Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

The Battle to Ban Toxic Toys

By Brita Belli, E Magazine. Posted May 14, 2007.


How some lawmakers and advocacy groups are fighting to make toys safe from harmful chemicals.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Who's Paying for the Recession Most of All? Young Workers
Lizzy Ratner

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Abortion Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
10 Suicides a Month at Ft. Hood -- War Stress Is Taking Soldiers to the Brink
Dahr Jamail

More stories by Brita Belli

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"Phthalates" (pronounced THA-lates) are found in everything from cosmetics to IV bags to children's toys. Environmentalists and environmentally minded legislators are beginning to worry about long-term exposure to the chemical compounds.

Specifically, they worry about diisononyl phthalate or DINP, a plasticizer commonly used in soft vinyl products made for babies, such as bath books, rubber ducks and teething rings as well as bisphenol A (BPA), a building block for polycarbonate plastic used in shatter-resistant baby bottles.

Studies have linked BPA to hormone disruption in rats, to increased breast cancer and prostate cancer cell growth, to early onset puberty and obesity; studies with phthalates have linked the chemicals to rodent cancers and genital abnormalities, especially in males.

Legislators have yet to revisit the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, and the EPA has banned just five chemicals since its passing. But this year, with Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) heading the Environment and Public Works Committee, a revised act, known as the Kid-Safe Chemical Act, may have a chance. First introduced by Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Jim Jeffords (I-VT) in 2005, the bill would require manufacturers to list health and safety information and require the EPA to determine the safety of 300 chemicals within the next five years. By 2020, "all chemicals distributed in commerce would need to meet the safety standard."

The city of San Francisco would have been the first U.S. jurisdiction to ban phthalates and BPA from children's toys and feeding products under the "Stop Toxic Toys" law beginning January 1, but two lawsuits, one state and one federal, both backed by chemical and toy manufacturers, stalled the initiative.

Since the lawsuits, from a coalition including the California Retailers Association, the California Grocers Association and the American Chemistry Council went into effect, the city's departments of environment and public health introduced amendments that would repeal the ban on BPA.

They also gave themselves another two years to revise the list of phthalate-containing products to ban. In 2006, the Maryland legislature failed to pass similar legislation prohibiting phthalates and BPA in children's toys.

Debbie Raphael, toxics reduction and green buildings program manager for the San Francisco Department of the Environment, told Plastics News: "When we saw the ordinance, we were dismayed and confused as to how it could be implemented."

Environment California, a citizen-based environmental advocacy organization had sponsored earlier legislation that would have imposed a statewide restriction on the manufacture, sale or distribution of phthalate- and BPA-containing products for kids under three, and is pressuring the state to revisit a more inclusive ban on toxic toys. "The state will take up the issue again sometime this year," says spokesperson Rachel Gibson.

Requiring the labeling of products could be a first step, but Gibson says it's not enough. "Short of a big explanatory message [saying] 'this is linked to cancer,'" she says, "it doesn't give consumers any information."

Until more stringent regulations are passed, consumers can use the recycling codes on plastic products to determine content. If it's marked #7, it's polycarbonate plastic and contains BPA; if it's marked #3, it's PVC plastic and contains potentially harmful phthalates.

"According to the Consumer Products Safety Commission, these products are tested and deemed safe for use," says Tiffany Harrington, director of public affairs at the American Chemistry Council (ACC). ACC calls the ban on BPA "both legally flawed and scientifically unsound" because it is at odds with Food and Drug Administration rulings and hurts California's economy.

Studies of DINP-containing toys in 1998 found that, on average, most babies and toddlers would not mouth the toys long enough (75 minutes or more) to present a health risk. But according to the author of the study, Dr. Michael Greene, "the two eight-month-old children averaged 78.3 minutes [mouthing the toys]" and there was a "maximum duration of 141.2 minutes provided by one of the ... subjects."

The European Parliament considers phthalates dangerous enough to ban them from children's products. The European Union has ordered the removal of the phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP from children's products and banned DINP, DIDP and DNOP from anything that children might mouth. "They're banning some phthalates from children's toys that were never used in toys," says Harrington.

But Environment California and other groups see the EU ban as evidence that alternatives to these plasticizers exist and must be explored in the U.S. "Many places in the world have to comply with restrictions on phthalates," Gibson says. "It's a mystery why we sell toxic toys to American kids."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: toxics, phthalates, toys

Brita Belli is managing editor of E Magazine.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Need more such articles
Posted by: sacha_arilad on May 14, 2007 3:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you. It's articles such as these that raise awareness in consumers of the dangers present even to wee infants and toddlers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

slowbob
Posted by: slowbob4 on May 14, 2007 5:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is no mystery, Ms Gibson. If the American businessman can make money on it, go with it!!
Screw the consumer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

most of my son's toys don't have a number
Posted by: Shakti on May 14, 2007 7:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just checked my baby's toys and none have a recycle number on them ... the only mark, if any, says "Made in China."

It just astounds me how many poisons industrial society pumps out into its products and the environment. It's amazing we are all as healthy as we are.

The pollutants are so numerous and ubiquitous, I feel as if I'm suffering from "toxin fatigue" another version of "compassion fatigue" so that I've become somewhat calloused to new information about poisons in our food, toys, water, etc.

I think the answer is to buy locally grown/made products that are organic/natural, or in the case of baby toys, to buy things made in European countries where the standards are higher. I'm not going to wait around for the government to regulate the corporations and manufacturers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If interested in this topic
Posted by: Colton on May 14, 2007 9:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suggest reading "Our Stolen Future: How We Are Threatening Our Fertility, Intelligence and Survival" by Colborn, Dumanoski and Meyers- sadly this has been known about for decades but research tends to just focus on which chemicals cause Cancer and nothing else. This book was written about 10 years ago but is still a good read.

Don't get me wrong, cancer is a scourge that effects the lives of many many people all over the world but these chemicals in plastics that mimic human and animal hormones effect the very survival of life on the planet. The problem here is that modern testing focus' on Cancer to the exclusion of all else, ignoring endocrine and hormonal damage that effects our fertility and intelligence, damage that takes several decades to manifest itself and is almost impossible to track.

Worse yet - these chemicals never EVER degrade in the environment. Each year we produce them by the metric ton and they will stay and effect life all over the planet. Unlike even radiation they will exist and contanimate until the tectonic plates they reside on shift to the earth's core.

It's important to note that this article is about toys for children, yet these chemicals are things that we interact with daily. The non-stick wrapper of your candy bar, the fire-proof materials that are used in aircraft construction, all these specific chemicals can be found in wildlife and human fat tissue and breast milk world wide. Everyone has heard of Teflon being found in the blood samples of Eskimos that have never used a frying pan in their lives... this is just 1 millionth of an example.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bisphenol A arrests insulin production
Posted by: tnlex on May 14, 2007 11:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Science News unequivocally reports that Bisphenol A in animal tests,arrests insulin production--completely. What is the excuse for its manufacture on the planet--by Mitsui? Type one diabetes, no insulin production, requires parents to give their children injections every 1 1/2 hours to keep them alive and we allow this to go on. I have to share the previous writiers comments that the current federal legislation that has been proposed is an insult to our children and to us and that I am grateful for the European leadership that provides some more healthful alternatives for children and for health and beauty products.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's a better idea. Fight for BIO-DEGRADABLE plastics. HEMP HEMP HOORAY !
Posted by: maxpayne on May 14, 2007 5:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now let's see today's parents put that silly "drug war" to rest and make our markets real and environmentally friendly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In the local dollar store...
Posted by: freeda'all on May 14, 2007 10:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found these toys called 'blaster balls.' They were about 1-1/4" in diameter, two to a package and listed ingredients of potassium chlorate, sulphur glue and ground glass and they stank heavily. They weren't 'toys' and they weren't balls, they were minor explosive devices intended to entertain kids when they were thrown against the ground or whatever.

Face it folks, our deaths and injuries and sicknesses are all an acceptable cost of doing business.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

good article
Posted by: bemf on May 16, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This was a helpful article illuminating yet another way in which toxics threaten us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Plastic Plague Beyond Our Shores
Posted by: M. Eriksen on May 18, 2007 2:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Plastic Plague Beyond Our Shores

Plastics plague our homes, lives and now float in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. I’ve seen it myself halfway to Hawaii, where the mass of plastic marine debris is six times heavier than the biomass of surface marine organisms. I work for the Algalita Marine Research Foundation (www.algalita.org) studying the impact of plastics on the ocean ecosystem. We’ve conducted 5 expeditions 1000 miles west of Los Angeles to an area we call the Eastern Garbage Patch. Based on our findings we estimate the mass of plastics floating off the shore of the U.S. to be roughly 3.5 million tons. It is larger than any American landfill. It’s almost all plastic.

I’m grateful for Brita Belli for writing this article about phthlates in plastic toys. We are a culture immortalized by plastic. 60 years ago you couldn’t find plastic on the shelves, with all containers and packaging being made from paper, wood, glass and metal. Plastic was a marvel to a “Throw Away” society. Half a century later we recognize that it persists in the environment, and plastic-derived toxins persist in our bodies. Our American culture of convenience produced 120 billion pounds of plastic last year according to the American Chemistry Council, which is up from 60 billion pounds 15 years ago. This production cannot be sustained, especially when it has limited long-term post-consumer use. The California Integrated Waste Management Board took a look at where the 120 billion pounds goes. Half is destined for a landfill, 20% becomes durable goods, like circuit boards and car bumpers, only 5% gets recycled, which leaves 25% unaccounted for.

That 25% is stuck in the natural world somewhere, either in trees, blowing across highways and deserts, sunk in rivers and estuaries, or floating out to sea. The latter was clear to me in 2003 when I rafted the Mississippi River, ironically on a raft made from plastic 2-liter bottles. I started in Lake Itasca and traveled 2000 miles in 5 months, through 10 states to the Gulf of Mexico. By the time I got to my hometown of New Orleans I could always look left or right and see a plastic bottle or bag, broken ice chest or milk crate. It was an unending stream of plastic leaving America’s greatest watershed. It was unbearably wrong that we allow it to continue.

The Plastic Plague is a moral issue. Do we embrace sustainability or allow unfettered free markets exploit natural resources to our long-term detriment? Many communities have chosen well. In California, the cities of Santa Monica, Berkeley, Huntington Beach and Calabasas have banned expanded and rigid polystyrene, commonly called Styrofoam. San Francisco has banned polyethylene plastic bags. Los Angeles County is considering a similar measure. I’ve just returned from a week in Alaska testifying about the Plastic Plague in support of Senate Bill 118 to tax plastic bags. Change is happening.

Thanks again for writing your article about toxins in plastic. It’s another step in the right direction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement