=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL’S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #369
—December 23, 1993—
News and resources for environmental justice.
——
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
The Back issues and Index are
available here.
The official RACHEL archive is here.
It’s updated constantly.
To subscribe, send E-mail to rachel-
weekly-request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It’s
free.
===Previous
Issue==========================================Next
Issue===
CHEMICALS AND HEALTH–PART 1
Each year some 3.5 billion pounds of industrial toxins, and an
additional 1 to 2 billion pounds of pesticides are intentionally
released into the environment of the U.S., according to U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
During the early 1990s it has became fashionable for the mass
media to portray these chemicals as having little effect on human
or environmental health. [1] However, in scientific and medical
journals, the evidence linking chemicals to ill health has
continued to accumulate.
Writing in the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH in 1992, Philip
J. Landrigan, chairman of the department of community medicine at
the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, said,
“Disease caused by toxic chemicals in the environment is a
substantial… cause of morbidity [illness] and mortality [death]
in the United States and around the world.” [2] He went on to
say, “Public health workers and the makers of public policy must
recognize that toxic chemicals in the environment are important,
widespread, proven causes of human disease. Each year preventable
exposures to chemical toxins sicken and kill thousands of persons
of all ages in the United States and around the world. These
hazards must be confronted. They cannot be wished away.
Reduction of exposures to chemical toxins will prevent thousands
of deaths and will improve the quality of hundreds of thousands
of lives.”
Is there any evidence that these claims are true?
LEAD POISONING: “Lead poisoning is epidemic among young U.S.
children,” Landrigan writes. “The Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) estimates that 3 to 4 million American pre-school children
have blood lead levels above 10 micrograms per deciliter
(mcg/dl). Blood lead levels in this range in young children have
been shown to cause depression of neurological and psychological
function, effects that appear to be permanent.”
(In 1993, the National Research Council of the National Academy
of Sciences published the estimate that 6 million American
children and 400,000 fetuses, at any given time, have 10 mcg/dl
lead in their blood, or more, and that this level of lead “places
them at risk of adverse health effects”–including reduced IQ and
reduced ability to concentrate. [3])
ASBESTOS: “Asbestos in the workplace has created an absolute
disaster,” says Landrigan. By the year 2000, an estimated
300,000 American workers will have been killed by exposure to
asbestos. Deaths will continue to occur well into the 21st
century. With the overseas spread of asbestos-containing
building materials, the pandemic [wide epidemic] is now extending
to the third world.”
OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE: “Studies conducted in New York state have
estimated that 50,000 to 70,000 workers die each year from
chronic occupational diseases resulting from past exposures to
toxic substances,” Landrigan writes. “Included are lung cancers
and mesothelioma [cancer of the lining of the chest cavity] from
asbestos exposure; bladder cancer among dye workers; leukemia and
lymphoma in workers exposed to benzene and ionizing radiation;
chronic bronchitis in workers exposed to dusts; disorders of the
nervous system (including possibly dementia, Parkinson’s disease,
and motoneuron disease [Lou Gehrig’s disease]) in workers exposed
to pesticides, solvents, and certain other neurotoxins; renal
[kidney] failure in workers exposed to lead; and cardiovascular
disease in workers exposed to carbon monoxide and carbon
disulfide.”
In addition to what is known, millions of American workers are
being exposed to chemicals whose effects are unknown because 80%
[or 48,000] of the 60,000 chemicals now in use have never been
tested for their carcinogenic [cancer-causing], neurotoxic,
immunotoxic, or other toxic effects, Landrigan says.
In addition to the 50,000 to 70,000 deaths cause by toxic
exposures in the workplace each year, an estimated 350,000 new
cases of illness occur among workers each year from toxic
exposures on the job, Landrigan says.
CANCER: Between 1950 and 1988, for U.S. whites, age-adjusted
incidence [occurrence] for all forms of cancer rose by 43.5% and
age-adjusted cancer mortality [deaths] increased by 2.9%.
“Explanations for these increases do not exist,” says Landrigan.
“They do not appear to be attributable solely to changes in
cigarette smoking.” Several of the cancers for which increased
incidence at all ages (and mortality above age 55) have been
noted in a number of industrialized nations are not known to be
related to smoking: these include multiple myeloma [cancer of the
bone marrow], brain cancer, cancer of the breast, testicular
cancer, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
“Changes in competing causes of death, improved access to health
care, and alterations in diagnostic technology also do not appear
to account entirely for the observed changes in cancer incidence
and mortality,” says Landrigan.
* * *
During 1993, the relationship of toxic chemicals to breast cancer
came into sharp focus. Cancer of the female breast has increased
58% during the past 35 years. Even when better diagnosis
(mammography) is taken into account, it appears that breast
cancer is increasing at a steady one percent per year. In 1940,
an American woman’s lifetime risk of getting breast cancer was
one in 16; today it is one in 8–a rate that warrants the term
“epidemic.” A review of recent studies, by Devra Lee Davis and
others, appearing in ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES in 1993,
offered many lines of evidence linking breast cancer to
“xenoestrogens”–xeno from the Greek word for “stranger or
foreigner.” [4] Xenoestrogens are common toxic chemicals that
mimic, or interfere with, the body’s natural estrogen. Estrogen
is female sex hormone–the chemical in blood that gives rise to a
woman’s monthly cycle. In the 1990s, it has been discovered that
many common industrial chemicals and pesticides mimic hormones
and thus can interfere with fundamental bodily processes. (See
RHWN #365.) DDT, methoxychlor, chlordecone (kepone), PCBs,
atrazine (and other triazines), benzene, and polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons [PAHs], among others, can act like sex hormones and
interfere with fundamental biological processes, such as
reproduction, in wildlife and humans. PAHs are produced by
automobiles, by burning of fossil fuels, and by incinerators.
Pesticides and other xenoestrogens are manufactured by firms such
as DuPont, Monsanto, and Dow.
Davis and her colleagues revealed that xenoestrogens stimulate
the growth of cells in the breast, very possibly giving rise to
cancer. From studies of humans and laboratory animals Davis and
her colleagues found compelling evidence that estrogens lie at
the heart of the breast cancer problem, and that xenoestrogens
very well may be causally related to the epidemic.
From epidemiological studies, there is evidence that exposure of
females to xenoestrogens while in the womb can increase their
risk of breast cancer as adults. And in 1993, several studies
raised the possibility that exposure of males to xenoestrogens
while in the womb reduces their ability to produce sperm after
they mature. The average male today produces only half as much
sperm as his grandfather did, and exposure to environmental
toxins may well be the cause of this decline. [5] (If this
decline were to continue at historical rates, humans in
industrialized countries would have difficulty reproducing
themselves by about the year 2020.) Furthermore, there is now
evidence that prostate cancer, the second leading cause of cancer
deaths in U.S. men (after lung cancer) is linked to xenoestrogens.
Journals published by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, and the American Chemical Society, as
well as the American Public Health Association, in 1993 took
official notice of this new information about chlorinated
chemicals and human health. Prime Time on ABC TV aired an
exploratory program on breast cancer and DDT. But for the most
part the mass media in 1993 continued to promote the view that
the connection between chemicals and ill health is imaginary and
that the public suffers from “chemophobia.”
Without public understanding of current scientific and medical
views, public policy cannot very well protect public health. As
Philip Landrigan said in 1992, calling for a policy of
“containment:”
“The tragedy of environmental diseases is that they are highly
preventable. Toxic environmental diseases arise as a direct
consequence of human activity and can therefore, in theory, be
prevented through modification of that activity. The control of
toxic disease does not require changing the behavior of millions
of addicted or habituated individuals, only the containment of
common sources of exposure to chemical toxins. Such containment
is demonstrably achievable through legislation, regulation, and
other well-understood mechanisms of communal action. Children
must be protected from exposure to lead. Automotive and
industrial atmospheric emissions must be curbed. Dangerous
chemicals in the work environment must be replaced with safe
substitutes; hazardous processes must be enclosed and ventilated;
and workers and consumers must be provided with knowledge,
training, and protective equipment. Premarket testing of new
chemicals and processes constitutes a very effective approach to
the prevention of toxic disease.” [2]
–Peter Montague, Ph.D.
===============
[1] For example, Keith Schneider, “New View Calls Environmental
Policy Misguided,” NEW YORK TIMES March 21, 1993, pgs. 1, 30.
Descriptor terms: toxic chemicals; production; statistics;
toxics; pesticides; epa; u.s. environmental protection agency;
american journal of public health; philip j. landrigan; mount
sinai school of medicine; lead; children; national research
council; national academy of sciences; nrc; nas; asbestos;
occupational safety and health; third world; cancer; lung
cancer; mesothelioma; bladder cancer; leukemia; lymphoma;
benzene; dust; air pollution; particulates; radiation; chronic
bronchitis; parkinson’s disease; lou gehrig’s disease; motoneuron
disease; solvents; cardiovascular disease; mortality statistics;
morbidity statistics; testing; breast cancer; devra lee davis;
environmental health perspectives; estrogen; ddt; methoxychlor;
chlordecone; pcbs; atrazine; triazines; benzene; polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons; chlorinated hydrocarbons; chlorine; pahs;
automobiles; fossil fuels; oil; natural gas; coal; incineration;
xenoestrogens; sperm count; prostate cancer; american association
for the advancement of science; aaas; american chemical society;
prime time; abc tv; containment; pollution prevention;
regulation; keith schneider;