Showing posts with label 1994-11. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1994-11. Show all posts

Monday, 31 March 2014

#417: Big-Picture Organizing--Part 1: Some Good News amid the Bad

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #417
---November 24, 1994---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY
Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library.
Dioxinnz.com

========================Original Source========================

First the Good News
Since 1975, grass-roots action at the local level has brought important successes. It was grass-roots action that killed the civilian nuclear power industry in the U.S., principally by making radioactive waste disposal difficult and therefore expensive, and by turning every nuclear power plant into a fight and therefore into a public relations nightmare for its electric-utility owner.

Grass-roots action at the local level crippled the municipal solid waste incinerator industry. Since 1985, 70 incinerators were built, but during the same period at least 280 incinerators were killed. [1]The municipal incinerator industry is on the ropes.

Grass-roots action killed expansion of the industry that buries hazardous wastes in shallow pits in the ground. Since BFI opened the appropriately-named "Last Chance" dump in Colorado in 1991, no new hazardous waste dumps have even been proposed. (After getting a license for its "Last Chance" dump, BFI abandoned the hazardous waste dump business entirely.)

Most importantly, grass-roots action forced the International Joint Commission (IJC) to recommend an entirely new philosophy of chemical regulation --one that assumes chemicals are harmful until proven safe, and one based on the principle of precautionary action. The precautionary principle says that, to avoid irreparable harm to the environment and to human health, wherever it is acknowledged that a practice (or substance) could cause harm, even without conclusive scientific proof that it has caused harm or does cause harm, the practice (or emissions of the substance) should be prevented and eliminated. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1994 rejected the IJC's recommendations, but the handwriting is on the wall now, officially.) [2]

And Now the Bad
Despite these important successes, chemicals released into the environment are still decimating wildlife, making people sick, and killing people. In this sense, despite thousands of successes in local battles, grass-roots activists are losing the war.
Consider these facts:
** The incidence rates for 5 kinds of cancers are decreasing, but the incidence rates for 19 kinds of cancer are steadily increasing. The death rates for 12 kinds of cancer are dropping, but the deaths rates for 12 other cancers continue to rise. [3] Among the fastest-growing is breast cancer. In 1960, a woman's chance of getting breast cancer was 1 in 20; today it is 1 in 9, moving toward 1 in 8.
** Increasingly, couples in their prime child-bearing years are sterile; this may be due in part to a 53% decline in sperm count that has been documented among men in all industrialized countries over the past 50 years, a decline that is apparently continuing. [4]
** Ectopic pregnancy rates have quadrupled in the last 20 years. [5] An ectopic pregnancy is one that occurs outside the uterus, in one of the fallopian tubes; if not treated, such a pregnancy is fatal to the mother. Even when treated properly, it can result in sterility.
** The prevalence of endometriosis (a painful disease of the tissues lining the uterus, which often results in sterility) is steadily increasing and now afflicts somewhere between 5 and 9 million American women; [6]
** Immune system disorders (such as asthma and diabetes) are increasing. In 1990 the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (JAMA) observed that death rates from asthma have been increasing in the U.S., Canada, England, France, Denmark and Germany. [7] Other sources report increasing death rates from asthma in Wales and Australia. [8] In the U.S., the increase has been rapid. Asthma death rates increased 31% between 1980 and 1987 (from 1.3 per 100,000 population to 1.7 per 100,000). The biggest increase occurred among children between the ages of 5 and 15.
The prevalence of asthma is also increasing, especially among young children. Among children ages 6 to 11, the prevalence of asthma increased from 4.8% in 1971-74 to 7.6% in 1976-1980, a 58% increase in a short period. More recent studies indicate that the increases are continuing.

Another immune system disease, diabetes, is also increasing rapidly in the U.S. The prevalence of IDDM (insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, also called Type I diabetes) doubled between 1964 and 1981. [9] A 1993 study says, "[W]e are undergoing an epidemic of IDDM with the rapid increase in the number of cases seen recently." [10]
** The prevalence of nervous system disorders (Lou Gehrig's disease, and Parkinson's disease) is increasing; [11]
** A new disease has emerged called "multiple chemical sensitivity," characterized by extreme sensitivity to low levels of various chemicals, sometimes including odors from new carpets, perfumes, and the fragrances in commercial products such as waxes and detergents. Paints and solvents can set off an allergic-type reaction. Symptoms of MCS range in severity from an itchy rash to coma. An estimated 10% to 15% of the U.S. population now suffers from this disease in one form or another, and the prevalence appears to be rising. [12]
** Birth defect rates are steadily increasing. The federal Centers for Disease Control in 1990 summarized the trends in 38 types of birth defects; they found 29 increasing, 2 decreasing, and 7 remaining unchanged. [13]
** Eight studies of air pollution in U.S. cities have now shown that fine particles (the invisible soot emitted by incinerators, automobiles, power plants and heating units) are presently killing about 60,000 Americans each year. [14] More than a dozen studies have, in one way or another, confirmed this relationship. Furthermore, there appears to be no threshold, no level below which effects disappear. This means that people are being killed by air pollution levels well within existing federal standards.
** In 1990, the American Public Health Association (APHA) estimated that each year 50,000 to 70,000 Americans die of diseases developed from toxic exposures on the job. Furthermore, APHA estimated that 350,000 new cases of occupational disease develop each year from toxic exposures. [15]
Good News Amid the Bad
It seems clear that the opportunity is ripe, and steadily growing, for a major political organizing campaign with health as the centerpiece. Everyone cares about their health and the health of their children. A health-centered organizing campaign offers a clear entryway into the much larger question, "What has gone wrong with America?" Addressing this question would require what we call "Big-Picture Organizing."

[To be continued.] #419

 --Peter Montague

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


[1] Ellen Connett, "Since the 1980's a Minimum of 280 Proposals to Build Municipal Waste Incinerators in the U.S. Have Been Defeated or Abandoned," WASTE NOT #283 [from: Work On Waste, U.S.A., 82 Judson St., Canton, N.Y. 13617: phone 315/379-9200] (July 1994), pg. 1. The 280 figure is an underestimate; several incinerators have been defeated since July 1994, according to Ellen Connett, personal communication to Maria Pellerano November 22, 1994.


[2] See Peter Montague, "Our Greatest Accomplishment: Grass-roots Action has Forced a Major Shift in Thinking," THE WORKBOOK [from: Southwest Research and Information Center, P.O. Box 4524, Albuquerque, N.M. 87106; phone 505/ 262-1862.] Vol. 19, No. 2 (Summer 1994), pgs. 86-90.

[3] Incidence rate means occurrence of cancer per 100,000 population, age-adjusted; death rate means deaths from cancer per 100,000 population, age-adjusted. The 5 cancers with decreasing incidence are mouth and pharynx; uterus; stomach; cervix; and esophagus. The 18 cancers with increasing incidence are: colon/rectum; larynx; testicles; bladder; Hodgkin's; childhood cancers; leukemia; thyroid; liver; pancreas; ovaries; lung; skin; female breast; prostate; kidney; brain; non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; and multiple myeloma. Death rates are dropping for mouth and pharynx; uterus; stomach; cervix; colon/rectum; larynx; testicles; bladder; Hodgkin's; childhood cancers; leukemia; and thyroid. Death rates are increasing for esophagus; liver; pancreas; ovaries; lung; skin; female breast; prostate; kidney; brain; non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; and multiple myeloma. Source of information: Barry A. Miller and others, editors, CANCER STATISTICS REVIEW 1973-1990 [National Institutes of Health Publication No. 93-2789] (Bethesda, Md.: National Cancer Institute, 1993), Table I-3, pg. I.[27].

[4] Increasing infertility among Americans in their prime reproductive years is discussed in Appendix A, "Reproductive Dysfunction in the Population," pgs. 341-346, in Office of Technology Assessment, REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH HAZARDS IN THE WORKPLACE [OTA-BA-266] (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, December, 1985).

[5] Increases in ectopic pregnancies are documented in MMWR [Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report] CDC SURVEILLANCE SUMMARIES Vol. 39 No. SS-4 (December, 1990), pgs. 9-19.

[6] David E. Larson, editor, MAYO CLINIC FAMILY HEALTH BOOK (N.Y.: William Morrow, 1990), pgs. 1101-1102. Sherry E. Rier and others, "Endometriosis in Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca mulatta) Following Chronic Exposure to 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-P-dioxin," FUNDAMEN-TAL AND APPLIED TOXICOLOGY Vol. 21 (1993), pgs. 433-441.

[7] A. Sonia Buist and William M. Vollmer, "Reflections on the Rise in Asthma Morbidity and Mortality," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION October 3, 1990, pgs. 1719-1720. Kevin B. Weiss and Diana K. Wagener, "Changing Patterns of Asthma Mortality," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION Vol. 264 (1990), pgs. 1683-1687.

[8] Peter J. Gergen and others, "National Survey of the Prevalence of Asthma Among Children in the United States, 1976 to 1980," PEDIATRICS Vol. 81 (1988), pgs. 1-7.

[9] National Diabetes Data Group, DIABETES IN AMERICA [NIH Publication No. 85-1468] (no place of publication [Bethesda, Md.?]: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Arthritis, Diabetes, and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, August 1985), Table 2, pgs. VI-4, VI-5.

[10] Ingrid Libman and others, "How Many People in the U.S. Have IDDM [insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus]?" DIABETES CARE Vol. 16, No. 5 [May 1993], pgs. 841-842.

[11] Increases in Parkinson's disease and in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS, or Lou Gehrig's disease) are documented in Office of Technology Assessment, NEUROTOXICITY; IDENTIFYING AND CONTROLLING POISONS OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM [OTA-BA-436] (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, April, 1990); see Figures 2-2 and 2-3 on pg. 55.

[12] See Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, National Research Council, MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITIES (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1992). Multiple chemical sensitivity afflicts 10% to 15% of the American public, and appears to be increasing, says Bette Hileman, "Multiple Chemical Sensitivity," C&EN [Chemical & Engineering News] Vol. 69 No. 29 (July 22, 1991), pg. 34. This emerging disease has been subject of two excellent book-length studies: In 1990 the New Jersey Department of Health published a report by Nicholas Ashford and Claudia Miller, CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY, which is distributed by National Center for Environmental Health Strategies (NCEHS), 1100 Rural Ave., Voorhees, NJ 08043; phone (609) 429-5358. $17.00. See also Nicholas Ashford and Claudia Miller, CHEMICAL EXPOSURES: LOW LEVELS AND HIGH STAKES (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1990).

[13] Larry D. Edmonds and others, "Temporal Trends in the Prevalence of Congenital Malformations at 
Birth Based on the Birth Defects Monitoring Program, United States, 1979-1987," MMWR [Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report] CDC SURVEILLANCE SUMMARIES Vol. 39, No. SS-4 (December 1990), pg. 22.

[14] Seven studies are reviewed by Joel Schwartz, "Particulate Air Pollution and Daily Mortality: A Synthesis," PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS 1991/1992 Vol. 19 (1992), pgs. 39-60. The 8th is Douglas Dockery and others, "An Association Between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six U.S. Cities," NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE Vol. 329 (1993), pgs. 1753-1759; see also pgs. 1807-1808. The 60,000 figure is taken from "Air Pollution in Typical U.S. Cities Increases Death Risk," press release dated May 13, 1991, from the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass. describing findings later reported in Joel Schwartz and Douglas W. Dockery, "Increased Mortality in Philadelphia Associated With Daily Air Pollution Concentrations," AMERICAN REVIEW OF RESPIRATORY DISEASE Vol. 145 (1992), pgs. 600-604. Two million deaths occur in the U.S. each year; according to Schwartz and Dockery, fine particles account for 3%.

[15] Philip J. Landrigan, "Commentary: Environmental Disease--A Preventable Epidemic," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 82 (July 1992), pgs. 941-943.

Descriptor terms: grass-roots citizen action; civilian nuclear power; municipal solid waste incineration; msw; landfilling; dumps; hazardous waste; ijc; regulation; reverse onus; burden of proof; precautionary principle; principle of precationary action; wildlife; human health; morbidity; mortality; studies; statistics; cancer; breast cancer; sterility; reproductive disorders; ectopic pregnancies; tubal pregnancies; endometriosis; immune system disorders; diabetes mellitus; type I diabetes; asthma; nervous system disorders; lou gehrig's disease; amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; parkinson's disease; multiple chemical sensitivity; mcs; birth defects; air pollution; fine particles; apha; american public health association; occupational safety and health;

Sunday, 30 March 2014

#414: Potent Immune System Poison: Dioxin

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #414
---November 3, 1994---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY
Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library.
Dioxinnz.com
=======================Original Source========================

The immune system is a complex set of specialized cells and organs that defends the body against attack by "foreign" invaders. When it functions properly, the immune system fights off diseases caused by bacteria, viruses, fungi, parasites, and cancer cells. "When it malfunctions, however, it can unleash a torrent of diseases, from allergy to arthritis to cancer to AIDS," according to the federal National Institutes of Health (NIH). [1]

At the heart of the immune system is the ability to distinguish between self and nonself. A healthy immune system protects the "self" and attacks only the "nonself." Virtually every cell in your body carries distinctive molecules that identify it as self. Cells lacking a "self" marker are quickly perceived as "foreign," attacked, and eliminated by the immune system.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) describes the immune system this way: "The immune system, which equals in complexity the intricacies of the brain and nervous system, displays several remarkable characteristics. It can distinguish between self and nonself. It is able to remember previous experiences and react accordingly: once you have had chicken pox, your immune system will prevent you from getting it again. The immune system displays both enormous diversity and extraordinary specificity: not only is it able to recognize many millions of distinctive nonself molecules, it can produce molecules and cells to match up with and counteract each one of them. And it has at its command a sophisticated array of weapons.

"The success of this system in defending the body relies on an incredibly elaborate and dynamic regulatory-communications network. Millions and millions of cells, organized into sets and subsets, pass information back and forth like clouds of bees swarming around a hive. The result is a sensitive system of checks and balances that produces an immune response that is prompt, appropriate, effective, and self-limiting." [1]

The immune system can fail in two ways: if it is damaged, it can fail to attack foreign invaders, and can thus allow infections or cancers to develop. On the other hand, if the immune system fails to distinguish self from nonself, it can overreact and attack the self, causing "autoimmune" diseases such as arthritis, asthma, lupus, or Type I diabetes (insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus). Other autoimmune diseases include scleroderma, Graves' disease, Addison's disease, Hashimoto's disease, myasthenia gravis, lymphocytic adenohypophysitis (also called Sheehan's syndrome), mucocutaneous candidiasis, Schmidt's syndrome, and autoimmune thyroid disease.

Dioxin: Potent Immune System Poison
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) 1994 draft reassessment of dioxin emphasized that dioxin damages the immune system directly and indirectly. From studies of rats, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, cattle, marmosets, monkeys, and humans, EPA concludes that even low doses of dioxin attack the immune system. Dioxin directly reduces the number of B cells (immune cells that develop in the bone marrow, then circulate throughout the blood and lymph, fighting off invaders). And it reduces the number of T cells (immune cells that develop in the thymus, then circulate throughout the body, attacking invaders), but dioxin's attack on T cells seems to be indirect. EPA says, "One potentially important indirect mechanism is via effects on the endocrine system. Several endocrine hormones have been shown to regulate immune responses, including glucocorticoids, sex steroids, thyroxine, growth hormone, and prolactin. Importantly, TCDD [dioxin] and other related compounds have been shown to alter the activity of these hormones." [2, pg.9-49]

EPA goes on to say, "It is important to consider that if an acute exposure to TCDD even temporarily raises the TCDD body burden at the time when an immune response is initiated, there may be a risk of adverse impacts even though the total body burden may indicate a relatively low average TCDD level." In other words, a single dose of dioxin at the wrong time may damage your immune system's ability to protect you.

EPA then says, "Furthermore, because TCDD alters the normal differentiation of immune system cells, the human embryo may be very susceptible to long-term impairment of immune function from in utero [in the womb] effects of TCDD on developing immune tissue." In other words, dioxin can prevent the immune system from developing properly in an unborn child, with lifelong consequences, EPA believes. "Animal studies suggest that some immunotoxic responses may be evoked at very low levels of dioxin exposure," EPA says. [2, pg.9-50]

Linda Birnbaum, director of research at the U.S. EPA Health Effects Laboratory in Research Triangle Park, N.C., was the leader of EPA scientific team reassessing dioxin. She says, "Dioxin appears to be a carcinogen in fish, rodents, and other mammals, including humans. But dioxin can also modulate [modify] the immune system resulting in an inability to fight disease. It is a very powerful immunosuppressant. But it can also upregulate [excite] the immune system so that you start becoming hypersensitive, developing autoimmunity and allergies. Depending upon the stage [of growth] of the animal and the species, sometimes you observe immunosuppression and in other cases you observe upregulation." [3, pg.4]

Birnbaum goes on to describe Taiwanese children, exposed to dioxin-like chemicals, who had unusually frequent respiratory infections and ear infections (otitis). Further, she described an Inuit population in Quebec with elevated levels of dioxin in their bodies from eating the fat of marine mammals (seals); their children have "very high incidences of respiratory infections and otitis [ear infections], and also a very decreased take of vaccinations," Birnbaum says. [3, pg.11] In other words, vaccinations don't work well in these children, perhaps because their immune systems have been damaged.

Birnbaum says there is no threshold for immunotoxic responses to dioxin; [3, pg.14] in other words, there is no level of dioxin below which the immune system is not affected. Put another way: any amount of dioxin seems to do some damage to the immune system, at least in animals; there is no "safe" dose.

In laboratory mice, a single tiny dose of dioxin causes increased deaths when the mice are challenged with an influenza virus. [4] It is worth emphasizing that the effective dose of dioxin is very small: 10 nanograms of dioxin per kilogram of bodyweight (10 ng/kg) harms the mouse immune system enough to increase the death rate from influenza virus. To get 10 ng/kg into perspective, consider that a single 5-grain aspirin tablet taken by a 150-pound adult is a dose of 4.7 MILLION nanograms of aspirin per kilogram of bodyweight (4,761,936 ng/kg). For an adult human to get a dose of aspirin equivalent to the dose of dioxin that harms the mouse immune system, you would have to divide a single aspirin tablet into 470,000 pieces (nearly half a million pieces) and eat only one piece. Is the human immune system as sensitive to dioxin as the mouse's? No one yet knows.

What about animals more human-like than mice? 
Tom Webster of the Boston University School of Public Health cites evidence that the number of immune cells in rhesus monkeys is changed by a dioxin body burden of 270 ng/kg; in marmosets, the number of immune cells is changed at only 6 to 8 ng/kg of dioxin. "While the medical implications of this effect are unknown, it appears to occur at about the average human body burden of dioxin-like compounds," he says. In other words, average residents of North America carry 7 to 9 ng/kg in their bodies now, and 6 to 8 ng/kg alters the immune systems of marmosets. [4, pg.8] "Similar effects [immune cell alterations] were seen in the children of mothers who lived in dioxin-contaminated Times Beach, Missouri during and after pregnancy," Webster notes, citing work by Gerson Smoger and others. [4,pg.7]

This past summer, German researchers published a study of the health of 158 chemical workers who had been exposed to dioxin in 1953 during an industrial accident at a BASF chemical plant. [5] The 158 exposed workers were compared to 161 unexposed workers. The dioxin-exposed workers experienced more frequent infections and parasitic diseases during the 36 years after exposure, consistent with immune system damage. Especially noticeable were increases in respiratory infections, thyroid diseases, disorders of the peripheral nervous system, and appendicitis. Mental disorders were also increased. All together, the highly-exposed group had 18% more recorded episodes of illness than the control group.

Ironically, the largest source of dioxin entering the environment today is medical incinerators. Together, medical incinerators and municipal solid waste (msw) incinerators account for 95% of all dioxin emissions into the air of the U.S., according to U.S. EPA. [6,pg.2] The good news is: these technologies are not needed and could be phased out rapidly, if public health authorities began to take their DISEASE PREVENTION responsibilities seriously. Plans for new incinerators could be easily abandoned. For both medical wastes and municipal wastes, alternatives already exist that are cleaner, safer, and less expensive. (The chief appeal of incinerators is political: massive campaign contributions by the waste industry.)

Unfortunately, instead of planning to phase out incinerators, EPA has announced plans to "regulate" incinerator emissions more tightly by requiring air pollution scrubbers. Scrubbers will not decrease dioxin production, but will move dioxin from the air emissions into the incinerator ash, which gets buried in shallow pits in the ground. Thus, current public health policies are creating a legacy of unpleasant surprises for our children.

 --Peter Montague

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


[1] Lydia Woods Schindler, UNDERSTANDING THE IMMUNE SYSTEM [NIH Publication No. 88-529] (Bethesda, Md.: National Institutes of Health, July, 1988), pg. 1.


[2] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, HEALTH ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT FOR 2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZO-p-DIOXIN (TCDD) AND RELATED COMPOUNDS. VOL. III OF III. [EPA/600/BP-92/001c] (Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August, 1994.) This is the official draft of "Chapter 9" of the EPA dioxin reassessment, also known as the "risk characterization chapter." Available free while supplies last; telephone (513) 569-7562 in Cincinnati.

[3] Linda Birnbaum, GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY BOARD 102ND MEETING, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, JULY 15, 1993, PRESENTATION BY LINDA BIRNBAUM, U.S. EPA (Washington, D.C.: International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Water Quality Board, Dec. 21, 1993), pg. 4. Available from us for $4.00.

[4] Tom Webster, DIOXIN AND HUMAN HEALTH: A PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT OF DIOXIN EXPOSURE IN CANADA (Boston: Boston University School of Public Health, 1994), pg. 7, citing unpublished work by Linda Birnbaum and others. Available from us for $4.00.

[5] Andreas Zober and others, "Morbidity follow up study of BASF employees exposed to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) after a 1953 chemical reactor incident," OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE Vol. 51, No. 7 (July 1994), pgs. 479-486.

[6] Lynn Goldman, STATEMENT OF LYNN GOLDMAN, M.D., ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXICS, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 13, 1994).

Descriptor terms: immune system; morbidity; nih; national institutes of health; dioxin; incineration; taiwan; children; bronshitis; upper respiratory infections; basf; occupational; safety and health; times beach; mo; tom webster; linda birnbaum; gerson smoger; epa; us environmental protection agency; germany; thyroid; appendix; appendicitis; peripheral neuropathy; mental health; medical waste; infectious waste; msw; municipal solid waste; corruption; elections; campaign reform; campaign contributions;

#416: The Scientific Basis of Chemical Safety--Part 2: Standards That Kill

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #416
---November 17, 1994---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY
Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library.
Dioxinnz.com
=======================Original Source========================

As we saw last week,#415 Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) are air pollution limits for the workplace. Since 1946, TLVs have been devised and published by a private organization called the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), a private group composed of industrial hygienists from state and local governments, plus academics and industry consultants. ACGIH clearly wants its audience to believe that TLVs are health-based standards; the preface to ACGIH's annual TLV list says TLVs "are health-based recommendations derived from assessment of the available published scientific information from studies in exposed humans and from studies in experimental animals." Furthermore the preface to the annual TLV list says TLVs are airborne concentrations "to which nearly all workers may be exposed for 8 hours per day, 40 hours per week for a working lifetime without adverse effect." [1]

In 1970 Congress created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to protect workers from injury and from toxic chemicals. In 1971, OSHA adopted the ACGIH's 1968 TLVs as official workplace standards called PELs (permissible exposure limits). The rationale at the time was that the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) required OSHA to adopt standards quickly and there was no time to develop independent standards. However, the OSH Act created a new process for OSHA to follow in establishing future PELs, and it created a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) with official responsibility for providing scientific advice to OSHA. During the next 20 years, NIOSH developed and published Recommended Exposure Limits, or RELs, for 160 chemicals. However, OSHA ignored the bulk of NIOSH's recommendations and adopted only 12 new PELs during the 20-year period.

During the 20 years that OSHA spent setting 12 new PELs, the ACGIH TLV Committee revised 234 TLVs downward, making them more protective (and stricter than the corresponding PELs which had been adopted in 1970 but never revised), and adopted 168 new TLVs for which there were no PELs. By 1987, official PELs were lagging badly behind the development in TLVs, and this was a source of embarrassment to OSHA. In the spring of 1987 OSHA began a formal procedure to adopt a new Air Contaminants Standard. OSHA proposed to adopt, once again, all of the ACGIH's TLVs (in their 1987 revision). [2]

During the next 2 years, TLVs came under close scrutiny. In 1988, two occupational hygienists, Barry Castleman and Grace Ziem, examined the official documentation that ACGIH said it had relied upon in setting TLVs. (See RHWN #128.) Castleman and Ziem reported that at least 104 of the TLVs were based on nothing more than unpublished allegations, often made to the TLV committee by industry scientists whose employers had a direct financial interest in the particular substance being considered. [3]

Despite this information, OSHA continued proposing to adopt all TLVs as official PELs.

During public hearings on the proposed Air Contaminants Standard in 1988, NIOSH placed 4000 pages of testimony in the record. They offered evidence that at least 98 of the 400 proposed PELS would not protect the health of workers. For 50 of the 98 substances, NIOSH had already published Recommended Exposure Limits (RELs). NIOSH's average (mean) REL was 71 times lower (more protective) than the corresponding TLV.

During the public hearings, the New Jersey State Department of Health (NJSDOH) placed in the record a study that it had conducted of existing and proposed PELs, using EPA's [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's] Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database. [4]

The IRIS database was created by EPA to collect and systematically review human and animal toxicity data on particular chemicals. The IRIS database in 1990 contained reviews of 370 chemicals. The purpose of the IRIS system is to support EPA and other governmental regulators in their efforts to protect public health.

NJSDOH researchers randomly selected 43 existing and proposed PELs. Using widely-accepted risk assessment methods to extrapolate from reference doses and unit risks in the IRIS database, the NJSDOH researchers calculated health-based occupational guidelines. For the 43 chemicals, the average (mean) existing PEL was 9.5 mg/m**3; the average (mean) proposed PEL was 7.5 mg/m**3; and the average (mean) health-based guideline calculated by NJSDOH was 0.004 mg/m**3. Thus average existing PELs exceeded NJSDOH's health-based guidelines by a factor of 2375 and proposed PELs exceeded NJSDOH's health-based guidelines by a factor of 1875, on average. The New Jersey State Department of Health concluded that OSHA's proposed PELs were based on outdated information and weak methodology and would not protect worker health.

Despite these compelling criticisms, OSHA formally adopted all of ACGIH's TLVs as enforceable PELs in January 1989. As a practical matter, this astonishing decision had the effect of making ACGIH's TLV Committee the de facto workplace-standards-setting body in the U.S. Since the TLV Committee operates behind closed doors without peer review of its methods or conclusions, this transfer of authority from OSHA to ACGIH effectively gutted the OSH Act, which had established a public process for setting occupational standards. (In July 1992, a court declared the new PELs illegal, thus re-establishing the 1971 PELs, based on the 1968 TLVs, as official U.S. standards; the Clinton administration did not appeal that court ruling. [5])
Now, as we saw last week, the TLVs themselves have been subjected to withering criticism. Although they are called THRESHOLD limit values, implying that they are set at a level that would PREVENT disease, in many cases they have been set at or above levels at which disease is known to occur in humans.

For example, 7 of 14 workers exposed to chlorodiphenyl at 10% of the TLV suffered chloracne; 10 out of 10 volunteers exposed to ethyl ether suffered upper respiratory tract irritation at 75% of the TLV; and 5 out of 5 volunteers exposed to 2-nitropropane suffered central nervous system effects such as headaches, nausea, and vomiting at 80% to 180% of the TLV. In the Air Contaminants Standard, OSHA set the PEL for these three substances at the same level as the TLV. [6]

Today the ACGIH and its TLVs are being subjected to a continuous stream of criticism from knowledgeable authorities. For example, a well-known industrial hygienist in New Jersey recently said, "The reality is that for the vast majority of chemicals, we have little or no chronic toxicity data. Even when we do, we usually don't know the chemical's effects on lung function, nervous system function, immune or endocrine system function, reproductive function, or other vital bodily functions. Without such data, claims that we know what exposures are permissible and will not harm workers are false.

"They [ACGIH] still have not acted rigorously to avoid conflicts of interest among members, however. Instead of requiring disclosure of corporate consulting relationships, they are using an honor system where members merely state upon appointment that they have no conflicts of interest. While some positive changes have been made, they do nothing to undo the damage already done by the present TLVs which were set under the old, dysfunctional system, and the changes do not go far enough to ensure that past mistakes will not be repeated.

"Exposure limits are theoretically helpful to workers. However, if we don't get the numbers right, and it looks like ACGIH and OSHA usually have not, then they are harmful." [4]

In 1993, a researcher recalled a 1956 criticism of TLVs: "In the introduction to its 1956 list... the Committee on Threshold Limits says, 'Values are given... for the maximum average atmospheric concentrations of contaminants to which workers may be exposed... without injury to health.' Careful study of the data which support the currently accepted values suggests that no such description can be truthfully attached to most of them." [7] [The ... appear in the 1993 original.]

A July 1994 analysis of TLVs finds that 229 of the approximately 600 current TLVs have been criticized, in one technical forum or another, as inadequate to protect workers' health. [8]

What then is the purpose of TLVs, if not to protect the health of workers?

In 1935, a group of industrialists met to devise a comprehensive response to the "industrial dust problem." At that time, lawsuits were pending, demanding hundreds of millions of dollars in damages for occupational lung disease. This meeting led to the formation of the Air Hygiene Foundation in 1936, with 200 corporations and trade associations as members. One goal of the Foundation was to set up "authoritative and approved standards for the control of industrial dusts which, if complied with by industries, or by industrial companies, will act as a defense against personal injury suits." [8]

Though TLVs often may not protect the health of workers, they do provide what is now commonly known as the "TLV defense" when a company is sued for harming workers by exposing them to toxic chemicals. The typical TLV defense quotes the ACGIH saying TLVs are "thought to be safe for workers --based on the best available information." The winners in this sad affair are the business interests and lawyers who use the TLV defense as a shield from liability in personal injury lawsuits. The losers are the 50,000 to 70,000 workers who die each year from diseases they developed after exposure on the job, and the estimated 350,000 workers who develop new cases of occupational disease each year from toxic exposures.

 --Peter Montague

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


[1] TLV documents quoted in Ernest Mastromatteo, "TLVs: Changes in Philosophy," APPLIED INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE Vol. 3, No.3 (March 1988), pgs. F12-F16. In 1988, Mastromatteo was head of ACGIH's TLV Committee.


[2] James C. Robinson and others, "Implications of OSHA's Reliance on TLVs in Developing the Air Contaminants Standard," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE Vol. 19, No. 1 (January 1991), pgs. 3-13.

[3] Barry I. Castleman and Grace E. Ziem, "Corporate Influence on Threshold Limit Values," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE Vol. 13, No. 5 (1988), pgs. 531-559.

[4] Eileen Senn Tarlau, "Guest Editorial; Industrial Hygiene With No Limits," AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATION JOURNAL Vol. 51, No. 1 (January 1990), pg. A9-A10.

[5] Frank Swoboda, "Some Toxic-Substance Rules Being Dropped; Administration Did Not Appeal Court Decision," WASHINGTON POST, March 23, 1993, pg. D1.

[6] S.A. Roach and S.M. Rappaport, "But They Are Not Thresholds: A Critical Analysis of the Documentation of Threshold Limit Values," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE Vol. 17, No. 6 (1990), pgs. 727-753.

[7] Henry Smyth Jr., 1956, quoted in S.M. Rappaport, "Threshold Limit Values, Permissible Exposure Limits, and Feasibility: The Bases for Exposure Limits in the United States," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE Vol. 23, No. 5 (May 1993), pgs. 683-694.

[8] Barry I. Castleman and Grace E. Ziem, "American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists: Low Threshold of Credibility," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE Vol. 26, No. 1 (July 1994), pgs. 133-143.

Descriptor terms: occupational safety and health; osha; job safety; worker safety; tlvs; threshold limit values; acgih; american conference of governmental industrial hygienists; congress; niosh; barry castleman; grace ziem; pels; rels; permissible exposure limits; new jersey state department of health; njsdoh; iris database; risk assessment; epa; chlorodiphenyl; ethyl ether; 2-nitropropane; air contaminants standard; air hygiene foundation; tlv defense; lawsuits; morbidity statistics; mortality statistics; eileen tarlau;