Say What? A Chemical Can Damage Your Lungs, Liver and Kidneys and Still Be Labeled "Non-Toxic"?

http://www.alternet.org/environment/150888/say_what_a_chemical_can_damage_your_lungs%2C_liver_and_kidneys_and_still_be_labeled_%22non-toxic%22/

Bisphenol A, parabens, phthalates, formaldehyde, and on and on. Do they expect us all to be chemists? I’m a chemist and even I don’t want make every trip to the store a research project. Why not just provide a simple label like “nontoxic” that we can look for? Surely it is illegal to put a nontoxic label on products containing known toxic or carcinogenic substances—especially on children’s products. Not so. And we all should know how we got into this mess.

Until the 1980s, even asbestos was a common ingredient in many products including children’s art materials. For example, one product was a powdered papier-mâché product for children marketed by Milton Bradley. It contained about 50 percent asbestos powder. Called FibroClay, the asbestos-containing product had a nontoxic approved product (AP) seal on it from the organization known today as the Arts and Creative Materials Institute (ACMI).

Although the hazards of asbestos were known in the 1970s and the 1980s, the only required toxicity tests for consumer products at the time were acute animal tests. These tests involve a brief exposure to the test substance and observation of the animals two weeks later. Because asbestos didn’t immediately poison the test animals, no law was broken by labeling this product “nontoxic.”

The asbestos problem and other labeling issues were raised by a group of activists, including myself, when I worked with a nonprofit corporation later known as the Center for Safety in the Arts. The center presented the problem to the National Art Materials Trade Association (NAMTA) in 1979. NAMTA refused to work with us to amend the labeling laws to cover chronic or long-term hazards, however, so we took the issue to various states. We were joined by many groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of School Administrators, the American Public Health Association, and Artists Equity—a huge coalition of trade associations, health professionals, and artists. Yet the U.S. Public Interest Research Group and its many state offices became the backbone of the lobbying efforts.

More at the link --

I mean they can transplant those things now so it's all good, man! <sigh>

This is probably the 4th or 5th time I've said this here at DU, in an attempt to get the word out: a book called Our Stolen Future was published back in 1996 that started ringing the alarm bells on this subject. Other books have come along since then, such as Our Toxic World and, most recently, Toxic Bodies by Nancy Langston. Anyone interested -- and we ALL should be -- can consult these books and many journal articles on the subject of environmental pollutants and widely-used compounds such as phthalates acting as endocrine disruptors.

I also highly recommend a CBC documentary called The Disappearing Male. Information about it is at http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/doczone/2008/disappearingmale/

Those in Canada can stream it at http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Shows/Doc_Zone/ID=1233750780

This documentary discusses the demasculinizing effects of bisphenol A, phthalates, and other such compounds. The pronounced decline in sperm counts, increased incidence of birth defects of the urogenital tract in male babies, marked increase in autism spectrum disorders (which affect boys much more than girls), and other such phenomena are all linked to these compounds.

Canada has since banned bisphenol A.

For those who are into downloading: you can dl this documentary if you know where and how to look for it.