recommendation that the trailers were for temporary use only, not to be lived in.

Our hope now: that FEMA comes clean about formaldehyde exposure and moves all 40,000 families out of trailers and into safe, toxin-free environments.

Said Rep. Nick Lampson, who is asking for more information from FEMA and CDC: "Not following good science in advising people to do things as they try to recover from one tragedy is indeed a much greater tragedy this is compounding."