TIP TALKS

The Newsletter of the

Toxics Information Project (TIP)

SPRING 2008

*****************************************************************************************************

ATTENTION FINALLY BEING PAID TO ENDOCRINE DISRUPTERS

As I’ve been wistfully noting the stronger product chemical safety standards in other countries, some rays of hope have found their way across my desk recently.

1. Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced an amendment to the Consumer Product Safety bill in the U.S. Senate to take action on Phthalates - and it actually passed! (Still in the process, though)

2. The state of Washington passed a Phthalates bill - and it is expected to be signed by the Governor.

3. The Associated Press just did a study of pharmaceutical chemicals contaminating waterways! Also, AP & other mainstream media have been running stories about endocrine disrupting chemicals, some as far back as Autumn of 2007. A sampling:

ASSOCIATED PRESS, 2/4/2008, “Study Warns of Chemicals in Baby Items: Baby Lotions, Shampoos, Powders May Expose Infants to Worrisome Chemicals, New Study Finds” http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=78918

NEWSWEEK, Jan 26, 2008, “The Chemicals Within, www.newsweek.com/id/105588

Many Common Household Products Contain Compounds That Could Be Affecting Our Health.

BOSTON GLOBE, January 14, 2008, “Obesity Epidemic: Is Plastic Making Us Fat?”

www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2008/01/14/is_plastic_making_us_fat/

BOSTON GLOBE, September 5, 2007, “Bisphenol A: Be Very Afraid”

www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2007/09/05/bisphenol_a_be_very_afraid/

In this issue of TIP TALKS, I have included some significant articles on this concern. One is actually a 2007 report on phthalates in cosmetics from the major league resource, Consumer Reports - in their fairly new ShopSmart sister publication! To add icing to the cake, they even put the finger on one of my constant irritants, fragrance: “All the fragrances we tested contained at least these two phthalates: Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), which is banned in cosmetics in Europe, and diethyl phthalate (DEP), which is not banned and was present in much larger amounts. Our findings seem counter to a fragrance-industry survey that reported DEHP use is down to zero.”

Other articles come to us via one of my most used and admired resources: Environmental Working Group (EWG). These folks do an amazing amount of research and pile the information onto their website in huge, educationally rich quantities.

Of course, I can’t be too sanguine, considering that a group of environmental organizations petitioned the EPA in May, 1999 to take action vs. Bisphenol-A in baby bottles and food packaging - with little or no result to this day. However, whenever real health information appears in widely read publications, it is a great help and encouragement to us out there fighting the lonely educational battle. I even found some awareness at last week’s RI State Science Fair - see below! The bad news - these chems are everywhere, including our own bodies. The good news - the first step to solving a problem is recognizing that it exists!

Blessings,

Liberty Goodwin, TIP Director

WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOUT CONCERNS FROM OUR LAST TIP TALKS?

2008 LESS TOXIC LANDSCAPING RESOURCE DIRECTORY: New, updated edition is in print!

RI STATE SCIENCE FAIR: Special Awards for projects on less toxic living have been given this week.

2008 RI STATE SCIENCE FAIR
TIP LESS TOXIC LIVING AWARDS RECIPIENTS

SENIOR DIVISION

FIRST PLACE: GREGG GELZINIS, La Salle Academy, Environmental Analysis

“NEXT GENERATION POLLUTANTS: ARE FISH IN OUR RIVERS CHANGING SEX DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF ESTROGEN?” Changes in minnows due to endocrine disrupters. EVA-085 - E

(Another bright spot in our week re: endocrine disrupter awareness - a teen-ager shall lead them?)

SECOND PLACE: CAITLYN HAYES, Scituate High School, Microbiology

“SUPERBUGS: A BACTERIUM CONUNDRUM.” Measured antibiotic-resistant bacteria in Scituate H.S. After completing the project, recommended the school stop using anti-bacterial soap. Was assisted by Shannon Donovan, a teacher at SHS. MIC - 135

THIRD PLACE: KELLY GRIFFIN, St. Mary Academy, Bay View, Cellular & Molecular Biology

“VITAMIN C DEGRADATION - ORGANIC VS. NON-ORGANIC” Tested levels of Vitamin C in produce, before and after loss of such. Organic won. CEL- 025

JUNIOR DIVISION

FIRST PLACE: MAGGIE HABERSHAW, CJCR, Plant Science

“PUTTING THE TEST TO MOTHER NATURE” Organic wins vs. hydroponic growing. Worked with folks at Good Earth. PLS - 485

SECOND PLACE: KAITLIN DITRAGLIA, St. Philip School, Environmental Analysis

“WHAT’S IN YOUR WATER?” Hypothesis was that water furthest from reservoir - South Kingstown - would be most polluted - Wrong! Woonsocket water was worst - tested positive for pesticides and high levels of chlorine. Other towns tested were Johnston, Cranston, East Providence, East Greenwich, Pawtucket and Barrington. Other pollutants - phosphates and lead. EVA - 389

THIRD PLACE: MOLLY GAGNON & JENNIFER DEAR, Monsignor Matthew F. Clarke School, Environment Analysis

“GO GREEN TO GET CLEAN” Hypothesis was that non-organic chemical cleaners, being stronger, would clean better. Wrong! Seventh Generation and other organics effectiveness was equal - or sometimes superior. EVA - 370

******************************************************************************************************************************

INTRODUCING A NEW RESOURCE FOR HEALTHIER SHOPPING IN YOUR LOCAL AREA

THE NEW LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE

Lighting the Way to Less Toxic Living

(A Work In Progress)

A small section in our latest Less Toxic Landscaping Directory marked the beginning of a new plan to make your efforts toward a healthier lifestyle simpler, more focused and more effective. We propose to compile, over the months ahead, a guide for less toxic living similar to our popular landscaping and gardening publication.

We expect to include local sources for healthier household products and services, personal care, children’s products and toys, restaurants serving organic or chemical-free food. This section of the 2008 landscaping directory provides some samples of the kinds of listings envisioned for the companion publication.

TIPS TO TIP! If you know a good local resource for finding/buying less toxic household, personal care or children’s products, pass them on for possible inclusion in the upcoming Less Toxic Living Guide! CONTACT: Liberty Goodwin, TIP Director. 401-351-9193, or E-Mail: liberty@toxicsinfo.org

2007 DEM REPORT ON LAWN CARE PESTICIDE USE AT RI SCHOOLS

TIP COMMENTS: Although we strongly urge total elimination of toxic lawn pesticide use on school grounds, we are encouraged by DEM efforts toward limitation and reduction. The recommendations below should be carried out throughout Rhode Island. IMPORTANT: PARENTS NEED TO CONTACT THEIR LOCAL SCHOOL TO FIND OUT WHAT IS BEING DONE AND TO INSIST ON SAFER PRACTICES.

RHODE ISLAND DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

· Requiring schools and daycare facilities to develop and implement IPM Plans, in accordance with RIGL §23-25-37.

· Adopting a self-certification approach, with electronic reporting on a 2- or 3-year cycle, to monitor and enforce the IPM requirement.

· In accordance with IPM Plans, limiting the type of pesticides used on school and childcare grounds to only those deemed necessary (as a last resort) and determined to be least toxic.

· Providing all schools and child daycare facilities with support materials such as IPM fact sheets and guidance documents detailing all relevant legal requirements governing pesticide use, and how to minimize exposure and exercise proper precautions.

· Evaluating the resources needed to carry out the proposed strategy, and exploring potential funding opportunities.

Continuing the partnership with the RI Chemical Safe Schools Committee to maintain a coordinated statewide approach to addressing the overall issues involving pesticide use at schools.
Integrating outreach and training components with URI’s ongoing educational programs

RECOMMENDED PROGRAM; ENFORCEMENT ISSUES AND FISCAL IMPACTS

DEM has long advocated IPM programs at schools, but more could be done to advance this objective. An appropriate step would be to incorporate IPM Plan development and implementation by schools as a regulatory requirement, pursuant to section 23-25-37(a) of the General Laws. The recently completed survey showed that while most (35 of 49) schools report that they are aware of RI law that addresses the issue of IPM in schools, few (6 of 49) have adopted an IPM Plan or Program. Given the significant health and economic benefits to schools offered by IPM, it is striking that so few schools have opted to move in that direction on their own. A voluntary push might help, but a regulatory requirement would likely achieve better results.

The major obstacle to moving forward with an IPM Program requirement is the administrative and enforcement burden that DEM, as the implementing agency, would have to bear. There are 276 public and non-public elementary schools, 205 pre-schools, 420 child daycare centers, and about 1,400 family/group/home child care centers in RI. Enforcement activities for the existing regulatory program require routine inspections of pesticide applicators making applications on school grounds. DEM’s Pesticide Program had two full-time inspectors; now, as a result of budget cuts, it has just one. That one inspector is responsible for all compliance and inspection activities relating to all aspects of Chapter 23-25 on a statewide basis. School-related inspections are conducted now and then, typically in association with routine applicator inspections of municipal personnel or of companies providing lawn care service to schools. At best, it is a hit-or-miss approach to enforcement. The shortage of resources, which is unlikely to improve in the near future, makes it impossible to take on any additional regulatory requirement work, such as that associated with a new IPM mandate.

In lieu of a “top-down” expansion of the regulatory program, DEM recommends consideration of a “bottom-up” approach, involving a self-certification program. The approach would call upon all schools and child daycare facilities to self-certify that they have adopted an IPM Plan and are implementing an IPM Program in accordance with the Plan. Monitoring would be achieved via electronic reporting, to DEM, on either a 2- or 3-year reporting cycle. If pesticides are used as part of a school’s IPM program, that information would be provided to DEM as part of the report process. Schools and child daycare facilities would be obligated to limit the types of pesticides used to only those deemed necessary, as a last resort, and determined to be least toxic. The reporting system would enable DEM, in coordination with the RI Chemical Safe Schools Committee, to review the efforts of the schools on a regular basis and identify any potential needs to further strengthen the laws relating to the issue.

ADVICE FROM THE GREAT ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP (EWG) ENVIROBLOG: ON PHTHALATES & BISPHENOL-A

Caution: avoid phthalates CAUTION: THESE SEVEN HOUSEHOLD ITEMS

MAY FEMINIZE BABY BOYS

…And They’re Unhealthy For You, Too

www.enviroblog.org/2007/10/avoid-household-phthalate-exposure.htm

Phthalates are the culprit. Phtha-what, you ask? Phthalates are common industrial chemicals. They've been around since the 1930's, making vinyl out of hard plastics, acting as solvents, and contributing to the "fragrance" of many personal care products. The Centers for Disease Control tested 289 people in 2000, and found phthalates in all of their blood at surprisingly high levels. High phthalate levels have been linked to decreased sperm motility and concentration and altered hormone levels in adult men; in a recent study of 134 newborn boys and their mothers, researchers found distinct differences in the reproductive systems of the boys whose mothers had the highest phthalate levels during pregnancy. Further research revealed that those moms' phthalate levels weren't uncommon -- in fact, an estimated one-quarter of American women would have similarly high phthalate levels.

Luckily, there are steps you can take to limit your exposure. Here are ~~six~~ seven common sources of phthalate exposure in the home, and what you can do to avoid them.

Nail polish: Dibutyl phthalate is often used to make nail polish chip-resistant. Look for it on the ingredients list, where it may be shortened to DBP.
Plastics in the kitchen: Take a critical eye to your cupboards. Phthalates may be more likely to leach out of plastic when it's heated, so avoid cooking or microwaving in plastic.
Vinyl toys: Phthalates are what make vinyl (PVC) toys soft, so don't give them to children. Opt instead for wooden and other phthalate-free toys, especially during that age when they put everything in their mouths!
Paint: Paints and other hobby products may contain phthalates as solvents, so be sure to use them in a well-ventilated space.
Fragrance: Diethyl phthalate (DEP) is often used as part of the "fragrance" in some products. Since DEP won't be listed separately, you're better off choosing personal care products, detergents, and cleansers that don't have the word "fragrance" on the ingredients list.
Vinyl: Vinyl shows up in a lot of different products; lawn furniture, garden hoses, building materials, and items of clothing (like some raincoats) are often sources. Aside from carefully choosing materials when you're making purchases, there is one easy change you can make: switch to a non-vinyl shower curtain. That "new shower curtain" smell (you know the one) is a result of chemical off-gassing, and it means your shower curtain is a source of phthalates in your home.
Air Fresheners: New research from the NRDC demonstrates that, just like fragrances in personal care products, most air fresheners contain phthalates. That even goes for the ones labeled "fragrance free." NRDC suggests that you open your windows and use fans to circulate air and keep it fresh.

BISPHENOL-A IN YOUR BODY: HOW IT GOT THERE

BPA in canned food AND HOW TO MINIMIZE YOUR EXPOSURE

www.enviroblog.org/2007/09/bisphenol-a-in-your-body.htm

September 26, 2007 The common plastic additive bisphenol A has been getting a lot of press lately. It's a hormone disruptor that can be found in almost everybody, and animal studies have linked it to breast and prostate cancer, and infertility. Knowing all that won't help you avoid the chemical, but we've got some information here that might. Knowing how you're exposed is among the best ways to minimize further exposure.

How'd It Get There?

Studies show canned foods are a common source of daily BPA exposure in our lives. Cans of soda generally contain less BPA than canned pasta or soup. The worst foods tested contain enough BPA to put pregnant women and formula-fed infants much closer to dangerous levels than the government typically allows. Even some liquid infant formula is packed in cans lined with BPA, which seems ludicrous given the special vulnerabilities of children's developing systems.

In addition to canned food, certain plastics are often made with BPA. Called polycarbonate, these plastics are rigid and clear or translucent and usually marked with a recycling label #7. Not all #7 containers are made with BPA, but it makes for a reasonable and useful guideline for avoiding a category of plastics. Some reusable polycarbonate water bottles (we won't name names), marketed as non-leaching because they minimize plastic taste and odor, may still leach trace amounts of BPA. But hold on before you run out and buy a metal water bottle -- make sure you know what you're getting. Many reusable metal water bottles are lined with the same BPA-leaching plastic found in cans of food.

How Do You Get Rid Of It?

Unfortunately, BPA is so widely used and manufactured that you're not likely to eliminate it from your system altogether. There are some steps you can take to minimize your exposure, though:

When possible, and especially if you’re pregnant and when feeding a young child, limit the amount of canned food in your diet.
Avoid using old or scratched polycarbonate bottles. If you're in the market for a new water bottle, look for stainless steel water bottles that do not have a plastic liner.
Don't use plastic containers to heat food in the microwave. Opt for ceramic, glass, or other microwavable dishware.
Soft or cloudy-colored plastic does not contain BPA.
If you're formula feeding your infant, consider using powdered formulas packaged in non-steel cans. Also, choose baby bottles made from glass or plastics that don't leach BPA (like polypropylene or polyethylene).

Environmental Working Group (EWG) is one of the best information resources, and one we utilize frequently. Though a small organization, they do quite a bit of research on products of concern to us and to savvy consumers. Check out their main website at: www.ewg.org for lots of helpful articles!

A RESOURCE YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT -

SHOPSMART MAGAZINE FROM CONSUMERS UNION

www.consumer-action.org/press/articles/shop_smart_magazine_launched_by_consumer_reports/

ShopSmart, the new shopping magazine for women, hit newsstands in August 2006 — with a twist. Like sister publication Consumer Reports, but unlike its competitors, ShopSmart accepts no advertising or free samples from companies. Ads and sample freebies are two staples of traditional women’s and shopping magazines. But ShopSmart’s editor-in-chief says those factors may unduly influence the magazines’ coverage. The editor-in-chief, Lisa Lee Freeman, who’s worked for several women’s magazines, says, “The difference is we’re 100% unbiased.” Consumer Reports, owned by the non-profit consumer advocacy group Consumers Union, receives some grants from foundations and individuals. But it’s run mostly with money from subscriptions to the magazine and its website. Freeman says Consumer Reports spends millions of dollars a year to buy everything it tests, from cars to computers to skin creams. It employs hundreds of anonymous shoppers around the country who buy products for testing. Freeman says it’s crucial for shopping magazines to enjoy the public’s trust and notes that the type of products ShopSmart features, in particular, require independence. Along with detailing how synthetic many purportedly “organic” creams really are, for instance, ShopSmart’s first issue reviewed family cars, child seats and diet supplements.

***********************************************************************************************************************

A SAMPLE ARTICLE FROM THIS USEFUL RESOURCE ADDRESSES A TIP 2008 CONCERN

TIP is delighted that the prestigious and respected Consumers Union has given its attention to this important concern. We recommend that all our readers take the time to read the additional articles mentioned, by scrolling down at: www.safecosmetics.org/newsroom/consumer_repts_1_07.cfm

(All on the website of another fine resource, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics).

WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT CHEMICALS IN YOUR COSMETICS

www.safecosmetics.org/newsroom/consumer_repts_1_07.cfm

Consumer Reports ShopSmart^(SM), Winter 2007 Visit ConsumerReports.org® »

You slather, spray, and paint them on and rub them in. Cosmetics are so much a part of your daily regimen that you probably never think twice about them. If they're on store shelves, it seems reasonable to figure that they're safe to use, despite those unpronounceable ingredient lists. But at least some of what's in your cosmetics might not be so good for you.

One example is the family of chemicals known as phthalates (pronounced THAL-ates), which may be linked to developmental and reproductive health risks. The industry says phthalates are safe, but some companies have dropped them in response to public concern. Essie, OPI, and Sally Hansen, for example, are removing dibutyl phthalate (DBP), which is used to prevent chipping, from nail polishes. Other big-name brands that have reformulated products to remove some phthalates include Avon, Cover Girl, Estée Lauder, L'Oréal, Max Factor, Orly, and Revlon.

If you're trying to cut back on phthalates, however, sticking with these brands may not make much of a difference. You'll find phthalates in too many other personal-care products, including body lotions, hair sprays, perfumes, and deodorants. The chemicals are used to help fragrances linger and take the stiffness out of hair spray, among other reasons. They're also in detergents, food packaging, pharmaceuticals, and plastic toys.

And they have turned up in our bodies. Although phthalates show up in so many places, they're often absent from labels because disclosure is not always required. That's the case with fragrances. We tested eight fragrances and although none of the products included phthalates in its ingredient list, they all contained the chemicals. Some were made by companies that specifically told us their products were free of phthalates, and two even say as much on their Web sites.

Getting your nails done or spritzing on your favorite perfume obviously isn't going to kill you. But the health effects of regular long-term exposure, even to small amounts, are still unknown.

Makeup Wakeup Call

Companies that have eliminated phthalates are no doubt getting the message that people are paying more attention to ingredients. But public concern isn't the only factor driving the reformulations.

Another reason is a European ban. Although the U.S. has outlawed just eight cosmetic ingredients, the European Union has banned more than 1,000. For companies that make cosmetics, complying with E.U. rules makes good business sense. It's more efficient to sell the same product worldwide. It's also good PR. About 380 U.S. companies have publicly pledged their allegiance to cosmetic safety by signing the Compact for Global Production of Safe Health & Beauty Products, under which they voluntarily pledged to reformulate globally to meet E.U. standards.

The reformulation trend is likely to gain further momentum from the California Safe Cosmetics Act of 2005, which took effect only this year. Manufacturers that sell over $1 million a year in personal-care products in the state must report any products containing a chemical that is either a carcinogen or a reproductive or developmental toxic agent. Among those that must be disclosed are the phthalates DBP and di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). California plans make this information public, possibly on the Web, so some companies may choose to remove rather than report the ingredients.

Guinea Pig Nation

Despite the laws, pacts, and reformulations, questions about safety remain. Cosmetic industry critics argue that the Food and Drug Administration has not told companies what "safe" means, leaving them to make their own decisions. In fact, with cosmetics, the government generally takes action only after safety issues crop up. Take the case of Rio hair relaxers. In December 1994, the FDA warned against two products sold through infomercials after consumers complained about hair loss, scalp irritation, and hair turning green. Rio announced that it would stop sales but there were reports that it continued to take orders. The California Department of Health then stepped in to halt sales and in January 1995, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles filed a seizure action. By then, the FDA had received more than 3,000 complaints. Rio later reformulated and renamed its products.

The Rio case illustrates how holes in the government's cosmetic regulatory system can hurt consumers. The industry essentially regulates itself. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review panel, made up of physicians and toxicologists and funded by the industry's leading trade group--the Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association (CTFA)--assesses ingredient safety. Another industry group reviews fragrances and helps create safety standards. But manufacturers aren't obligated to do anything with this information. "We're working on the honor system when it comes to cosmetics safety," says Jane Houlihan, vice president for research at the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a research and advocacy group. "In the absence of federal standards, we have a huge range of safety in the products we buy every day."

The FDA has made efforts to improve its ability to spot problems and issue warnings. The agency now has a computerized database, called CAERS, that collects reports of problems such as allergic reactions. Complaints can be sent via the FDA Web site or by calling a district office. But Amy Newburger, a dermatologist at St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York City and a former member of the FDA's General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel, says her experiences make her wonder about the system's effectiveness. In one case, she filed a report by phone and on the CAERS system after she and several of her patients got a rash with blisters after using an anti-aging treatment. It wasn't until a year later, in November 2006, that the FDA sent an e-mail asking her to complete some forms, she says. The FDA responds that it doesn't provide information or feedback to people who file complaints. It simply routes them to the appropriate office for evaluation. The FDA says it may also send reports to companies.

So What Are The Risks?

Scientists know very little about how repeated exposure to small amounts of phthalates in cosmetics may affect your health, if at all. But some studies suggest that the chemicals are present in our bodies. In 2005, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that it had found breakdown chemicals from two of the most common cosmetic phthalates in almost every member of a group of 2,782 people it examined. A separate study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) in 2005 showed that men who used the most personal-care products, such as after-shave and cologne, had the highest urinary levels of a breakdown product of diethyl phthalate (DEP). In rodent studies, phthalates have caused testicular injury, liver injury, and liver cancer.

We found no such clear hazards in human research. But we did find studies suggesting that phthalates may be associated with other health issues, including the following four examples from one source alone, EHP, which is a leading journal published by the National Institutes of Health. In 2000, EHP published a small study that said elevated blood levels of phthalates were associated with premature breast development in young girls. Another report in 2003 found that men with higher concentrations of two phthalate breakdown products in their urine were more likely to have a low sperm count or low sperm motility. A study published in 2005 said women with higher levels of four phthalate compounds in their urine during pregnancy were likelier to give birth to boys with smaller scrotums. And a 2006 report cited low testosterone levels in male newborns exposed to higher levels of phthalates in breast milk.

Experts in the industry and the government are aware of such reports but say there is no cause for alarm. The FDA, for instance, concluded after a thorough review of the literature that "it's not clear what effect, if any, phthalates have on health." And the CTFA, the industry trade group, notes that government and scientific bodies in the U.S. and Canada have examined phthalates without restricting their use in cosmetics. After the 2005 report linking phthalate exposure to smaller scrotum size, in particular, the trade group said, "The sensational and alarming conclusions being drawn from this single study are completely speculative and scientifically unwarranted."

Even companies that have dropped phthalates from products say they are safe. "This policy is driven by a wish to allay public concern and does not reflect concern with the safe use of the ingredients," Avon said after announcing that it would cut DBP from its product line. John Bailey, the CTFA's executive vice president for science, says ingredients like DBP in nail polish are simply not a hazard in such small amounts.

On the other side are some environmental and public-health advocates who say possible carcinogens and reproductive toxins do not belong in cosmetics, no matter how small the amount. "We take issue with the idea that a little bit of poison doesn't matter, because safer alternatives are available," says Stacy Malkan, communications director of Health Care Without Harm. "Companies should be making the safest products possible, instead of trying to convince us that a little bit of toxic chemicals are OK." While the scientific jury is still out, we at ShopSmart^(SM) believe it makes sense to reduce your exposure to phthalates, especially if you're nursing, pregnant, or trying to become pregnant.

QUICK READ

Phthalates, a family of chemicals used in cosmetics, may pose significant health risks but:

• They're found in perfumes, nail polishes, and other products we use every day.

• Scientists say they're found in our bodies as well.

• In many cases, they're not listed on labels, so they can be difficult to avoid.

• Some manufacturers are removing them from their products, but the FDA has not restricted their use.

MORE INFORMATION FROM THIS ISSUE: BE SURE TO READ ALL!

Take a Whiff of This ,Q&A With a Scientist, Smarter Cosmetic Shopping

CANARY CORNER

CONSULT A CANARY TODAY!

(We Can All Benefit From the Hard-Earned Wisdom of the Most Vulnerable)

It’s discouraging to what extent our “regulatory” agencies do not regulate - and don’t protect us from toxic products. It’s encouraging that there are good agency personnel and non-profit organizations helping to educate and bring about positive change. But perhaps one of the most useful resources we have are the human “canaries” - folks who struggle every day to survive in the chemical stew we call Earth. Their techniques for reducing/avoiding exposure to toxins in everyday products could help us be healthier - and maybe avoid becoming canaries ourselves! Also, we can create an environment which our human canary friends can inhabit more comfortably! It’s a win-win! (Actual birds will also benefit - see below) TIP often gets good advice from a group of experienced canaries by E-Mail. Ask a question and see! Meanwhile, here are some thoughts from this Director/Canary about what you can learn from our travail.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE SICKENING PRODUCTS TO AVOID & THE BEST ALTERNATIVES?

AROUND THE HOUSE: One concern for most canaries is the interior and furnishings - including the possibility of new paint or carpets, both of which outgas toxic volatile organic chemicals (VOCs). In the winter, the type of heating system becomes crucial. Forced-air oil & gas systems are really bad, because they carry noxious gases from furnace to your living space. Gas stoves are also a problem. In the bathroom, chlorine fumes in a steamy shower stall are a reminder that the chemical began its career as a nerve gas in wartime. A real killer is any kind of pesticide, fungicide, termiticide! Many people have become canaries because of exposure to these, indoors or outside their homes. Household cleaners cause many canaries to swoon - not with love! They contain strong, toxic - and usually unnecessary - chemicals. Finally, heat can cause sickening fumes from non-stick fry pans (known to kill avian canaries) and microwave ovens (from plastics #3,6,7).

BETTER OPTIONS: Live in an older, well-out-gassed dwelling. If you must paint, buy No-VOC or Low-VOC types that are widely available. Get area rugs of natural materials, not wall-to-wall synthetics. If you insist on the latter, have the carpet thoroughly aired before allowing it in your house, ask about less toxic adhesives and avoid chemically treated rugs. Find a home with electric heat or water-based distribution - old-fashioned radiators are good. Opt for an electric stove - if you are stuck with gas, make sure it is fan-vented and use an electronic air cleaner with a carbon filter in your kitchen when cooking. A shower filter solves the “gas chamber” problem while bathing. And there are lots of less-toxic pest controls - think natural & bait, not spray!

Use natural cleaning agents and stainless steel, cast iron or ceramic cookware. NEVER MICROWAVE IN PLASTIC! For healthier household and cleaning options, check out: www.toxicsinfo.org/TIPS_house.htm

AROUND THE PERSON: “Fragrance” is a catch-all term for any chemical they want to put in a product - as a solvent (often toluene - also used in paint thinner), to make the scent last longer, go further… It can include endocrine disrupters, carcinogens, asthma triggers. Even if a label proclaims natural ingredients like herbs, aloe, etc., if it has the word “fragrance” in the list on the back - Beware! This is public enemy number one for canaries - we are forced out public spaces by people who reek from fragranced products. Two other personal hazards for canaries - and others - are reactions to clothing. This can be from permanent-press chemicals or the effect of petroleum-based synthetics against the skin. Laundry detergent is the other lurking threat. There are all kinds of nasty chemicals in it, including “fragrance”. I’ve had nasty rashes and all-over illness from this.

BETTER OPTIONS: Don’t be a stinker! Fragrance-free products abound. For info and alternatives, scroll down at: www.toxicsinfo.org/canary.htm. As for clothing, buy cotton and WASH BEFORE USING! Natural laundry detergents are best, but any fragrance-free variety is better than the alternative. You can even use just baking soda and/or vinegar, the all-purpose household wonders. Don’t ever use fabric softener or bleach!

WATCH FOR OUR UPCOMING “LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE” FOR MORE ADVICE & LOCAL SOURCES FOR HEALTHIER PRODUCTS! `Don’t forget to seek that canary wisdom - contact us at TIP@toxicsinfo.org`

`or 401-351-9193 with queries.` Also, visit the TIP website: www.toxicsinfo.org

IS THERE A WAY TO TELL WHICH PRODUCE IS GMO? http://bonappetit.typepad.com/bon_appetit/2008/02/organic-or-gmo.html

Organic or GMO? Did you know that the PLU (price look-up) code of produce tells you whether it's organic or genetically-modified?

* The PLU codes on fruit and vegetables contain four numbers (i.e., 4859).
* If produce is organic, the PLU code is 5 numbers starting with a 9 (i.e., 94859).
* If you see 5 numbers starting with an 8, (i.e., 84859), that means the fruit or vegetable is a GMO (a genetically-modified organism).

Of course, you'll see signs loudly marketing fruits and vegetables as organic so you probably won't have to examine the PLU to figure that out. However, for those "quiet" GMOs that have found their way into the food system and consequently into our diets, here's a way to keep them out!

- Katherine Kwon, Communications Project Manager

(TIP NOTE: We just discovered this same information in several different sources. We’ll be checking to see if it is really a reliable indicator.)

****************************************************************************************************************************

WOULD YOU LIKE DRUGS WITH THAT? PHARMACEUTICALS IN U.S. TAP WATER

Antibiotics, sex hormones, and other prescription drugs contaminate drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, according to a 5-month investigation by the Associated Press.

How'd the drugs get there? When people take pills, their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it is flushed down the toilet. Water treatment plants aren't designed to remove pharmaceutical residues, so they stay in the water. What you can do:

Learn more about drugs in tap water at: www.ewg.org/node/26128
Use EWG's National Tap Water Quality Database at: www.ewg.org/tapwater/findings.php

to find out what’s in your water.

Use a reverse osmosis filtration system to remove many chemicals (though we're still investigating which filtration systems remove pharmaceuticals - stay tuned for more info).
Contact your Senators and Representatives to demand stricter oversight

******************************************************************************************************************************

TIP TALKS - SPRING ISSUE, 2008

MEMBERSHIPS/DONATIONS: Judy Hey, Nancy L. Knott, Jill Barrette, Nancy E. Weiss-Fried, Jean Williams, Anna Browder. Special Thanks to Susan R. Warren for her ongoing support and special contributions toward the Fragrance Free Conference fund!!

IF YOUR MEMBERSHIP IS UP FOR RENEWAL OR YOU WISH TO GIVE TIP SOME CHEER AND SUPPORT, CONSIDER USING OUR ONLINE CREDIT CARD OPTION! JUST GO TO: http://www.toxicsinfo.org/subscribe.htm (Old-fashioned checks made out to Toxics Information Project are also gratefully accepted.)

TOXICS INFORMATION PROJECT (TIP), P.O. Box 40572, Providence, RI 02940

Telephone (401) 351-9193, E-Mail: TIPTALKS@toxicinfo.org,

Website: www.toxicsinfo.org

BOSTON GLOBE, September 5, 2007, “Bisphenol A: Be Very Afraid”

www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2007/09/05/bisphenol_a_be_very_afraid/

INTRODUCING A NEW RESOURCE FOR HEALTHIER SHOPPING IN YOUR LOCAL AREA

THE NEW LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE

(A Work In Progress)

TIPS TO TIP! If you know a good local resource for finding/buying less toxic household, personal care or children’s products, pass them on for possible inclusion in the upcoming Less Toxic Living Guide! CONTACT: Liberty Goodwin, TIP Director. 401-351-9193, or E-Mail: liberty@toxicsinfo.org

REPS. DINGELL, STUPAK INVESTIGATING

CORRUPTION OF SCIENCE PANELS AT EPA

Powerful Chairmen Demanding Answers From EPA Chief Over 'Science For Hire' Revelations

How'd It Get There?

How Do You Get Rid Of It?

WATCH FOR OUR UPCOMING “LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE” FOR MORE ADVICE & LOCAL SOURCES FOR HEALTHIER PRODUCTS! `Don’t forget to seek that canary wisdom - contact us at TIP@toxicsinfo.org`

`or 401-351-9193 with queries.` Also, visit the TIP website: www.toxicsinfo.org

IS THERE A WAY TO TELL WHICH PRODUCE IS GMO? http://bonappetit.typepad.com/bon_appetit/2008/02/organic-or-gmo.html

Organic or GMO? Did you know that the PLU (price look-up) code of produce tells you whether it's organic or genetically-modified?

WOULD YOU LIKE DRUGS WITH THAT? PHARMACEUTICALS IN U.S. TAP WATER

TIP TALKS - SPRING ISSUE, 2008

MEMBERSHIPS/DONATIONS: Judy Hey, Nancy L. Knott, Jill Barrette, Nancy E. Weiss-Fried, Jean Williams, Anna Browder. Special Thanks to Susan R. Warren for her ongoing support and special contributions toward the Fragrance Free Conference fund!!

BOSTON GLOBE, September 5, 2007, “Bisphenol A: Be Very Afraid”

www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2007/09/05/bisphenol_a_be_very_afraid/

INTRODUCING A NEW RESOURCE FOR HEALTHIER SHOPPING IN YOUR LOCAL AREA

THE NEW LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE

(A Work In Progress)

TIPS TO TIP! If you know a good local resource for finding/buying less toxic household, personal care or children’s products, pass them on for possible inclusion in the upcoming Less Toxic Living Guide! CONTACT: Liberty Goodwin, TIP Director. 401-351-9193, or E-Mail: liberty@toxicsinfo.org

REPS. DINGELL, STUPAK INVESTIGATING

CORRUPTION OF SCIENCE PANELS AT EPA

Powerful Chairmen Demanding Answers From EPA Chief Over 'Science For Hire' Revelations

How'd It Get There?

How Do You Get Rid Of It?

WATCH FOR OUR UPCOMING “LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE” FOR MORE ADVICE & LOCAL SOURCES FOR HEALTHIER PRODUCTS! Don’t forget to seek that canary wisdom - contact us at TIP@toxicsinfo.org

or 401-351-9193 with queries. Also, visit the TIP website: www.toxicsinfo.org

IS THERE A WAY TO TELL WHICH PRODUCE IS GMO? http://bonappetit.typepad.com/bon_appetit/2008/02/organic-or-gmo.html

Organic or GMO? Did you know that the PLU (price look-up) code of produce tells you whether it's organic or genetically-modified?

WOULD YOU LIKE DRUGS WITH THAT? PHARMACEUTICALS IN U.S. TAP WATER

TIP TALKS - SPRING ISSUE, 2008

MEMBERSHIPS/DONATIONS: Judy Hey, Nancy L. Knott, Jill Barrette, Nancy E. Weiss-Fried, Jean Williams, Anna Browder. Special Thanks to Susan R. Warren for her ongoing support and special contributions toward the Fragrance Free Conference fund!!

WATCH FOR OUR UPCOMING “LESS TOXIC LIVING GUIDE” FOR MORE ADVICE & LOCAL SOURCES FOR HEALTHIER PRODUCTS! `Don’t forget to seek that canary wisdom - contact us at TIP@toxicsinfo.org`

`or 401-351-9193 with queries.` Also, visit the TIP website: www.toxicsinfo.org