Search

Were we surprised or even disappointed that the California EPA just ruled that the plastic hardener bisphenol-A (BPA) would be subject to warning labels according to their Prop 65 law, or that the Natural Resources Defense Council would be jumping with joy over it?

Not really given the chemophobia of both of those groups, the surprise is that it took Cal-EPA this long; and that the NRDC is so happy about it is as surprising as the sun rising in the east.

Prop 65 as it s widely known, was passed by plebiscite in 1986. Who in California could resist the easy choice: Do you want anything with a possible carcinogen or reproductive toxin so labelled? Of course, said...

Screen Shot 2013-11-06 at 2.23.04 PMWe at ACSH are rarely surprised by anything we see published. Since it is our job to debunk bad science, we get a steady diet of it. But we got a special dessert dropped in our laps, and this one takes the cake.

Although the study in question is from July, it is so jaw-droppingly awful that we decided to include it today. And when you read it, you may want to discontinue your subscription to Scientific American, which...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGJlNJhC3B4

Yesterday's Dispatch took note of the new momentum (or lack thereof) for "reform" of the chemical law known as TSCA, which if enacted would needlessly tighten already protective regulations about chemical safety. Now we learn that, in the same spirit of hyper-precaution based on nothing other than political agenda, the powers-that-be in the high levels of California Health (actually the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, OEHHA) have decided after lengthy debate to put bisphenol-A (BPA) on their Prop 65 list.

Proposition 65,...

To our readers:

We value your opinion. We have compiled a list of the five stories from 2014 that we feel are the most exciting and relevant and were wondering about your thoughts. Which of these stories is of most value to you? Please let us know by e-mailing us at morning@acsh.org.

A recent "health" column in USA Today ("'Everywhere chemicals' in plastics alarm parents," Oct. 30) attempts yet again to scare the public -- especially parents of young children -- about the alleged "endocrine-disrupting" effects of common chemicals, specifically bisphenol-A (BPA) and phthalates. The specific phthalate attacked, the vinyl plasticizer DEHP, is found in many healthcare products, including intravenous tubing and bags, and some instruments used in surgery. BPA is found, most familiarly, in plastic water bottles and baby bottles, but also in various consumer products such as the coating inside food cans and dental fillings.

The authors of this alarmist article point...

Screen Shot 2014-03-26 at 1.57.51 PMIt never stops. Monday: Phthalates, Tuesday: BPA, Wednesday: Phthalates, Thursday: BPA, Friday: Phthalates ¦.

It s a good thing there aren t more days in the week, cause this could get awfully tiresome.

But on March 21st (a Friday) those of us who were unfortunate enough to stumble upon Deborah Blum s piece A Plastic Threat to Male Fertility were treated to a world-classless tutorial on (of...

Oz Have I got a disruptor for you!!

New (OK, not all that new) chemical scaremonger definition:

Endocrine disruptor [es-truh-juh n]  [dis-ruhpt-tor] (noun) — Any chemical you don't like.

Alternate— Any chemical you feel like calling an endocrine disruptor

Although this is a bit ridiculous, it's not much more so than what is passing for science these days. More on that to follow.

Let's assume for a moment that endocrine disruptors are lurking all over the...


With the European Union regulators recently reaffirming the safety of bisphenol A, ACSH friend Jon Entine has a long (but breezy and well-written!) piece in the Huffington Post asking, “at what point will the science prevail?”

Apparently not quite yet — as yesterday Canada became the first jurisdiction in the world to declare that the widely-used chemical is toxic...

There are no adverse health effects associated with the low-level amounts of mercury found in dental fillings, the FDA determined less than 18 months ago. This conclusion was supported by the American Dental Association. But after four consumer and dental groups resumed attacking mercury amalgam in dental fillings, citing hypothetical health risks, and accusing the FDA of using flawed science in approving the substance for the umpteenth time, the agency will yet again reassess the scientific basis used for its decision.

“This sounds akin to the ongoing controversy over BPA,” says ACSH's Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, “except that these amalgams have been used for over 150...

In an article for Science Careers, a supplement to the journal Science, reporter Elisabeth Pain interviewed ACSH s Dr. Josh Bloom about his take on the crises in the pharmaceutical sector. Jobs are being lost, pipelines are drying up, and revenue is decreasing for a multitude of reasons, explains Dr. Bloom, not least of which is outsourcing. To gain a comprehensive understanding of this complex problem, read the full article here.

Also noteworthy is the appearance of ACSH s Dr. Gilbert Ross s opinion in an article for Medscape Today,...