Finally, the US Department of Health and Human Services’ National Toxicology Program (“NTP”) has issued its final report on bisphenol A (BPA).  And the NTP expressed some concern about the potential health effects associated with BPA exposuers at the current levels to which we are exposed.

• The NTP has some concern for effects on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and children at current human exposures to BPA.
• The NTP has minimal concern for effects on the mammary gland and an earlier age for puberty for females in fetuses, infants and children at current human exposures to BPA.
• The NTP has negligible concern that exposure of pregnant women to BPA will result in fetal or neonatal mortality, birth defects or reduced birth weight and growth in their offspring.
• The NTP has negligible concern that exposure to BPA will cause reproductive effects in non-occupationally exposed adults and minimal concern for workers exposed to higher levels in occupational settings.

In connection with the report, NTP Associate Director John Bucher, Ph.D., stated “There remains considerable uncertainty whether the changes seen in the animal studies are directly applicable to humans, and whether they would result in clear adverse health effects.  But we have concluded that the possibility that BPA may affect human development cannot be dismissed.” 

How should consumers react and what should they do?  Well, the NTP doesn't provide much advice.  CERHR Director Michael Shelby, Ph.D., stated “if parents are concerned, they can make the personal choice to reduce exposures of their infants and children to BPA.”

Will this end the debate?  No.  In fact, I recently go into a debate on the subject after Mommy Myth Buster posted that BPA being harmful was a myth.  I happen to disagree that it is a myth.  I don't think uncertainty makes something a myth.  That being said, I do think, however, that it is clear that the science on the issue is uncertain.  The low dose animal studies are just that, animal studies.  Making those studies relevant to humans involves analysis and assumptions.  And the animal studies are not necessarily relevant to humans - rodents, for example, process BPA differently so whether the adverse health effects seen in rodents apply to humans is not yet answered. 

But reports continue to document adverse health effects associated with BPA exposure.  Just this week, scientists at the Yale School of Medicine have found that "exposure to low-dose BPA may have widespread effects on brain structure and function."  The study found that low dose BPA exposure may lead to disruption in memory and learning, and depression.  Or, as TreeHugger put it - "BPA may make you stupid and depressed."  What is important about this study is that it involved monkeys - and monkeys process BPA more like humans, as opposed to rodents.  This is the first time BPA has been linked to health problems in primates. 

The study's authors suggeste that the EPA should lower its current acceptable level for human exposure to BPA.

The FDA continues to maintain that BPA is safe.  The FDA recently issued its draft report declaring BPA to be safe.  Specifically, the FDA's draft report states the "FDA has concluded that an adequate margin of safety exists for BPA at current levels of exposure from food contact uses."  The draft report was issued in advanced of a meeting scheduled for September 16 - methinks the meeting will be very interesting . . .

And the industry?  The American Chemistry Council responded to the NTP’s report with the statement that “There is no direct evidence that exposure to bisphenol A adversely affects human reproduction or development.” 

So, what can a parent do if the experts can’t decide?  The health effects from very small dosages that only recently could be detected are just now being understood.  Recent research has shown harmful effects in animals at low levels (levels consistent with human exposure).  Emerging, substantial evidence indicates that BPA can harm laboratory animals at concentrations below the daily levels to which most of us are already exposed.  In fact, the Chapel Hill panel’s consensus statement evaluated the strength of data from more than 700 BPA studies and labeled as “confident” its assessment that BPA at low doses has had a negative effect on experimental animals.  The panel concluded that BPA exposure in the womb can permanently alter genes of animals, impair organ function in was that persist into adulthood, and trigger brain, behavioral and reproductive effects, including diminished sperm production. 

I think that with the NTP finding "some concern" - or a 3 on the NTP's 5 point scale - caution is in order.  I think it is prudent to reduce exposure to BPA for pregnant women or women trying to get pregnant, babies and young children.  With so many alternatives on the market, why not minimize the risk?  As my mom use to safe, better safe than sorry.

In the rush of getting back to school, from buying new (green!) school supplies to figuring out how you are going to make a 100 or more creative lunches (let me know when you figure that one out), you might not stop to think about the building where your child is going to spend a good part of his or her day.  Or, if you do think about it, you may be focused on greening the school’s cleaning or improving its pest management practices - both fabulous goals.  I would guess that asbestos is the last thing on your mind.

Asbestos?  What does asbestos have to do with going back to school?

A lot of us assume that the health implications associated with asbestos are no longer an issue.  But we may be wrong.  Flashback to Seinfeld – what happens when we assume?

Yes.  Relatively regular news stories focus on asbestos in our children’s schools, but you may not think about the implications for your children’s schools.  However, the EPA estimates that MOST of our nation's schools have asbestos-containing materials.

Despite the advent of asbestos regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency in the 1980s, asbestos is still a very real health threat.  Exposure to asbestos fibers causes health risks.  Plus, exposure to asbestos is the only known cause of pleural mesothelioma, a fatal form of cancer that has no cure.

So what the heck is asbestos?  Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral.  Asbestos actually refers to a group of fibrous silicate materials.  These fibers have desirable properties, such as heat insulation, fire resistance and strength.

Asbestos was widely used prior to regulations because of its excellent insulating capabilities. Most often found within insulation, asbestos may be found in over 35 million residences within the U.S.  It is also found in commercial buildings.  However, more of concern for parents with children going back to school, countless school buildings also contain high levels of asbestos, not only within insulation, but in drywall, acoustical plaster, stucco, roofing tiles, and floor and ceiling tiles.  

Before you panic, keep in mind that asbestos is not harmful unless it is disturbed or damaged.  Most often, the damage occurs as a result of a renovation project or some sort of disaster, such as a fire or flood. When damaged or disturbed, asbestos fibers become “friable” and may be released into the air, putting individuals at risk of inhalation. Asbestos fibers are long, microscopically thin fibers – so thin you can’t see them – and they float in the air.  If inhaled, the claw-like structure of the tiny asbestos fibers allow them to cling to the pleural lining of the lungs for decades before an individual may begin to experience common mesothelioma symptoms, including difficulty breathing and a chronic cough.

And children may be more at risk.  Why is asbestos such a danger to our children?  The latency period for asbestos related disease is between 10 and 50 years after first exposure – so children exposed at a young age of a potentially higher risk because they will have the long latency period.  Mesothelioma has a latent period of between 20 and 50 years, so if a child is exposed at age 8, they may not experience any mesothelioma symptoms until they are in their thirties or older!

Unfortunately, despite the potentially higher risk, school officials, often overworked and underfunded, don’t always the resources or information to adequately protect our children.  Hundreds of school buildings must undergo asbestos abatement each year, and although the majority conduct this project during summer recess or school breaks in an effort to avoid exposing students, this does not guarantee that our children are exempt from exposure. Asbestos removal is often a result of aging asbestos-containing insulation and floor tiles that have loosened or corroded and are literally falling apart in classrooms and cafeterias – put off until the last possible moment because of budget shortfalls.

So what can you do? 

• Be involved and ask questions about remodeling and renovation projects. 
• Ask your children about the state of the buildings, and keep your eyes open when you visit the school facilities. 
• Be part of the school’s green committee. 
• Speak with school officials about utilizing alternatives to asbestos-containing insulation and ask for a copy of the school’s asbestos-testing records. 
• Participate in the process.  The school/district should have an asbestos management plan.  There should be an inspection and re-inspection for asbestos-containing materials every three years under the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA).  You may want to check out the EPA's guidance on the ABC's of Asbestos in Schools or the EPA's website information on asbestos in schools.

You may also have asbestos at home.  If your home was constructed prior to 1980, it is very likely that your home has asbestos in some of the building products. While we may not be able to control what happens outside of our homes, we can work to make our homes healthy and environmentally conscious. 

Smart Mama’s Simple Steps to Reduce Asbestos Exposure:

• Inspect your home.  If you have an older home, then you may want to inspect it to indentify suspect materials.  If you still have your home inspection report from when you purchased the home (if you had one), then it may identify suspect materials.
• Let it be.  If the material is in good condition, let it be.
• Don’t disturb it.  Make sure you don’t cut, saw, sand, drill holes in or otherwise disturb asbestos containing building materials.
• Repair it.  If the material is not in good condition, then you probably need to repair it or remove it.  Repairing it usually involves either sealing or enclosing the asbestos material.  Sealing the asbestos material involves using a sealant that binds the asbestos fibers together or coats the fibers so that they cannot be released.  Covering the asbestos material usually involves preventing the release of asbestos fibers by putting something over it, like a protective wrap over insulated piping or new flooring over asbestos containing floor tiles.  Of course, repairing it means that that asbestos fiber remains in place.  If you ever remodel or replace the material containing asbestos, you will need to take further action.  A professional trained in handling asbestos should be used even for minor repairs because a risk of exposure exists and improper handling can result in a hazard where none existed before.
• Remove it.  Removal of the asbestos containing material will eliminate the risk if the removal is done properly.  Make sure you use a professional training in asbestos handling. 

This post was co-written by me and Samantha Catalano at the Mesothelioma & Asbestos Awareness Center.  The MAAC provides information regarding asbestos and its associated health complications.  Its goal is to build awareness and to provide support and education.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission, in conjunction with the Bonne Bell Company, announced a recall today of several Smackers and Bonne Bell makeup bags because the clasp has excess lead.  I'm posting it because the recall announcement came out late on a Friday before a 3 day weekend, so I think it may be overlooked in the rush to enjoy the last weekend of summer.  And, before you dismiss the recall because it is just the clasp, keep in mind the tragic death of a 4 year old Minneapolis boy from lead poisoning after ingesting a small heart-shaped charm in 2006.

So, I've posted pictures of the recalled totes.  If you have one of these in your house, make sure your children don't play with it and check the codes to see if it has been recalled.  

Smackers makeup or cosmetic totes:

Bonne Bell makeup or cosmetic totes:

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published its study of lead in vitamins, including children's vitamins, and found that only 4 of the 324 tested did not contain lead.  Here you are trying to do something good for your child by giving him vitamins, and there is lead!  That's scary.  And annoying.

The maximum level for children's vitamins result in an exposure of 2.88 micrograms (ug) lead per day (or ug/day).  That product?  Nature's Plus Animal Parade Shake.  The second highest was Superior Multi Age at 2.23 ug lead per day.  THe next products drop off significantly in terms of daily estimated exposure, with Nutraceutical Pedia Powder at 0.895 ug/day.

What is more disconcerting is that the FDA says there is nothing to worry about based upon the FDA's provisional tolerable total daily intake (PTTI).  The FDA's PTTI for children under 6 is 6 ug/day.  But, California's Proposition 65 has a lower level for its "maximum allowable dose levels" causing reproductive harm.  So, while the FDA says this maximum exposure of 2.88 ug/day is safe, another agency disagrees.  California's Proposition 65 sets a daily exposure level of lead at 0.5 ug/day for lead as a reproductive toxicant (it is higher for lead as a carcinogen).  In other words, the maximum exposure of lead in vitamins is 5 times what is safe under Proposition 65!

Granted, the median exposure is less than even California's Proposition 65 standard.  The median exposure for children under 6 is 0.123 ug/day.  And, children don't absorb all the lead they ingest - but they do absorb approximately 50% of the lead that reaches their digestive tract.  But still . . .

If you are trying to eliminate your child's exposure to lead (and you can read about the hazards of lead exposure), giving it to him in his vitamins is NOT what you want to do.  And, lead exposure is additive, so it is prudent to eliminate all sources.

Plus, while the median for young children may be below the Proposition 65 safe level for lead as a reproductive toxicant, the median exposure for pregnant or lactating women is 0.845 ug/day, above the California Proposition 65 standard.  Hello?  Lead does pass across the placenta.  However, adults only absorb approximately 11% of the lead that reaches their digestive tract.

You can see the entire list and the results.

I've been involved recently in several online debates on Twitter and other blogs on bisphenol A (BPA).  And I don't want to repeat the BPA debate in this blog, but if you are curious as to some of it, you can check out a summary of the issue and the recent declaration of the Food and Drug Administration that BPA is safe.  But, Scientific American published a really good article on the scientist whose accidential findings kicked off the recent debate as to BPA's safety many years ago, Patricia Hunt, and you should give it a read.

Many of us worry about our exposures to toxic chemicals, and want to know what we can do to reduce those exposures.  And, before I get hate email, let me just clarify that just because we are exposed, does NOT mean that any adverse health effect will occur.  Or that the exposure is even a problem.  There is a lot of uncertainty as to what is and what is not safe, how exposures occur, how much exposure we actually get, etc.

And I'm not advocating that we be afraid of life.  Not at all.  We should enjoy life!  But I do think that knowledge is power.  So, by knowing what exposures you might have, you can take some simple steps to reduce your exposures.  Also, awareness may spur you to become an advocate to, say, reduce the unnecessary toxic chemicals in our everyday consumer products.

So, in any event, I posted a blog on the subject at 5 Minutes for Going Green, where I also blog.  The post is Do You Need a Hazards Chemical Warning Label?