BPA, FDA, EPA: What is that chemical in my Alphabet Soup?
The Federal Drug Administration’s (FDA) recent denial of a petition to end the use of bisphenol A (BPA) in food and food packaging came as no surprise to me – though it angered parents and health care providers across the country. Regrettably, coverage of that announcement masked the larger, more significant problem: even if you take BPA out of food packaging, we and our children will still be highly exposed from a myriad of other sources, from water bottles to toys.
Even if BPA were heavily restricted or banned, untested replacement chemicals could be introduced with little to no oversight, and the affected products could be on the market for years before the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the FDA or other agencies could catch up with appropriate safety studies.
Our current system for assessing chemical safety is tragically broken. The Toxic Substances Control Act, the nation’s primary chemical safety law enacted in 1976, has failed to protect public health, the environment, and our communities. While rates of diseases like asthma, diabetes, childhood cancers, infertility and learning and behavioral disorders keep going up, the federal system that should protect us hasn’t changed in 36 years.
That’s why a chemical like BPA – known to mimic estrogen in the human body and wreak havoc with developmental systems – can continue to slip through the cracks, guaranteeing our continued exposure for years to come.
The Toxic Substances Control Act set up a system that quickly proved inadequate for ensuring that chemicals are safe. It grandfathered the 62,000 chemicals that were on the market at that time and has never required the EPA to review their safety. Although an additional 20,000 chemicals have been introduced, the law creates such large burdens that the EPA has been able to require only about 200 of those chemicals to be tested, and has partially restricted only five. Old chemicals like trichloroethylene were given a free pass. New chemicals like BPA (and whatever might be used to replace it) are basically waved through an open gateway.
The good news is that help could be on the way, but only if the American consumer (that’s all of us) gets involved. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., has introduced the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 847), which would take meaningful steps to protect families from toxic chemicals. It would improve the safety of chemicals used in consumer products, increase public information on chemical safety, protect our most vulnerable populations and disproportionately affected “hot spot” communities, reform EPA’s science practices to ensure the best available science is being used to determine chemical safety, support innovation in the marketplace and provide incentives for the development of safer chemical alternatives.
For the first time the chemical industry would be required to develop and provide information on the health and environmental safety of chemicals in order to enter or remain on the market. In addition, EPA would be authorized and required to take immediate action on the “worst of the worst” chemicals (those known to be persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic, such as lead, mercury and brominated flame retardants) that present the greatest peril to our bodies, breast milk and the environment.
The proposed Safe Chemicals Act has gained support in the business community because it would help American manufacturers and workers compete in a world demanding safer chemicals and products. Many companies have been stymied in this regard, because they often lack information on the chemicals in their own supply chains. Instead, companies often are forced to choose between a chemical with known health hazards and alternative chemicals whose safety is unknown.
The Safe Chemicals Act would provide this information to domestic product manufacturers and retailers for the first time. Importantly, by applying these requirements to chemicals in imported goods as well as those in domestic goods, the act would create a level playing field and reduce incentives to ship manufacturing overseas.
The Safe Chemicals Act would create jobs, help American business compete and at the same time protect the health of individuals and communities. Parents and health care providers could stop spending their time navigating an alphabet soup of “chemicals of concern” in everyday products.
Despite what seems like a no-brainer, federal legislation tends to move only when strong support is stressed to our senators. We
and our children deserve the protection that this legislation provides.
Tom Vitaglione is senior fellow at Action for Children North Carolina.