By
Douglas Fischer, STAFF WRITER
SACRAMENTO—The effort to ban two plastics common in
children's toys and known tocontaminate
our bodies got its biggest push yet in California
on Tuesday, when scientists told lawmakers of the permanent harm these products
inflict on the very young.
The
informational hearing laid out the case for and against two plastic additives:
bisphenol-a, used to harden plastic baby bottles, and several phthalates, a
ubiquitous chemical family used to soften vinyl in baby teething rings and soft
books.
Both
act as sex hormones in the body. The question before lawmakers Tuesday was
whether levels found in products and in humans are high enough to cause
concern.
Assembly
Bill 319 by Assemblywoman Wilma Chan, D-Oakland, would ban both compounds from
children's items in California.
Proponents said Tuesday that the science suggests that at the low levels often
found in the environment today, both chemicals disrupt the hormone system and
cause permanent reproductive and genital defects in developing embryos.
"Future
studies will determine the extent of these effects in humans," said Shanna
Swan, director
of the Center for Reproductive Epidemiology at the University of Rochester's School of Medicine and Dentistry. "The
question is: Should we wait?"
Industry
representatives, toy manufacturers and other scientists countered that the
additives - crucial for a variety of modern-day products including cosmetics,
lotions, perfumes and shatter-proof plastics - are safe. The push to ban both
compounds, they said, is politics and fear mongering at its worst, aimed at
scaring the daylights out of a slice of the population that has enough on their
minds: new mothers.
"Raising
kids is hard enough. Let's not make it harder by creating these fantasies of
chemical exposures that are not going to harm them," said James Lamb, the
former head of the Fertility and Reproduction Group of the National Toxicology
Program. He testified Tuesday on behalf of the toy industry.
But
recent studies have lawmakers thinking caution may be warranted. Both
phthalates and bisphenol-a are found in just about every part of our bodies -
blood, urine, even amniotic fluid. Last year, the governor signed a law
requiring manufacturers to label beauty products made with phthalates, often
added to bind fragrances and other
ingredients to cosmetics.
The
fear is that at very low levels, bisphenol-a and phthalates act as estrogen.
Exposure to pregnant
mothers carrying boys is particularly worrisome. In animal studies, a single
dose of one phthalate at the wrong time leaves "permanent and profound
effects" on the embryo, testified Earl Gray, a research biologist with the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
"There's
no reason humans wouldn't be affected if they were exposed to toxic levels at a
critical time of development."
And
humans do not appear to be immune at current levels, new research by Swan's
group suggests. She looked at phthalate levels in the urine of 85 pregnant
women, then studied the genital development of their babies. The boys from the
most highly exposed mothers were 10 times more likely to have impaired genital
development than boys from the least exposed mothers.
"Wherever
we've looked, human studies are consistent with rodent studies," she said.
But
with others citing evidence of no harm, the conflicting information makes a
decision difficult.
No
government, for instance, has imposed any restriction on bisphenol-a, originally
developed as a synthetic hormone 70 years ago and now found everywhere from the
plastic linings of canned food to water and baby bottles to dental sealants.
Europe
recently banned some phthalates from toys, and four phthalates have earned a
spot on California's
Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm.
But repeated risk assessments by the United States and other governments
have found no cause for concern.
"We're
bothered by any allegation that toy manufacturers would do anything to harm our customers,"
said Joan Lawrence, vice president for standards and regulatory affairs at the
Toy Industry Association. "If there was solid scientific evidence that
these products were harmful,
the toy industry would be the first to (remove the chemicals)."
What
Chan and others pushing AB 319 want to hear, however, is evidence these
products are safe. "There are safe alternatives," Chan said in an
interview before the hearing. "If they want to tell me - with 100 percent
certainty - that there's no risk to babies, I'd consider pulling my bill. But I
haven't heard them say that."
A
review published last year found that, of 152 studies looking for some harm as
a result of low-dose exposure to bisphenol-a, 129 found some adverse effect.
Only 33 found none, including all 12 industry-funded studies.
"If
the government sits down and looks at this, which it is under tremendous
pressure not to do, this chemical is finished." said Frederick
vom Saal, author of that review and biology professor at the University of Missouri
who has specialized in the estrogenic effect of chemicals.
