Memory problems? Contamination with PBDE in water and air is bioaccumulative and toxic!

[Guest guest]

.. .

. RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS #736 .

. .

. HEADLINES: .

. HERE WE GO AGAIN: PBDEs .

. ========== .

. Environmental Research Foundation .

. P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403 .

. Fax (410) 263-8944; E-mail: erf .

. ========== .

. All back issues are available by E-mail: send E-mail to .

. info with the single word HELP in the message. .

. Back issues are also available from http://www.rachel.org. .

. To start your own free subscription, send E-mail to .

. listserv with the words .

. SUBSCRIBE RACHEL-NEWS YOUR FULL NAME in the message. .

. The Rachel newsletter is now also available in Spanish; .

. to learn how to in Spanish, send the word .

. AYUDA in an E-mail message to info. .

=====================================================

 

 

HERE WE GO AGAIN: PBDEs

 

A new class of toxic chemicals has been discovered in breast

milk, in human blood, in food, in remote rural air, in wild

fish, and in the sewage sludge being applied as fertilizer on

food crops across the U.S. A Canadian health official recently

summed up the discovery saying, " This stuff is everywhere. " [1]

 

The newly-discovered contaminants are brominated flame

retardants. Bromine is a highly-reactive chemical element, a

halogen in the same class as chlorine and iodine. Worldwide,

eight chemical corporations manufacture about 300 million pounds

of brominated fire retardants each year, of which about 80

million pounds are members of the class known as polybromo

diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs.[2] Although all brominated fire

retardants seem capable of creating environment and health

problems, here we will focus on PBDEs, which leach into the

environment from the plastics in appliances, TVs and computers,

foam in upholstery, and the fabrics of carpets and draperies.

Many hard styrene plastics and many foam padding materials are

5% to 30% PBDE by weight.

 

Like their cousin PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), many PBDEs

persist for years in the environment, accumulate in the food

chain and concentrate in fatty tissues. A recent survey of the

PBDE literature revealed that some PBDEs can cause cancer,

interfere with hormones, and disrupt normal growth and

development in laboratory animals.[3] Recent studies have shown

that these brominated compounds can interfere with the thyroid

hormone, which is critical for the proper development of the

brain and central nervous system in animals and humans. Baby

mice exposed to PBDEs show permanent behavioral and memory

problems, which worsen with age.[3,4]

 

Because PBDEs are found at very high levels in computers,

carpets and the foam padding inside furniture, the thick dust

covering " ground zero " in lower Manhattan doubtless contains

substantial quantities of PBDEs, so anyone breathing the air

there without proper safety equipment is inhaling these

toxicants. The dust at the site of the World Trade Center

atrocities resulted from " thousands of plastic computers, acres

of flammable carpet, [and] tons of office furniture.... "

pulverized when the twin towers and other nearby buildings

collapsed September 11. To make matters worse, a portion of this

high-tech dust is being continuously incinerated by a stubborn

fire smoldering beneath the rubble.[5]

 

In several " risk assessments " of air pollution hazards at

" ground zero " U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has

concluded that the air in lower Manhattan is safe for workers

and residents,[6] but EPA's risk assessment did not consider

PBDEs (nor did it consider many other chemicals probably present

in that air). Notably, in spite of EPA's assurances of safety,

more than 4000 people have developed chronic chest pain, a

persistent cough now known as " world trade center cough " and

asthma-like (or emphysema-like) breathing problems from exposure

to the air in lower Manhattan.[7]

 

EPA has also employed risk assessment to declare the use of

contaminated sewage sludge " safe " as fertilizer on food crops,

but here again EPA did not consider the effects of PBDEs (or

many other chemicals) on the crops, on people eating the crops,

or on the natural environment in which the crops are grown. An

estimated 8 billion pounds of contaminated sewage sludge are

routinely spread onto farmland in the U.S. each year. In July of

this year researchers reported finding high concentrations of

PBDEs in 11 samples of sewage sludge from Virginia, New York and

California.[8]

 

This of course is one of the unavoidable failings of a

risk-assessment approach to managing toxic chemicals -- you can

only (partially) assess the risks of chemicals that you know a

great deal about. U.S. chemical manufacturers introduce about

1000 new chemicals into commercial use each year with no safety

testing required and little or none done. Typically, safety

testing only begins after industrial chemicals have been

discovered causing harm 10 to 20 years after introduction. Risk

assessments are always " behind the curve " and therefore always

give false assurances of safety.

 

An alternative to the risk assessment approach is to take

precautionary action as soon as evidence of harm begins to

emerge.

 

A recent survey by a group of Scandinavian researchers reports

that PBDE levels have been increasing exponentially in the

environment in Sweden for 30 years and show no sign of leveling

off.[2] Recent studies indicate that the U.S. is far more

contaminated than Sweden. For example, sewage sludge in the U.S.

contains 10 to 100 times as much PBDE as does European

sludge.[8] Other major sources of PBDEs are thought to be

municipal incinerators and landfills.[2] PBDEs can also

volatilize (ooze into the air) out of electrical components,

especially from warm devices such as computers and TV sets.

 

PBDEs are not very soluble in water, but they dissolve readily

in fat. They are also persistent in the environment (meaning

they break down only slowly). As they move through the food

chain, they concentrate and biomagnify. These are the very

characteristics that have caused other industrial poisons to be

labeled bad actors and yanked from the market, including DDT and

PCBs.

 

Given these characteristics, it was no surprise when

Scandinavian scientists reported earlier this year that PBDEs

have been increasing exponentially in breast milk in Sweden

since 1972, the concentration doubling every 5 years.[2] The

researchers emphasized that current levels in breast milk, and

in the Swedish diet, are far below the levels known to harm

laboratory animals, but they concluded that " the time trend of

PBDEs in human breast milk is alarming for the future. "

 

No one knows for sure what the effects of PBDEs might be on

developing embryos or suckling infants. (To inform yourself

about the KNOWN consequences of contaminated breast milk, read

Sandra Steingraber's electrifying new book, HAVING FAITH; AN

ECOLOGIST'S JOURNEY TO MOTHERHOOD.[9] It is worth emphasizing

here that breast milk, even laced as it is with low levels of

industrial poisons, is still the best food for infants because

all the alternatives are worse.)

 

PBDEs are now everywhere. European researchers have found PBDEs

in freshwater and ocean fish (salmon, herring, sprat), in air at

remote rural locations, in sewage sludge, in deep ocean

sediments, in eels, seals, shellfish, bottlenose dolphins,

porpoises, pilot whales, and crabs, among other species. Based

on limited studies, the Great Lakes appear to be among the most

PBDE-contaminated bodies of water in the world, with Lake

Michigan the worst.[2]

 

Studies in Germany, Holland, Sweden, Japan and the U.S. have

reported the presence of PBDEs in fish, meat, cow's milk, fats/-

oils, and bakery products. Studies of human blood in the U.S.

have revealed PBDEs in all samples.

 

In 1999 the Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate concluded that, " The

lower-brominated technical PBDE compounds, containing mostly

pentaBDE, are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic in the

aquatic environment. They show effects above all on the liver

but also on thyroid hormone and affect the behaviour of mice.

They occur widely in the environment, in human blood and in

mother's milk. " [10] In Sweden, this combination of

characteristics triggers precautionary action to remove such

chemicals from the market. Denmark and the Netherlands have also

taken steps to ban PBDEs.[2,11]

 

In September the European Union decided to take precautionary

action without waiting for conclusive scientific evidence of

harm. The European Parliament voted September 6 to ban the use,

manufacture, and import of some forms of PBDEs during the next

few years, but the European Council of Ministers must approve

the ban before it becomes law.

 

Naturally, all such bans will be subject to challenge in the

secret tribunals of the World Trade Organization (WTO) if any of

the world's eight manufacturers of PBDEs decides to fight for

its self-declared " right " to turn a profit by discharging

industrial poisons into the environment. The manufacturers have

reportedly expressed " furious opposition " to the European

ban.[11] One of the main purposes in setting up the WTO was to

allow corporations (acting through pliant governments) to use

" risk assessment " to challenge and repeal the health and safety

regulations of any and all nations. Prior to the WTO,

corporations had no way to challenge the health and safety

policies of all nations simultaneously, so the WTO offers

remarkable new efficiencies in this regard. Risk assessment is

ideally suited for such a purpose, especially when little is

known about the chemicals being assessed. The less is known, the

safer the chemicals can be made to appear -- just as with the

air at ground zero.

 

The U.S. government has no regulations governing the

manufacture, use, or disposal of PBDEs, and has announced no

plans to initiate regulations. U.S. chemical policy is still in

a primitive state, guided by the philosophy, " Don't ask, don't

tell. "

 

PBDEs are similar in chemical form, and in many of their

actions, to PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), which are among

the most dangerous and persistent chemicals ever let loose by

corporate imprudence. The U.S. banned PCBs in 1976, when much

less was known about PCBs than is known about PBDEs today. But

our political situation is far different today than it was in

1976. Corporations today are much more powerful and governments

are substantially weaker. Corporations have succeeded in

embedding risk assessment into all U.S. government

decision-making processes, so precautionary action is nearly

inconceivable within most agencies of government. The public is

much better informed, but its democratic institutions (public

schools, the press, the judiciary, Congress and the executive

branch) have been hijacked by corporate money and now mainly

serve powerful elites, regardless of the general welfare.

 

Within 10 to 15 years PBDEs will have surpassed PCBs as

environmental hazards. Breast milk studies indicate that the

danger to infants and children is rapidly rising. Who will lead

this fight to allow us to take precautionary action against the

corporate poisoners?

 

=================

 

[1] Charlotte Shubert, " Burned by FlameRretardants? " SCIENCE

NEWS Vol. 160 (October 13, 2001), pgs. 238-239.

 

[2] Per Ola Darnerud and others, " Polybrominated Diphenyl

Ethers: Occurrence, Dietary Exposure, and Toxicology, "

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES Vol. 109 Supplement 1 (March

2001), pgs. 49-68.

 

[3] Kim Hooper and Thomas A. McDonald, " The PBDEs: An Emerging

Environmental Challenge and Another Reason for Breast-Milk

Monitoring Programs, " ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES Vol.

108, No. 5 (May 2000), pgs. 387-392.

 

[4] Per Eriksson and others, " Brominated Flame Retardants: A

Novel Class of Developmental Neurotoxicants in Our Environment? "

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES Vol. 109, No. 9 (September

2001), pgs. 903-908.

 

[5] Eric Lipton and Andrew C. Revkin, " With Water and Sweat,

Fighting the Most Stubborn Fire, " NEW YORK TIMES November 19,

2001, page unknown. Available at http://www.nytimes.com.

 

[6] Diane Cardwell, " A Nation Challenged: Lower Manhattan;

Workers and Residents Are Safe, Officials Say, " NEW YORK TIMES

Nov. 2, 2001, pg. unknown. Available at www.nytimes.com.

 

[7] Robert Worth, " A Nation Challenged: The Site; Citing Safety,

City Will Cut Work Force For Recovery, " NEW YORK TIMES November

1, 2001, pg. unknown. Available at www.nytimes.com.

 

[8] Robert C. Hale and others, " Persistent pollutants in

land-applied sludges, " NATURE Vol. 412 (July 12, 2001), pgs.

140-141.

 

[9] Sandra Steingraber, HAVING FAITH (Cambridge, Mass.: Perseus

Publishing, 2001). ISBN 0-7382-0467-6.

 

[10] KemI, " KemI proposes a prohibition of flame retardants, "

March 15, 1999. See http://www.-kemi.se/aktuellt/pressmedd/1999/-

990312_eng.htm

 

[11] Environment News Service, " EU Lawmakers Vote Broad Fire

Retardant Ban, " September 6, 2001. See http://www.ens-news.com/ens/-

sep2001/2001L-09-06-02.html.

 

################################################################

NOTICE

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior

interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes.

Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic

version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS free of charge even

though it costs the organization considerable time and money to

produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service

free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution

(anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send

your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research

Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do

not send credit card information via E-mail. For further

information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F.

by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at

(410) 263-1584, or fax us at (410) 263-8944.

--Peter Montague, Editor

################################################################