SureBaby Blog

Pediatricians Fight For Stronger Chemical Laws

Posted by admin

More and more studies are warning about the dangers of toxic chemicals in the products we buy, and now the American Academy of Pediatrics is pushing for stronger laws that will give consumers more information about what they’re buying.

Specifically, the group is fighting to have extensive testing performed on chemicals in manufacturing to examine the impact on pregnant women and children. If a chemical raises “reasonable levels of concern,” that should be enough to have it banned, rather than waiting to identify the clear exposure levels that trigger death, disease and impairment, they say.

Lead author of the Academy’s public statement Dr. Jerome Paulson noted that there is extreme oversight at the federal level in testing chemical substances, which impacts his ability to provide patients with advice. “We share the frustration of a lot of people that these chemicals are being addressed with sort of a flavour-of-the-month approach,” he said.

Generally, when a harmful substance is identified, it is identified in the context of a single product. Many people don’t have the information necessary to identify other products that may be made with the same chemical, because manufacturers aren’t required to expose the substances used to make their products.

The Academy of Pediatrics wants to create stronger laws and amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to help provide more insight on toxic substances, but many believe it will be a difficult task. “Frankly, there are thousands of chemicals in use, and our understanding on neurotoxicity is practically zero,” Marc Weisskopf, a Harvard School of Public Health environmental epidemiologist noted. In his opinion, the battle lies in defining the “evidence” for citing a chemical or substance harmful or toxic.

To read the full statement issued by the Academy of Pediatrics, visit the organization’s online journal, Pediatrics.

Sponsored Links for Pediatricians Fight For Stronger Chemical Laws[what's this]

Leave a Reply