How do you put your finger on a phenomenon that shape-shifts its way into nearly every corner of our lives, making 1,001 promises: flame-proofing, stain-proofing, germ-killing, fragrance-enhancing, sun-protecting?
All those vows come in different packages, but they have one unmistakable thing in common – they’re hormone disruptors.
You’ve likely heard about these in relation to flame retardants, can linings, cleaners, squishy sandals, kids’ toys, perfume, hair dye, antibacterial soap, sunscreen, sex toys, all things vinyl, most things plastic. The list goes on.
Since the endocrine system tells our 10 trillion cells how to develop, hormone disruptors can affect us in so many ways: thyroid problems, early puberty, fertility woes, rises in breast/prostate/testicular cancer, fibroids, endometriosis, genital birth defects, obesity, heart disease, ADHD.
So what’s our government doing to shield us from them? Well, very little, according to a forum organized by a coalition of women’s health networks, breast cancer orgs and the CAW held at the Best Western last week. There, scientists and health advocates accused the feds and provinces of failing to protect us from this burgeoning health crisis.
As it stands, the government’s current toxicology tests rely on the old “dose makes the poison” model, but we’re realizing that endocrine disruptors (EDs) behave differently. Many end up raising serious concerns at surprisingly low levels. Enviro health scientist Michael Gilbertson warned that when you’re talking hormone disruptors, there are no safe levels, and our current toxicology tests aren’t picking up on the problem. Even when effects are found, he adds, they don’t lead to government action the way cancer findings do.
Dayna Scott, enviro law prof, noted that the system is also vulnerable to corporate influence, since the standard-setting bodies that establish “safe” levels are dominated by industry scientists.
Yes, Health Canada has declared estrogen-mimicker bisphenol A toxic and is in the process of doing so for triclosan, the antibacterial ingredient (see ewg.org/triclosanguide) that’s been found to interfere with thyroid function in frogs.
Nevertheless, HC has no plans to ban either ingredient. The big problem raised at the forum is that tackling one ED at a time – even if you ban it – doesn’t actually work to protect public health. Once regulators acknowledged that PCBs were bad news, industry replaced the harmful flame retardants with their chemical cousins PBDEs, unleashing a whole torrent of new endocrine-disrupting ramifications.
And now that most PBDEs (used in furnishings and electronics) are finally on the way out, with national bans coming in, we’re finding out that their rushed-to-market replacement, Firemaster 550, is also trouble (linked to extreme weight gain, early-onset puberty and signs of heart disease in lab animals).
The same thing’s happening with BPA. If you’re buying BPA-free plastic baby bottles, I’ve got some bad news. One study found that 90 per cent of plastic products tested (including BPA-free ones), still leach estrogen-mimicking compounds when exposed to heat (i.e. dishwashers), UV light, or microwaves. Ditto for BPA-free thermal cash register receipts now using BPS as a replacement.
Ultimately, our regulators’ strategy for dealing with hormone disruptors boils down to a giant game of Whac-A-Mole. Bonk one on the head and up comes another and another. That’s why we’ve got to listen to scientists on the front lines warning that hormone disruptors have to be dealt with as a whole.
A European Parliamentary report is recommending that manufacturers bear the burden of proof and that endocrine disruptors be regulated as “substances of very high concern” even in the absence of “precise knowledge.”
In the absence of a similar initiative here, we can opt to stay away from antibacterial soap and canned foods or choose brands that don’t line their cans with BPA or BPS (like Eden), but, as Scott says, that puts the burden of regulatory failure on women, who do the shopping in most families. It leaves the majority of Canadians swallowing estrogen-mimickers and exposes women working, say, in canning factories to five times the normal risk of premenopausal breast cancer. We have to push for safe chems on the job, in our schools and on our shelves. It’s our right.
Got a question?
Send your green queries to:
ecoholic@nowtoronto.com | twitter.com/ecoholicnation
