House of Horrors

[Guest guest]

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,7890,1122019,00.html

 

House of horrors

 

Sperm counts are falling and cancer levels are rising. Something is very wrong

somewhere, but what? The answer, says Hilary Freeman, may be uncomfortably close

to home ...

 

Tuesday January 13, 2004

The Guardian

 

Yesterday, millions of Britons woke up to the news that our daily personal

hygiene routines could be making us ill. A study at the University of Reading

linked chemicals called parabens in underarm deodorants with a possible

breast-cancer risk, after discovering traces of parabens - preservatives thought

to mimic oestrogens - in human breast tumour samples.

This finding comes just a week after scientists revealed that men's sperm counts

have fallen by almost a third since 1989. Again, exposure to hormone-disrupting

chemicals - including parabens - is thought to have played a large part.

 

Buying organic and filtering your water may make you feel more secure, but it

does little to protect you or your family from environmental toxins. Forget

traffic pollution: the average Briton's home is almost certainly swimming in a

cocktail of chemicals, many of which have been linked to allergies, cancers and

infertility. These chemicals line your walls, carpets and flooring. They emanate

from curtains, PCs, toiletries, even children's toys. And, while the products

that you rely upon to keep your home clean do wipe out bacteria and viruses,

they also spread toxic chemicals across every surface.

 

Little by little, these toxins are seeping through your skin and lungs and into

your bloodstream, building up in your tissues and organs like a time bomb. No

one is sure what effect they might have on your health in years to come. It is

thought, for instance, that some chemicals have the ability to bio-accumulate

(an increase in concentration in a biological organism over time so it reaches

levels far higher than in the environment). The result is that, unaware and

without giving consent, we are all acting as guinea pigs in a giant chemistry

experiment.

 

" We're just as likely to be exposed to pollution indoors as outdoors, " says

Helen Lynn, health coordinator for the campaign group the Women's Environmental

Network (WEN). " Ironically, it is trying to keep our homes and ourselves

ultra-clean and sweet-smelling that is probably increasing our exposure to risky

chemicals. Some of the chemicals we use in the home end up living with us in the

dust, or indeed in our own body tissue. For example, the comparatively new

antibacterial agent, triclosan, has been detected in breast milk. "

 

Last year, the environmental charity Greenpeace published a report revealing

that " gender bending " and other chemicals that can damage reproductive organs,

interfere with growth and development and damage the immune system have been

found in babies in the womb. At the same time, Greenpeace released the results

of independent tests on a sample of consumer products including children's

pyjamas, toys and baby feeding bottles. Alarmingly, the same hazardous chemicals

were found in these items. For example, Disney-branded pyjamas contained

phthalates, which are banned from teething toys under emergency legislation

because they can cause liver, kidney and testicular damage.

 

Many of the chemicals found in household goods have been used for decades

without having undergone any safety checks. " When a drugs company manufactures a

new drug they must show that it has been through stringent tests demonstrating

its safety before it is allowed on to the market, " says Mark Strutt, chemicals

campaigner for Greenpeace. " But chemical compounds are not subject to the same

rigorous testing. Chemical companies do not even have to produce any data if a

substance was put on the market before 1981 - and that counts for over 90% of

the chemicals in circulation. "

 

We can only speculate about the connection between the widespread use of

chemicals in the home and the concurrent rise in cancers, particularly hormonal

cancers. What cannot be questioned are the facts: breast cancer rates have

increased by more than 50% in the past three decades, while prostate and

testicular cancer rates have almost doubled. Even when ill-effects are suspected

or have been identified in laboratory tests on animals, there is often no

conclusive proof of the effects of individual chemicals on human health,

particularly in the long term. Still more worrying is the fact that nobody knows

what happens when humans are repeatedly exposed to a cocktail of diverse

chemicals.

 

According to Strutt, the chemical manufacturers use this lack of certainty to

their advantage: " The industry demands proof of harm before a chemical is

restricted. Even when it is established that a chemical is harmful, they fall

back on the exposure argument - for example, will a child receive a big enough

dose from the toy to cause harm?

 

" Legislators fall for this because current regulations are based on risk rather

than precaution. In other words, if the estimated exposure of a child to a

particular chemical means only one in a million will incur damage, that is an

acceptable risk. We argue that no avoidable risk is acceptable. "

 

This state of affairs is set to change. In October 2003, the European Commission

announced radical plans to crack down on chemicals found in many household

items. Under the new guidelines - known as Reach (Registration, Evaluation and

Authorisation of Chemicals) - chemicals will be subject to more stringent

testing and companies will be forced to disclose basic information about all the

chemicals they produce. Should the proposals become law in 2005, around 30,000

chemicals are expected to undergo safety tests.

 

Campaigners say the legislation does not go far enough. Substances identified as

" of very high concern " will not automatically be banned. Instead the company

producing such a substance will have to demonstrate " adequate control " over its

circulation.

 

" The chemical industry will almost certainly argue that many substances we have

identified as hazardous are 'adequately controlled', " says Strutt. " It will then

take years to show they are not controlled, and the onus will be on

environmental and health groups to do this. "

 

The chemical industry is not happy with the Reach guidelines either. Judith

Hackett, director general of the Chemical Industries Association (CIA), says:

" We don't want to replace one set of regulations that don't work with another

that aren't right. Consumers want information on the substances of highest

concern, not five years of tests on substances of little concern which will be

looked at just because they're produced in high volumes. Reach does not yet

prioritise enough.

 

" European legislation banning substances will not prevent them finding their way

into our homes, " she adds. " Take phthalates in children's toys. Most children's

toys are manufactured in the far east. Who will police the toys coming into

Europe and determine whether or not they contain phthalates? These phthalates

are unlikely to be manufactured in Europe. "

 

As consumers, we have almost no say in whether we expose ourselves to these

potentially harmful chemicals. They are now found in dust particles and in

rivers; they are part of our environment. And it is practically impossible to

avoid buying products that contain them. Washing powders, cleaning products and

toys do not have to list their full ingredients. Only cosmetic products must do

so by law and commercial confidentiality protections allow them to leave out

select ingredients.

 

" Until the law changes, " says Helen Lynn, " we'd be better off throwing open the

windows, cleaning our homes with lemon juice, vinegar and bicarbonate of soda,

choosing furnishings, cosmetics and toiletries that are as natural as possible

and demanding products that are not just fit for their immediate purpose but are

safe in all respects. "

 

How your home may be poisoning you

 

1 Anti-perspirant deodorants: most brands of stick/cream/roll-on deodorants (not

usually aerosols).

Problem ingredient: parabens. Parabens are a family of compounds widely used as

preservatives in a range of cosmetics including shampoos, make-up, lotions and

deodorants. Although they cannot yet be conclusively indentified as a cause of

breast cancer, evidence now suggests they can act as oestrogen mimics. One,

propyl paraben, has been shown to adversely affect male reproductive functions

and decreased daily sperm production.

 

2 Toothpaste: most brands.

Problem ingredients: triclosan. Triclosan is a chlorophenol used in products

such as toothpaste, soaps and body washes, including vaginal washes - as well as

many household cleaning products, and even dish cloths and chopping boards - for

its antimicrobial (bacteria-killing) properties. The human body is a home for

many different bacteria, many of which are beneficial. However, triclosan will

kill all bacteria that it comes across, irrespective of whether they are good or

bad.

 

3 Dark hair dye

Problem ingredient: PPD (colouring agent). Hair dyes have been of concern since

1933, when they were found to contain p-phenylenediamine (PPD) and lead acetate.

The darker the hair dye, the more PPD it may contain. PPD is also a suspected

mutagen (a substance that causes changes to human DNA). Recent studies have

suggested that those who have worked for 10 or more years as a hairstylist could

have a risk of bladder cancer five times that of the general population. In

1995, more evidence linked frequent or long-term use of hair dyes by

professionals to a higher incidence of non-Hodgkins lymphoma and cancer of the

bone marrow. Another recent study found that women who regularly dye their hair

are at a higher risk of ovarian cancer.

 

4 Illustrated children's pyjamas: including Disney-branded Buzz Lightyear

pyjamas.

Problem ingredient: phthalates (plus nonylphenol, see below). Phthalates are a

group of synthetic chemicals used as softeners in the manufacture of PVC - they

are used to make the soft, glazed, plastic design on the front of the pyjama

tops. Phthalates have already been banned in teething toys. They are associated

with liver, kidney and testicular damage.

 

5 " Rubber " bath duck toy (made from PVC): including Funky Bath duck by Chad

Valley, from Woolworths.

Problem ingredients: nonylphenol (plus phthalates). Nonylphenol is used in the

manufacture of PVC. Studies have shown that it can mimic the female hormone

oestrogen and high levels have been found in rivers where male fish have

developed female characteristics. Earlier this year, research showed that the

chemical had adverse effects on mammalian sperm production. A 2002 study found

that nonylphenol can damage the DNA of glands that produce antibodies to fight

off diseases.

 

6 Baby feeding bottle: including Toys-R-Us decorated feeding bottle.

Problem ingredient: bisphenol-A. Bisphenol-A is used to make polypropylene, a

type of plastic. It has been shown to cause genetic damage in mice. A study

published in Environmental Health perspectives found that it acts as a hormone

mimic and can damage the mammary glands, uterus and male genital tract of

animals. Although plastics not containing it are available, it is very hard for

a consumer to tell the difference - try using glass feeding bottles as a safe

alternative.

 

7 Some air fresheners: including Ambi Pur parfum d'interior.

Problem ingredient: artificial musks. Most fragranced products contain

artificial musks (a known liver toxin), which are increasingly being found in

breast milk. They can be inhaled or absorbed through the skin or on food. Some

artificial musks have already been banned. Never spray air freshener in an

enclosed space.

 

8 Upholstered furniture

Problem ingredient: brominated flame retardants (also found in home PCs and

televisions) have been linked with hormone disruption and thyroid problems. A

1999 study found that three types induced intragenic genetic recombination in

mammalian cells, which is known to provoke a number of diseases, including

cancer. High levels have been found in breast milk. Safe alternatives are

available. Ikea has eliminated brominated flame retardants from all its

furniture. TV manufacturers Hitachi, Philips and Sony are all phasing it out.

 

 

 

 

 

====

http://www.geocities.com/purplestar1uk/journey.html

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Frank!

 

Thanks for a very eye opening article.

 

What a shame that it seems as though everything in our consumer world is based

on monetary gain and the safety and health of our very own is not taken into

consideration!

 

What can we do to reform our society?

 

I know what I will start to do - buy everything as natural as I can!!

 

Thanks!

 

Blessings & Rainbows,

 

Lynn Forth