Washington state can better protect people’s health by
deliberately stepping up to the problem toxic chemicals in the
environment, according to a new task force report provided to the
Washington governor and Legislature.
The task force, organized by the Washington Department of
Ecology, includes representatives from the world of business,
government and public health. The new “white paper” calls for
specific, creative actions to reduce potential harm caused by
chemical exposures.
Howard Frumkin, dean of the School of Public Health at the
University of Washington, served on the task force. He said
worrisome health trends and rising health-care costs provide
evidence of the problem. As he stated in a news release:
“We don’t know as much as we’d like about how toxic chemicals
affect health, but we can’t wait. We need to act, and we need to do
so in ways that are sensible, fair and evidence-based. I believe
that our state can come together to identify and implement
creative, effective solutions.”
Another member of the group, Sara Kendall, vice president for
corporate affairs and sustainability at Weyerhaeuser Company,
added:
“These issues are important, but they are also very complex. The
white paper represents a good starting place for a more complete
and thorough discussion by stakeholders.”
Because of the diverse membership on the committee, the overall
conclusions seem to be derived more from common sense rather than
from a desire to expand government oversight.
“Although we each individually have our preferences and
concerns, across this suite of ideas we all share a belief that we,
as a society, can do a better job reducing the adverse health,
environmental and economic impacts of toxic chemicals,” states a
letter accompanying the report.
Download the white paper, titled Toxics
Policy Reform for Washington State (PDF 1.5 mb), or visit the
Toxics
Reduction Strategy Workgroup on the Washington Department of
Ecology’s website.
Ecology’s new director, Maia Bellon, said:
“These proposed strategies come from knowledgeable experts
working alongside the Department of Ecology. The idea now is to
begin a broader conversation about how to build on our state’s past
accomplishments to reduce toxic chemicals.”
The white paper contains 12 recommendations for dealing with
toxic chemicals, including a proposed state policy that would say
simply, “Safer is better.”
Task force members suggest setting up a “Green Chemistry Center”
to identify or invent safer chemicals for specific purposes.
“Washington should become a national leader in green chemistry,
making these innovations a trademark of the state, just like
apples, wheat, software and airplanes,” the paper says.
The report calls for continuing state actions to reduce
exposures to a list of priority chemicals and to add chemicals with
toxic effects at very low doses, such as endocrine-disrupting
compounds.
Chemical bans and restrictions may be necessary at times, the
paper says, but such regulations “should not strand people or
businesses by banning or restricting chemicals before safer
alternatives are viable.”
The Legislature should consider exemptions when a chemical is
absolutely needed for a process or product, the paper says. Still,
an imminent public health threat might at times justify an outright
ban before a safer alternative is identified.
Education campaigns and effective product labeling can help
people take personal actions to reduce their exposure to toxic
chemicals, the committee said.
As for why members of the task force feel strongly that
Washington should not wait to address hazardous chemicals, let me
quote from the report, which first discusses toxic effects on
children:
“The developing nervous system is exquisitely sensitive to
perturbation by chemicals and other insults. Environmental
chemicals thought to be association with impaired brain development
include lead, methyl mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
manganese, organophosphate insecticides, arsenic, Bisphenol-A
(BPA), PBDEs and phthalates.
“Autism and ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder)
appear to result from a complex interaction between genetics and
environmental factors. In Washington state in 2010, more than
75,000 children — one in every 14 kids — ages 3-21 were receiving
special education services through school districts for learning
disability, emotional or behavioral disability, autism,
intellectual disability or developmental delay….
“Adults also are impacted by exposures to toxic chemicals.
Neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s disease and dementia
are growing problems, and evidence suggests that chemical exposures
may play a role. For example, pesticides, solvents, PCBs, PBDEs
(polybrominated diphenyl ethers) and heavy metals such as lead and
manganese have all been linked to an increased risk of Parkinson’s
disease.
“There are troubling toxic releases to the environment as well.
More than 1,700 water body segments in Washington are impaired due
to high levels of toxic chemicals or metals. The Puget Sound Toxics
Loading Assessment found that the vast majority of toxic chemicals
in Puget Sound come from non-point sources and are released to
Puget Sound through stormwater.”
Washington State Department of Health also weighs in on the
effects of environmental chemicals on children, offering fact
sheets on childhood asthma, cancer, learning and behavior, obesity,
and reproductive systems:
“Young children often have higher exposure to environmental
chemicals in the home because of their higher breathing rate and
natural activity of mouthing or sucking on household objects and
surfaces.
“There are critical periods during early childhood development
when small exposures to toxic chemicals can have permanent negative
effects. Without efforts to protect children during early life,
lifelong health can be negatively impacted.”
Share on Facebook