Dear
EarthTalk:
A few years back a study found over 200 chemicals in the umbilical
cords of newborns, particularly African American, Asian and Hispanic
babies. What are the causes of this phenomenon and what can be done
about it? --
Bettina Olsen, New York, NY
The
study referenced found traces of some 232 synthetic chemicals in cord
blood samples from 10 different babies of African
American, Asian and Hispanic descent
born in 2009 in different parts of the U.S. Study sponsors
Environmental Working Group (EWG) and Rachel’s Network were looking
to find out if the hormone-disrupting chemical Bisphenol A (BPA), a
plasticizer widely used in food and drink storage containers, is
present in the cord blood of minority babies in the U.S. Sadly and
not surprisingly, BPA turned up in nine of the 10 cord blood samples
tested. But perhaps even worse is the study’s detection of whole
new raft of chemicals showing up in babies’ cord blood for the
first time. Some of these newer offenders include tetrabromobisphenol
A (TBBPA) from computer circuit boards, synthetic fragrances used in
common cosmetics and detergents and Teflon-relative perfluorobutanoic
acid.
The
2009 study was a follow-up to an earlier analysis of chemicals in
cord blood in the mainstream U.S. population during 2004 births. That
earlier study found some 287 different industrial chemicals and
pollutants in babies’ cord blood, although BPA was not yet on EWG’s
watch list at the time. The more recent study focused on minority
babies because minority communities in the U.S. tend to bear a
disproportionate pollution burden given their closer proximity to
busy roads, industrial sites and older housing. But EWG points out
that they tested for chemicals that are likely found in virtually
every American household, so none of us are immune to exposure. EWG
hopes that by continuing to monitor the chemicals we are born with it
can hold corporate polluters’ and government regulators’ feet to
the fire in regard to waste outputs and pollution mitigation.
EWG
did not look for chemicals associated with smoking or alcohol
consumption on the part of mothers, instead focusing on contaminants
from exposures to consumer products and commercial chemicals
omnipresent on supermarket shelves. To EWG, the presence of these
chemicals in umbilical cord blood represents “a significant failure
on the part of the Congress and government agencies” charged with
protecting human health. “Our results strongly suggest that the
health of all children is threatened by trace amounts of hundreds of
synthetic chemicals coursing through their bodies from the earliest
stages of life.”
Part
of the problem is outdated laws governing the handling and use of
toxic chemicals. Currently 1976’s Toxic Substances Control Act is
the law of the land in regard to controlling the distribution, use
and disposal of toxic chemicals nationwide. But EWG and other groups
complain that hundreds of thousands of new chemical formulations are
unleashed on an unwitting public every year via America’s store
shelves because the federal government assumes new products and
ingredients to be innocent until proven guilty. These critics would
like to see the federal government take a more proactive role in
approving new substances for use in consumer products, not to mention
residential and workplace environments.
On the legislative
front, green groups are pinning their hopes for a reformed Toxic
Substances Control Act on New Jersey Democratic Senator Frank
Lautenberg’s Safe Chemicals Act (S. 847), introduced last fall. The
bill is currently spinning its wheels in committee hearings, but its
17 bi-partisan co-sponsors are optimistic that it will come up for a
floor vote before the 112th Congress wraps up the end of this year.
CONTACT:
EWG’s “Pollution in Minority Newborns,”
www.ewg.org/minoritycordblood.
EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E - The Environmental Magazine (www.emagazine.com). Send questions to: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe. Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.
Comments