Cancer risks finally sticking to Teflon maker?

[Guest guest]

" WC Douglass " <realhealth

Daily Dose - Cancer risks finally sticking to Teflon maker?

Tue, 10 Jan 2006 07:15:00 -0500

 

 

Cancer risks finally sticking to Teflon maker?

 

 

 

Daily Dose

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

January 10, 2006

 

 

Wow, I shouldn't have had a C-8!

 

Back in July (Daily Dose, 7/26/2005), I wrote to you about an EPA

report that linked a chemical used in the manufacture of Teflon (C-8,

also called PFOA) to cancerous liver tumors in lab animals. I promised

to keep you updated on the story - and since there's breaking news on

the subject, now's a good time to do so.

 

To recap, chemical giant DuPont's talking heads insisted last year

that there was no cancer risk associated with C-8/PFOA, since the

chemical was only used in the making of Teflon cookware coatings, but

not present in the finished product itself. This, despite the fact

that the environmental lobby had been pushing for a ban on the

chemical for years.

 

Flash forward to late 2005: According to the Associated Press and

other sources, at least one former DuPont employee (a chemical

engineer, no less) has recently " blown the whistle, " alleging that the

company buried studies showing that one of its products - a synthetic

lining for pizza boxes, candy wrappers, microwave popcorn bags and a

jillion other things, I'm sure - can leach a chemical into foods which

can then break down into...

 

You guessed it, the very likely carcinogenic C-8/PFOA.

 

If what the AP article claims is true, these aren't simply the

outrageous musings of a disgruntled ex-employee; it's a contention

supported by a quantity of DuPont's own past internal memoranda. These

documents were made public in November by an advocacy organization

called the Environmental Working Group. One of these memos from 1987

makes mention of lab tests showing this chemical (called Zonyl)

leached into foods at a rate more than 3 TIMES HIGHER than what FDA

guidelines have prohibited since the late 1960s.

 

For all intents and purposes, this could mean that for nearly 40

years, we've all been consuming foods (mostly junk foods, of course)

that have been packaged in a chemical that's been turning those foods

into cancerous agents in our bodies. According to the EWG, this is not

an overstatement. In a letter to the EPA and FDA, the organization's

President cited evidence that excessive levels of C-8/PFOA is

contaminating human blood on a large scale - including the umbilical

cord blood of infants born to DuPont's female employees!

 

As if this weren't bad enough for DuPont PR, now the EPA is getting

involved (finally). Keep reading...

 

 

 

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

 

A separate AP article on the scandal maintains that the EPA has been

trying to decide whether or not to classify PFOA/C-8 as a human

carcinogen. Though the piece didn't specify, the agency has probably

been bandying the evidence about for years...

 

But even though they've been dragging their feet in condemning the

chemical, they're at least aggressively punishing DuPont for

concealing the studies that point to possible risks inherent to the

compound's use. According to the article (along with other sources,

like MSNBC.com), the EPA is pinching DuPont for $16.5 million in

penalties for failing to disclose the information, a violation of

several federal environmental statutes. The penalty is the largest of

its kind ever levied by the agency.

 

Of course, $16.5 million is a laughably low punitive action, one

that's apparently not even worth fighting, if DuPont's reaction is any

indication. Their mouthpieces have stated that they could have tied up

the fines in litigation for years, but chose simply to cough up the

meager amount and get on with their business.

 

What I want to know is this: Under Federal Law (the Toxic Substances

Control Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act), DuPont

could have faced punitive damages of $300 million or more for its lax

reporting of the risks of PFOA/C-8...

 

So why the slap on the wrist? Why not throw the book at them?

 

This reminds me of what happens to drug companies when THEY conceal

evidence of massive danger, or even death. Basically, nothing.

 

Exposing risks - and slaps on the wrist,

 

William Campbell Douglass II, MD