« May 2006 | Main | July 2008 »
June 29, 2006
Myth Busting from Harvard Women's Health Watch
Here are two urban myths about plastics and food safety that won’t die and keep circulating in email: When food is wrapped in plastic or placed in a plastic container and microwaved, additives in the plastic can migrate into food; and plastic food wrap and plastic food containers contain phthalates, which can leach into the food
I’m very glad that Harvard Women’s Health Watch has decided to get the facts and do a little myth-busting. The July, 2006 Health Watch notes that FDA knows that additives can migrate into foods -- and that the agency has taken steps to make sure the levels are not harmful to the US public. The second myth is the claim that phthalates can leach from food containers and food wrap. But the reality is that they’re not used to make these products in the States. So, next time you get an e-mail touting these urban myths, be an activist for the truth. E-mail your friends and let them know that the FDA is on the job and they can use microwavable materials with confidence. To read the whole article from Harvard Women’s Health Watch, just click here. To read an FDA article on the topic, click here.
Posted by Marian at 2:46 PM | Comments (0)
June 21, 2006
Phthalates in cosmetics? No problem, says FDA.
It has long been a mystery to us why pressure groups have conducted such a frenzied attack on the use of phthalates in cosmetics and nail polish. Absorption through the skin and inhalation are not significant routes of exposure to phthalates, when compared to ingestion. And the Food and Drug Administration, which has the power to seize cosmetic products that present a risk to humans, has reviewed the matter and agrees that there is no reason for consumers to be concerned.
But after the pressure group blitzkrieg began, following a survey of products on the shelf measured for their phthalate content, the FDA in an apparent act of self-defense did its own "shelf study" of personal care products. It has now published the results of that study in the Journal of Cosmetic Science. It found what the pressure group study found – yes, indeed, there are phthalates in cosmetics – primarily DEP in fragrances, and DMP in nail polish. And its collected data largely agreed with what the pressure groups study found (proving nothing more than that the group hired a good lab.)
And, so, what did the FDA conclude from all this? Exactly what it said before – "...there is no basis upon which to take regulatory action at this time." Translated from the bureaucrat-ese, that means it found no reason to think consumers are at risk from phthalates in personal care products.
Posted by Marian at 2:31 PM | Comments (0)
June 16, 2006
Some good phthalate science (if we do say so ourselves!)
One of an impressive series of articles on biomonitoring just published online by Environmental Health Perspectives was authored by the Phthalate Esters Panel's own Rick McKee, who was chairman of the panel's Toxicology Research Task group for many years. He and co-author Antonia Calafat of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention describe what the CDC's biomonitoring studies tell us about phthalates – and they tell us a lot. Dr. McKee, a toxicologist and one of the country's leading experts on phthalates, and Dr. Calafat, an expert on the CDC's biomonitoring program, looked at two phthalates as case studies, and make these main points in their article:
- The CDC's methods can detect metabolites of phthalates in human urine samples down to the parts per billion level. (One part per billion equals one minute in 2,000 years.)
- The data that CDC collects can be used to give us accurate measurements of total external phthalate dose from all sources (using a formula developed by toxicologist Raymond David, also a former chairman of the Panel's research program). Previous exposure assessments were indirect “guesstimates,” and were usually higher than the actual exposures.
- The actual exposure levels revealed by the CDC data are below levels of concern established by the government.
Those who like to say that phthalates have not been assessed for their potential risks to health just aren't paying attention. Phthalates are one of the most extensively studied families of chemical in use today. And I am proud to say that Rick and Ray and our other panel toxicologists have made significant contributions to that body of knowledge over the 30 years of the panel's existence.
Posted by Marian at 7:08 PM | Comments (0)
June 5, 2006
New report flunks the smell test
It’s new car smell time again! It is all too common for phthalates to be identified as part of a new car’s indoor air, amid dark warnings of the toxicity of the “new car smell.” It doesn’t seem to matter that no report that we are aware of has ever identified phthalates as a significant presence in the air inside a car. Or that phthalates have little or no smell. Or that they are not very volatile compared to the compounds that can be found in a new car’s interior air.
Now we have a new report that names phthalates as a significant “airborne chemical” in car interiors. Or at least that’s what the news release says. But it’s not what the report says. It turns out the new report doesn’t have anything new to say about phthalates at all. In fact, of all the auto interior tests cited in the report, going back more than a decade, none is reported to have found any phthalates! You have to read deep into the report to find the basis for featuring phthalates. It is in a report we have already reviewed – see our January 12 blog – that claims to have found deposits of a phthalate on the windshield. We found it significant that the earlier report did not even bother to test the actual air inside the cars. The key question is how can this new report, prepared for an organization called Greenguard Environmental Institute by an institution that calls itself Air Quality Sciences, include phthalates as one of its “airborne chemicals?”
Good question. We deal with this all the time – anti-chemical propaganda masquerading as science.
Posted by Marian at 11:16 AM | Comments (0)