 Up to now, I've avoided writing
about the impact of untested chemical poisons on people (especially
children) and the environment. After all, we grew up in an even less
regulated environment -- lead toothpaste tubes and Matchbox toys,
thermometers full of mercury that we broke open and played with as
kids, creosote-treated wood in the fireplace, DDT and 2,4 D on
dandelions, and so on. And we're OK, right? Kids today just don't have
the same hardy constitution we did. We 'built up immunity' to these
substances from heavy early exposure. Today's kids are just
overmedicated wimps. There are more reports of problems because we're
more aware of the problems, that's all.
That, of course, is what the chemical industry would like you to
believe. Truth is, we can't possibly be very aware of the problems and
causes because there is simply no data on most of the chemical
substances in everyday use. None.
There are so many new chemicals being introduced each year, in raw form
or as ingredients in new or reformulated products, and as waste and
byproducts of petrochemical and mineral processes, that even the US
government has cried 'uncle' and put a floor level in place for any
testing. If production of a chemical is
below that threshold, they just
don't test it at all. The regulators just don't have the
resources. And even when it does test, the EPA does short-term
testing only. They feed
massive amounts of these poisons to laboratory rats, to dogs and to one
wild animal, as a surrogate for its effect on 'pests', 'domestic
animals' and 'animals in the wild' respectively -- and as a surrogate for its impact on humans. They measure the
diseases and symptoms from these artificial tests, and if they are not too bad, they deem the
product safe for human use. If the resultant diseases and symptoms are bad, the regulators indicate
what safety warnings must be put on the label when it is applied. They
disavow responsibility for assessing any longer-term impact, which they
never have adequate time to assess. For example, in their product testing report
on Deet, the product so many of us are slathering all over our skin in
record amounts this year to protect ourselves from West Nile-carrying
mosquitos, the
EPA says:
Scientists have gathered no
evidence that indicates harmful reproductive effects to human users. No
direct relationship between DEET use and carcinogenity in humans has
been established. The EPA needs further animal testing data to
completely evaluate DEET.
They do admit it causes birth defects in chicks and "increased
mortality rates" in baby rats. Of course, although we can torture
millions of helpless animals to come up with this wisdom, we really
don't know what the impact would be on humans because it would be
unethical to subject humans to the type of savagery that we inflict on
other animals to come up with these informative reports.
Bottom line: We don't have the
faintest idea how dangerous this, or any chemical is. And this
product is a "level 4" product -- one of the very few chemicals deemed
safe enough, after extensive animal cruelty, to approve it for contact
with human skin.
Let's look at what its manufacturer, Monsanto
Pharmacia, those swell
guys who brought us Agent Orange, PCBs and undisclosed, privately patented GM foods, say
themselves about a somewhat more dangerous chemical, Roundup, the top-selling
herbicide in the world, which it encourages you to spray on walkways
and driveways to get rid of those pesky weeds in the cracks:
KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN.
CAUSES EYE BURNS. May be harmful if inhaled. Avoid contact with eyes,
skin or clothing. Wear long sleeved shirt and pants, or coveralls,
chemical-resistant gloves and eye protection. Wash thoroughly with soap
and water after handling. Avoid direct applications to any body of
water. Do not contaminate water by disposal of waste or cleaning of
equipment. Spray solutions of this product should be mixed, stored and
applied only in stainless steel, aluminum, fibreglass, plastic and
plastic-lined steel containers. DO NOT MIX, STORE OR APPLY THIS PRODUCT
OR SPRAY SOLUTIONS OF THIS PRODUCT IN GALVANIZED STEEL OR UNLINED STEEL
(EXCEPT STAINLESS STEEL) CONTAINERS OR SPRAY TANKS. This product or
spray solutions of this product react with such containers and tanks to
produce hydrogen gas which may form a highly combustible gas mixture.
This gas mixture could flash or explode, causing serious personal
injury, if ignited by open flame, spark, welder’s torch, lighted
cigarette or other ignition source. Avoid contamination of seed, feed,
and foodstuffs. Make the empty container unsuitable for further use.
Dispose of the container in accordance with provincial requirements.
For information on the disposal of unused, unwanted product, contact
the manufacturer or the provincial regulatory agency. Contact the
manufacturer and the provincial regulatory agency in case of a spill,
and for clean-up of spills. Do not apply this product using aerial
spray equipment. AVOID CONTACT WITH FOLIAGE, GREEN STEMS, OR FRUIT OF
CROPS, DESIRABLE PLANTS AND TREES SINCE SEVERE INJURY OR DESTRUCTION
MAY RESULT. Do not allow spray mist to drift since even minute
quantities of spray can cause severe damage or destruction to nearby
crops, plants or other areas on which treatment is not intended, or may
cause other unintended consequences. Do not apply when winds are gusty
or in excess of 8 kilometres per hour or when other conditions,
including lesser wind velocities, will allow drift to occur. When
spraying, avoid combinations of pressure and nozzle type that will
result in fine particles (mist) which are more likely to drift. DO NOT
USE IN GREENHOUSES.
Yes,
I know, this wording is all written by lawyers to protect poor
Monsanto from frivolous litigation by unscrupulous consumers. In fact,
for the benefit of farmers who don't want to go through all this
bother, Monsanto has now developed, and will sell you each year,
genetically modified seeds that are resistant to Roundup (in other
words, they sell both the disease and the cure), so you can ignore
these warnings and just drown your crops in this toxic poison, secure
in the knowledge that the Frankenstein crops Monsanto has sold you are
the only thing that will live through it. Meanwhile, in public
pronouncements Monsanto Pharmacia has described this product as "as
safe as table salt". And the US National Forest Service, in an attempt
to make its life easier, has started spraying National Forests with
massive doses of Roundup "to reduce the frequency of forest fires".
There has been no study of the impact of this chemical dumping on
forest ecosystems. Meanwhile, after years of aerial spraying of tons of
Roundup on suspected coca-growing areas of Colombia, destroying the
ability of much of that country's soil to support any plant life, the
drug growers have simply genetically engineered a new coca plant that is Roundup-resistant,
so US taxpayer dollars are now going to be providing these drug-growers
with free herbicidal spraying that will make cocaine growing simpler
and maintenance-free. Thank you, Monsanto! No wonder so many people love you.
If only Roundup were the only product we had to worry about. But there
are over seven
million
chemicals commercially available, and most of them have
undergone no testing whatsoever. Even the testing that is done is
heavily dependent on the industry's own test findings, which are
inevitably biased and self-serving: Monsanto and most of its
competitors have been convicted of concealing and falsifying
test results. And they pay cash-strapped universities handsomely for
'objective' tests supporting their arguments that their products are
safe.
These chemicals are used in many commercial applications: food and
cosmetic additives to provide colour, texture, taste or extend shelf
life, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, plastic products and plastic
containers, building materials, insulation, paints, wood preservatives,
rubber, and many others. Many of the most dangerous chemicals aren't
used in any commercial applications at all -- substances like dioxins are merely hazardous
byproducts of the chemicals that are produced for commercial use.
AIG
Insurance, one of the largest insurers of chemical companies, lists
the many dangers that the production, disposal and use of chemical toxins
give rise to, which they of course insure. The descriptions of these
dangers make interesting consumer reading, coming as they do from an
organization that makes its living understanding risk and has no vested interest in understating them. Here are just a few of the groups they
insure, showing the many health and environmental dangers their products and processes are responsible for:
The CDC, in a marvellous example of understatement, says:
Children are uniquely vulnerable
to toxicants in the environment. Pound for pound, children eat more
food, breathe more air, and drink more water. Their hand-to-mouth
behaviors and their activities close to the ground increase their
chances for exposure to hazardous substances. Their metabolic pathways
are immature, so they detoxify and excrete pollutants less efficiently
than adults. In addition, children are growing and developing rapidly,
which can be disrupted by hazardous substances in the environment.
After childhood exposure, they can get diseases that can take many
decades to develop.
The use of some hazardous substances to meet social and economic goals
often prevails over environmental health concerns. Lack of effective
policy and regulations to prevent exposures to hazardous substances
often stems from a lack of scientific information necessary for
accurate risk assessments and from the general public's lack of
education about environmental health effects. Globally, disadvantaged
populations are more exposed to hazardous
substances as a result of exposures in the workplace, environmental
contamination, unregulated disposal in garbage dumps, and a lack of
knowledge about how to avoid exposure.
New York's organic farming association has pulled together a depressing analysis
of the quantity of pesticides that we each consume daily, and some
indication of the health consequences. In Canada, a physicians group,
alarmed at lack of government regulation in the face of overwhelming
evidence of their hazards, has documented that evidence and called for an all-out ban on pesticides except in health emergencies.
Most of us have no idea just how often and to what degree we're exposed
to chemicals that we really don't know the dangers of. The known
dangers include: birth defects, alterations in sexual and functional
development, neurologic disorders, diabetes, allergic reactions,
immunologic and immune deficiency disorders, cancers, leukemia,
respiratory disorders, endometriosis, structural abnormalities in the
reproductive, prostate and pituitary system, thyroid disorders,
non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, organ damage, skin diseases, reduced physical
stamina, developmental, behavioural and mental disorders, anger,
inattention, decreased mental capacity, learning disabilities,
dyslexia, hyperactivity disorders, autism, propensity to violent
behaviours, reduced motor skills, and deterioration in gross and fine
eye-hand coordination. The incidence of infant and childhood cancers in
particular is rising at an astronomical rate.
Here's a day in
the life scenario of a typical child:
The child sleeps in a bed made of
plastic, covered with synthetic sheets that are treated with
fire-retardant, and washed in harsh detergents containing toxic
synthetic chemicals. Sheets are dried at high temperature creating
dioxin from the chlorine bleach residue. The mattress cover's
flexibility is from plasticizers and it's treated with an antibacterial
agent. The room's new synthetic carpeting and freshly painted walls
offgass toxins. Snugly fitting disposable diapers contain toxic
ingredients such as sodium polyacrylates, and ethylvinylacetate-based
glues, resins, softening agents and antioxidants. His skin lotion
contains phthalates, which are known to mimic and damage hormones. His
drinking and bathing water contains high levels of chlorine, fluorine,
toxic metals, nitrates and possibly coliform. His food has been
drenched in a variety of pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides, then
wrapped in plastics, coated with sealants, or canned. It's heated in,
eaten from and eaten with plastic. Warm leftovers are saved in plastic
and refrigerated. While being driven about town, the child sits in a
car seat made of several types of plastic in a car that has that new
car smell, which is off-gassing of plastics. Dry-cleaned clothes,
perfume, hand cream, deodorant, hairspray, nail polish, lipstick, and
perhaps indirect cigarette smoke are also part the car's air. Driving
behind a diesel truck, fine particulate matter carrying carcinogens and
endocrine disrupters are forced deep into the child's lungs. They drive
through factory fumes to pick up the father, who does auto body repair,
and has just finished using paints and plastic filler. They stop to
fill up the car's gas tank and the fumes flow through the open window
along with the odour of the degreaser the mechanic uses. During the
summer ozone levels are high and smog is thick. In the winter, oil,
gas, coal, and/or wood combustion byproducts permeate the air. When the
child goes to school by diesel bus he is exposed to 23 to 46 times the
cancer risk considered "significant" by EPA and under federal
environmental laws. The air in rural areas will be laced with
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, dust, and diesel fumes. Jets fly
overhead, sometimes dumping jet fuel at high altitudes, which vaporizes
before reaching the ground. At school, the child will sit at a plastic
desk, on a synthetic floor covering, within walls covered with a vinyl
material, under vinyl covered ceiling tiles and fluorescent lighting.
The school has air conditioning with no fresh air supply, recycling
stagnant air through dusty, damp, mould ridden ducts. Old insulation
flakes from the ceilings and walls into the air. The teacher's perfume
mixes with the accelerants of the whiteboard markers. Many surfaces are
treated with pesticides, bleach and antibacterial liquids. The grounds
are covered with pesticides, herbicides, and synthetic fertilizers that
can contain just about any kind of toxic waste. Dozens of potent
chemicals are used in the swimming pool. For lunch, the child eats and
drinks highly processed, pesticide-ridden, irradiated foods with
synthetic preservatives, colourings, and a score of unnamed substances
whose only purpose is to extend the food's shelf life. The food is
often prepared at another location miles away, transported in plastic,
served on, and eaten with plates and utensils made of polystyrene.
Before eating, the child's hands are washed using a soap that is
antibacterial/antimicrobial, using chlorinated/fluoridated water.
What's the answer? There's one solution that's quite simple, and utterly radical. It's called
the Precautionary Principle, and it says: "When
an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment,
precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect
relationships are not fully established scientifically."
This principle shifts the onus of proof from citizens (who must today
prove conclusively that a chemical caused personal injury to them) to
producers (who would have to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, the
safety of a chemical before it could be produced or marketed
commercially). Better safe than sorry, in other words. If you think
this would be unduly onerous or economically catastrophic, please read
the FAQ in the link above. It was crafted by scientists and lawyers to
be simple and yet practical. It can work. In fact, San Francisco has
already legally adopted the principle, and other municipalities have or are considering following suit.
Another answer is to just say no: Refuse to buy products with chemicals
in them. Use natural alternatives to chemical cleaners, pesticides and
herbicides (there are many, many websites listing such alternatives).
Buy local, organically-produced foods. Avoid dangerous plastics like
polycarbonate, polystyrene, BPA and PVC. And never flush chemicals into
toilets, sinks or septic systems.
A third answer is political activism. This is most effectively done
within your own community. Lobby your municipal government to ban
"cosmetic spraying" of lawns and other large areas with pesticides and
herbicides, as many municipalities have already done. Find out who the
big polluters are in your community: Just type your zip code into the Environmental Defense website in the US, or your postal code into the Pollution Watch
site in Canada, to see what's being released into your local air and
water supply, and by which companies, and lobby to have these companies
cleaned up or shut down.
The fourth answer is awareness and vigilance. Learn the facts about chemicals -- how they're used and how they're dangerous: If you know, for example, that Bisphenol A (BPA) is a dangerous chemical found in many plastics, including baby bottles,
you can take appropriate action. Stay abreast of what we're starting to
learn every day about chemical dangers by subscribing to aggregators
like Environmental Health News. If you have to use chemical pesticides, study the dangers first before you choose.
We've let the chemical pollution of our world get out of control. It's
time to take that control back, for the sake of future generations, and
for our environment.
|
MADE IN CANADA
trust your
instincts 
