By Sarah Doll, National Director for Safer States.

With no action yet from Congress, state legislatures continue to work to protect citizens.

The past couple years have seen unprecedented changes in the toxic chemicals landscape across the United States. In the past nine years, over 80 chemical safety laws have been passed with an overwhelming margin of bi-partisan support in statehouses across the country.

But this is not a time to rest on our laurels. Across the country, families still come into contact with unregulated toxic chemicals. Every day, we are exposed to hundreds of different chemicals in our home and at our work—chemicals like formaldehyde and chlorinated Tris which are known carcinogens, and bisphenol-a (BPA) which contributes to health problems with reproductive development.

None of these chemicals are effectively regulated by the federal government: it is a widely held myth that manufacturers even have to prove a chemical's safety before introducing it into products we buy. They don't have to, and they won't often even disclose which chemicals make up their products. Instead, they hide behind the claim that the information is proprietary.

The hope for federal regulation is still that—just a hope; the law overseeing toxic chemical regulation is over 30 years old, and its overhaul is being buffeted by strong opposition from the industry trade association which is backed by billions of dollars of influence. So while Congress tries to figure out how to change the rules on the federal level, it is up to the states to fill the gap in protection.

The Safer States coalition, made up of groups of environmental advocates, physicians, nurses, parents, and concerned citizens, stands in support of laws and policies which will lighten the toxic chemical burden that our families, loved ones and community carry.

The fact that we have been able to consistently pass important laws during troubling economic times is encouraging. While much of the chemical industry would have us believe that such laws are anti-business and anti-profit, many other organizations see the writing on the wall: The way that chemicals get into everyday household goods and then into our homes is unsafe and dangerous.

In addition to bi-partisan passage of many toxic chemicals laws, we see the support of many small businesses and manufacturing companies. David Levine, co-founder of the American Sustainable Business Council, which represents more than 100,000 businesses and 200,000 business leaders and entrepreneurs, says:

"Today's astute business leaders are concerned about the health and business impacts that could arise if the products they use or sell contain toxic chemicals.

They recognize that safer chemicals protect human and environmental health and cut the costs of regulation, hazardous waste storage and disposal, worker protection, health care costs, and future liabilities.

Such steps make U.S. businesses more competitive in a global marketplace where protections from toxic chemicals are more stringent, opening up growing market opportunities.¹"

This year, at least 28 state legislatures will consider proposals to address continued concerns about toxic chemicals in consumer products. From bans on toxic flame retardants, BPA and formaldehyde to public right-to-know laws, state legislatures will be considering critical proposals to protect their citizens from toxic chemicals.

In fact Vermont already passed a school "green" cleaning policy which will require manufacturers of cleaning products to only sell environmentally preferable products in schools.

Highlights of 2012 state legislation include:

• Identification and Disclosure of Chemicals Harmful to Children. At least 13 states, including Alaska, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington will consider policies to identify and ultimately reduce exposures to chemicals of concern, including prioritizing chemicals for state action and requiring manufacturers of consumer products to disclose the chemicals in their products.
• BPA Phase Outs. At least 20 states will consider policy to restrict the use of the hormone-disrupting chemical BPA in infant formula cans, other food packaging, children's products, and receipt paper. Alaska, Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin are all states considering such legislation.
• Tris Flame Retardant Phase Outs. At least four state legislatures will introduce policies to phase out the use of the flame retardant chlorinated Tris in children's products. Chlorinated Tris is a flame retardant that was removed from children's pajamas in the 1970s because of concerns over adverse health effects, including cancer, but has reappeared in other children's products. Connecticut, Maryland, New York, and Washington are legislatures considering such a ban. In addition, Alaska, Michigan, New Jersey and New York legislatures will consider policies to reduce exposure to the flame retardant decaBDE.
• Green Cleaning in Schools. Earlier this month, Vermont passed policy requiring manufacturers to only sell environmentally preferable cleaning products to schools. Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and North Carolina are considering similar policy.
• Cadmium Bans in Children's Products. At least 5 states will be introducing or have introduced policies to ban the use of cadmium in children's products, including Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, New York, and Tennessee. Cadmium is linked to cancer and other health effects.
• Other policies. Oregon has introduced policy to require the state to reduce toxics through its procurement process. New York is considering policy to restrict formaldehyde in beauty products. Massachusetts and Georgia are also considering policy to improve the safety of cosmetics. Other states have introduced individual chemical restrictions, such as lindane in Michigan and perchloroethelyene in Vermont.

We have seen proof that state legislation creates a ripple which has effects that reach further than the state's borders. State legislation causes manufacturers to make nationwide changes, and sometimes it is the leader for federal regulatory changes. We look forward to another year of working to protect children and families from the debilitating effects of the toxic chemicals in our every day environment.

Press release: State Legislatures Tackle Toxic Chemicals To Protect Citizens (PDF)

About the author: Sarah Doll, mother of an adorable three year old, is the national director of SAFER states, a coalition of state-based organizations championing solutions to protect public health and communities from toxic chemicals.

References

¹Toxic chemical reform is good for business Louisville Charter, April 15 2010.

Recent reports show that toxic chemicals are found in every corner of our lives. They are being found in everything from foam in children's products to household cleaners and canned foods. This month, we rounded up some of the most significant studies from our partner organizations. These studies outline the ubiquity of toxic chemicals, and point the way toward solutions.

Fortunately, not all the news is bad. It was discovered that some products don't contain the worst-of-the-worst toxic chemicals, proving that it is possible to create these products with safer alternatives.

And when The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics announced that Johnson & Johnson baby shampoo still contains a harmful, formaldehyde-releasing chemical, the pressure of the news caused Johnson & Johnson to finally agree to remove it. While getting a harmful chemical out of a baby shampoo shouldn't require such action, it is encouraging to see forward motion away from toxic chemicals in some situations.

Washington Toxics Coalition and Safer States
Hidden Hazards in the Nursery (pdf)

Many nursery items contain toxic Tris flame retardants.

In a study released today by the Washington Toxics Coalition and SAFER states we learn that many foam products in children's nurseries contain high levels of toxic flame retardants. These chemicals are associated with health concerns such as lower birth weights, changes in thyroid hormone levels which affect critical metabolic functions, and lower IQ in children.

As we discussed on this site in September, the world of chemical flame retardants is an alphabet soup of names and chemical mixtures. As quickly as some chemicals are being banned, the chemical industry is creating new combinations which skirt the rules.

Washington Toxics Coalition in partnership with Safer States purchased foam-containing baby and children's items from major retailers in six states. They sent samples of the foam to a Duke University research laboratory for testing.

The study found:

• Chlorinated Tris (TDCPP) was present in 16 of 20 products. TDCPP is the chemical that was voluntarily removed from children's pajamas in the 1970s because of health concerns.
• The level of flame retardants in products was high. The 17 products that contained toxic flame retardants had an average of 3.9% by foam weight.
• These flame retardants are not chemically bound to the foam, which means that they escape from the products and get into the air and household dust, endangering the health of all in the home.

The real key to banning toxic flame retardants is a comprehensive policy which identifies the worst-of-the-worst chemicals, and sets in place a plan for phase-out in favor of safer alternatives. The states have seen that using the laser-focus of an individual chemical ban hand-in-hand with sweeping comprehensive policy is the most effective way to reduce toxic exposure to adults and little ones alike. Several states will be taking up the charge of toxic flame retardants this year, following in the footsteps of states like New York, which banned TCEP, a toxic Tris flame retardant, in 2011.

Women's Voices for the Earth
Dirty Secrets: What's Hiding in your Cleaning Products?

Hidden toxics in household cleaners underline the need for mandatory disclosure.

Women's Voices for the Earth (WVE) commissioned a laboratory to test 20 popular cleaning products for hidden toxic chemicals from the five top companies: Clorox, Procter & Gamble, Reckitt Benckiser, SC Johnson and Son, and Sunshine Makers (Simple Green). The report was particularly looking for undeclared and hidden toxic chemicals in products like all-purpose cleaners, laundry detergents, dryer sheets, air fresheners, disinfectant sprays and furniture polish.

WVE found:

• Some of the products tested contained reproductive toxins, carcinogens, and hormone disruptors.
• Allergens were detected in several products, with the most being found in fragranced air fresheners.
• Some "fragrance-free" products contained allergens.
• All toxic chemicals and allergens were undisclosed on the products' labels.

Simple Green, which bills itself as creating "non-toxic, biodegradable and environmentally safer cleaning products" contained several chemicals which cause health issues ranging from allergies to neurodevelopmental problems. One Simple Green product was found to have Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, which is part of the phthalate family associated with health risks such as lowered testosterone and lowered metabolism, which affect obesity rates. Simple Green had previously pledged to remove phthalates from its products.

WVE's findings underline the need for consistent ingredient disclosure, mandated and standardized on the federal level, so that consumers can make informed decisions about their household cleaning products.

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
Baby's Tub is Still Toxic

A report that changed the most famous children's shampoo.

In "Baby's Tub is Still Toxic", The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics—a coalition of women's, public health, labor, environmental health, and consumer's rights organizations—raised concerns about in Johnson & Johnson's use of quaternium-15 in the formula for its baby shampoos in the U.S. and some countries (but not in others). Quaternium-15 is of concern to environmental health advocates because it releases formaldehyde into cosmetics products. Formaldehyde is a carcinogenic chemical that is an extreme irritant to the eyes, nose and throat.

In a victory for the campaign, just as the report was being released Johnson & Johnson publicly stated¹ they were phasing out the use of formaldehyde- releasing chemicals from its baby products worldwide. The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics also announced that 322 cosmetics companies have met the goals of the Compact for Safe Cosmetics, the Campaign's voluntary pledge to avoid chemicals banned by health agencies outside the U.S. and to fully disclose product ingredients – a pioneering practice in the cosmetics industry².

These major successes by The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics prove that companies sometimes respond when consumer outrage is loud enough. But here's the thing: it took scientific analysis, dedicated dollars, and a coalition to identify the chemical in a baby shampoo. Federal disclosure laws should mandate that companies inform parents of any toxic chemicals in products used on their children.

Breast Cancer Fund
BPA in Thanksgiving Canned Food

Another BPA in cans test, same frustrating results.

In November, the Breast Cancer Fund released a report which studied the levels of bisphenol-A (BPA) in cans of food that would typically be used at the Thanksgiving dinner table: cream of mushroom soup, turkey gravy, evaporated milk, creamed corn, canned green beans, canned pumpkin, and cranberry sauce.

The report reinforced previous study results and found harmful amounts of BPA in cans. BPA in cans comes from the epoxy-resin can liner which is used to seal in the food.

The amount of BPA contained in the products which would be combined at a Thanksgiving meal reached levels which have been tied to health effects such as increased risk of breast cancer, reproductive effects, prostrate issues, obesity, and metabolic functions. The levels would be especially harmful to fetuses and infants.

An especially frustrating fact for environmental health advocates is that the levels of BPA varied from state to state and even from can to can across the same product. Del Monte Fresh Cut Sweet Corn, Cream Style had undetectable levels in New York, 4 parts per billion (ppb) of BPA in California, but 221 ppb in Minnesota (the highest result of the test). Moreover, BPA levels were not tied to a predictor such as expiration date. This means that consumers cannot depend on BPA levels to be consistent for a particular product, which makes protecting one's family from BPA all the more difficult without removing canned food from the diet altogether.

A Lot of Work To Do

We at Safer States are often reporting on victories among the states, be it bans on specific chemicals or wide-sweeping policies which encourage safer chemical alternatives. But these reports remind us that we have a long way to go. Until consumer products are safe from toxic chemicals which threaten the health of children and adults alike, our work is not done.

This year, we will continue to push for:

1. Specific policies which quickly phase out the worst-of-the-worst chemicals. Focus on toxic chemicals like BPA, phthalates and toxic Tris on the state level is the quickest path to getting them out of our lives.
2. Comprehensive policies on the state level that address the backbone of how we deal with toxic chemicals. States need to set policies into place which dictate how chemical companies manufacture and sell consumer products, and whether those products contain toxic chemicals.
3. Federal reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act, which is the law that oversees chemical policies on a federal level and is hopelessly out of date.

In our next post, look for specific ways that advocates around the country will be looking to pass policies in 2012 state legislative sessions that better protect citizens from these toxic threats.

References

¹Letter from Susan Nettesheim to Lisa Archer Johnson & Johnson, November 16 2011.
²Market Shift: Hundreds of Cosmetics Companies Fulfill Safe Products Pledge Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, November 30 2011.

It's no secret that the United States is battling overwhelming issues with obesity. Current statistics show that 34% of Americans are clinically obese, and 68% are overweight¹, and the federal government has found that a third of American children are obese or overweight.

This is having a tremendous consequence on the nation as a whole, including an estimated economic cost of $270 billion per year in the United States, according to a report² released this year. The costs come in need for medical care and the loss of worker productivity due to death and disability.

So, as a society, we are tackling obesity in all the expected ways. We are encouraging adults and children alike to eat less, eat better, move more, and to live healthy lifestyles. We are reevaluating school lunch programs, insisting that fast food restaurants provide healthy options, and encouraging healthy decisions at every juncture.

But what if some chemicals we were exposed to every day were making us fat? Enter obesogens. Science has recently uncovered that exposure to certain chemicals sets the stage for obesity.