Chasing Molecules: Poisonous Products, Human Health, and the Promise of Green Chemistry

Our Mission: We ignite the movement that empowers parents to protect children from harmful chemicals. Donate »

Blog

Chasing Molecules: Poisonous Products, Human Health, and the Promise of Green Chemistry

Janelle Sorensen

Thursday, March 18, 2010

When I first started working in this field about a decade ago, I was quickly overwhelmed by not only the ubiquity of toxic chemicals, but also by the main course of advocacy efforts. We were, and generally are still, fighting this issue chemical by chemical, product by product. I remember feeling there had to be a more efficient and effective solution.

After researching and talking to many experienced colleagues, I discovered a new framework for regulation called The Precautionary Principle, which states that “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.” The Precautionary Principle was common sense to me. It’s better to be safe than sorry.

After working as a precautionary policy advocate fighting corporate special interests for a few years, I had another realization. Corporations were driven by profits, not by public health or the environment. Corporate law actually legally binds them to create profits. It does not legally bind them to create goods and services that benefit society. Corporations are essentially legally bound to defeat me and the work of my colleagues. And, a concept known as corporate personhood gives them the rights of a human without being held accountable to their actions like a real human citizen.

“This is messed up,” I thought. “How will we ever be able to change things?”

Dig deeper to the real root of the problem, then you will find the solution. This is the narrative that Elizabeth Grossman examines in her new book, “Chasing Molecules: Poisonous Products, Human Health, and the Promise of Green Chemistry.”

Grossman travels the globe examining the problem that begins with the fact that “of the 30,000 or so chemicals currently in common commercial use, the environmental and health impacts of only about 4 percent are routinely monitored. Some 75 percent have not been studied for such impacts at all.” So, we use thousands of chemicals in unimaginable amounts and we don’t know what impacts they’ll have. The few that are being monitored paint a disturbing picture of global contamination and health impacts (both in animals and humans). Grossman details some of the most alarming offenders – stories and statistics you’ll maybe try to forget the moment after you read them. They’re that bad/sad/depressing/nauseating.

But, take a step back. What if we go back to the beginning – in the laboratory where these chemicals are made? According to Grossman, current academic programs don’t even teach chemists about toxicology or ecological impacts of manipulating molecules. One of the chemists she interviewed gasped at how he had synthesized over 2,500 compounds without having any comprehension of what makes a chemical toxic.

Enter green chemistry – a new way of developing chemicals that reduces or eliminates the use or generation of hazardous compounds. Grossman says we need to know if a material is safe or if it can be made safe. How? By asking the right questions during development.

Questions like:
• Is it hazardous?
• What is its biological activity?
• What does the substance do to a body and what does the body do to a substance?
• Can it get into the body?
• If so, what happens then?
• How is it metabolized?
• What organs might it target?
• Can it cross biological membranes or the blood-brain barrier?
• Is the substance persistent and will it bioaccumulate?

The simplest solution is usually the correct one. Green chemistry is by no means simple, but it’s simpler than trying to monitor and regulate chemicals after we’ve already released them into the environment. It’s simpler to create safe materials than to try to un-do the damage of unsafe materials. Many argue this is our moral duty. It’s time to clean up our act. Things have gone way too far.

Terry Collins of Carnegie Mellon’s Institute for Green Science is quoted by Grossman as saying “If it was 1500 and we were in an Italian hill town, you could only impact the people who you meet. Now every time you turn on the car, you’re affecting thousands of children. We can now impact people we never meet with these chemicals. We can affect babies yet to be born. Technology and science have given rise to a whole new category of ethics. There’s no precedent for it. We need to use only elements that we [ourselves] are made of in catalysts and polymers we’re going to make commercially.”

This is the beginning of a revolution and Grossman gives us an insider’s view of the innovation and passion behind it. Grossman gives us hope.

Read “Chasing Molecules” to learn more.