The Scoop: Preventative Policy and You

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

Blog

Claire Moss

Thursday, March 18, 2010

U.S. chemical regulation is not protecting human health as it should. Take action! The Scoop will keep you up-to-date on the latest news and ways to get involved. Check out our Policy Section, for further information about national and state initiatives.

TSCA Reform
As our national legislature moves closer to introducing chemical reform bills to the House and Senate, now is the time to really get involved and spread the word.

TAKE ACTION:

Make sure chemical reform is on your legislature’s radar – send an email, make a call, or visit their office. More people engaged in the process means more impact! Find your legislatures' contact information: House of Representatives , Senate.
Get your friends together and talk about chemical reform. Engage them in a conversation about the current state of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the Kid Safe Chemicals Act (the bill to be introduced to reform TSCA). Make it easy – provide them with the web address of a petition (listed below), or where to find contact information for their legislature (above).
Contact your legislature about TSCA through Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.
Sign the EWG petition supporting the Kid Safe Chemicals Act.
Sign the Care2 petition for chemical reform.

Your Senators and Representative take your opinions into account – they count the number of calls, emails or letters they receive in favor of and against a particular bill, and decide their vote based on these numbers.

More people who learn about chemical reform = more letters supporting reform = more Senators and Representatives supporting TSCA reform. Let’s get this flow of information and action going!

TSCA Hearings
Hearings in the Senate and House of Representatives are preparing for the introduction of TSCA reform bills to both legislative houses. Here are the most recent hearings:

March 4th House of Representatives Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection – TSCA and Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals: Examining Domestic and International Actions.
March 9th Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics, and Environmental Health - Business Perspectives on Reforming U.S. Chemical Safety Laws.
March 17th Senate Full Committee - Hearing on the Government Accountability Office’s Investigation of EPA’s Efforts to Protect Children’s Health.

PBTs
The recent hearings on TSCA outlined above have focused on PBTs, chemicals that are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic. In an article on the Environmental Working Group’s website, Richard Wiles notes:

“PBTs are just one of several categories of chemicals that demand priority action under a reformed national toxic chemicals policy.”

This is an important perspective - comprehensive reform that takes all chemicals into account, and is poised to handle future changes in chemistry and consumer products, is needed.

Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
TSCA reform will address a wide variety of chemicals, however, cosmetics are regulated by the FDA and won’t be impacted. As current legislation on cosmetics is over 70 years old, it also needs an update to make sure what we put on our bodies and in our hair is safe.

Explore the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics website, and learn more about their movement.

TAKE ACTION: Ask Congress to protect pregnant women from chemicals in cosmetics.

Chlorpyrifos (a Pesticide)
A neurotoxin, Chlorpyrifos is banned for residential use but is still being applied in agricultural settings. The Pesticide Action Network (PAN) is concerned about children’s exposure – pesticides do not stay where they are applied, and children are particularly vulnerable to exposure.

TAKE ACTION: Sign the petition urging the EPA to ban Chlorpyrifos.

It's so easy to feel overwhelmed about toxins and their widespread impact. But take note of the legislation mentioned above - there can and will be positive change in chemical policy. Check out our Public Policy section, where you'll find further information about national and state initiatives. Get your friends and family involved by discussing chemicals and the lack of chemical regulation. Stay positive and come back for an update in two weeks!

Image Courtesy Of laura padgett / CC BY-ND 2.0

Posted by Claire Moss on 03/22/2010 at 02:28 PM

Charli,

You make an important point - there are wider issues involved in chemical reform. I don’t know a lot about the specifics of animal testing and how it’s related to the testing the EPA currently does under TSCA. However, I’d imagine it’s an important consideration for chemical reform.

You might contact your Representative or Senator and mention animal testing and its relation to chemical reform. Also, a group that opposes animal testing might already be involved in bringing this issue to reformers’ attention.

Claire

Posted by Charli on 03/19/2010 at 02:05 PM

I think making industrial chemicals safer is something we can all get behind. To ensure that we really fix this problem we must include modern science language, which necessarily utilizes non-animal methods, in this bill; otherwise we’ll have another outdated bill on our hands.

Currently, many toxicity tests are based on experiments in animals and use methods that were developed as long ago as the 1930’s; they and are slow, inaccurate, open to uncertainty and manipulation, and do not adequately protect human health. These tests take anywhere from months to years, and tens of thousands to millions of dollars to perform. More importantly, the current testing paradigm has a poor record in predicting effects in humans and an even poorer record in leading to actual regulation of dangerous chemicals.

Alternatives to animal testing exist in a powerful way and many scientists advocate them. Chemical reform should not only modernize policy, but modernize the science that supports that policy. Let’s ensure chemical reform uses all the necessary tools to truly make humans, our environment, and animals safe.

More comments: