#437: Rush Limbaugh with Book Learning

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #437
---April 13, 1995---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net
==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library. Dioxinnz.com
========================Original Source========================

Until recently, there were only three camps in the environmental movement. Now some journalists are trying to start a fourth camp.

The original three camps are distinguished by where they place blame for environmental problems: The first says the general public is at fault. The second blames powerful economic and social institutions, chiefly in the "private sector." The third camp blames government.

People in the first camp want to solve environmental problems by recycling newspapers, planting trees, and putting a brick in their toilet tank to reduce water use.

The second camp wants the public to recognize that there really is no "private sector" because all "private" industrial decisions have profound impacts on public health and well being. They want the public involved in decisions about technology.

A third camp blames government. They favor eliminating weak laws, poor regulations, inept officials, and ineffective agency structures. [1]

Now a fourth camp is trying to emerge. This camp says the sources of environmental distress lie somewhere in the murky past, but solutions are staring us right in the face; however, we can't reach these solutions because environmentalists in the first three camps are so negative, so focused on doom-saying, so cynically intent on making money by frightening the public through direct mail appeals.

This new, fourth camp has just published its manifesto, calling itself "ecorealism." Ecorealism is upbeat, positive, buoyantly optimistic. Its basic premise is that most environmental problems either don't exist or would soon disappear if environmentalists would just stop exaggerating.

The ecorealists' manifesto is Gregg Easterbook's 745-page encyclopedia of feel-good optimism, called A MOMENT ON THE EARTH. [2] 

Here is a sampling:

** Human population is not a problem, if you just take the long view of it (pg. 491);

** Genetic engineering is more natural than soccer fields and rock concerts (because nature engages in genetic engineering itself [cross-pollination, for example] but nature never made a soccer field without human help) (pg. 419);

** No research has ever shown that industrial chlorine releases cause any public health or general ecological harm (pg. 414);

** New landfills, incinerators, and factories usually do not have emission problems (pg. 467);

** In the western world, the age of pollution is nearly over, because by the year 2004 society will have "almost painlessly" adopted a zero discharge philosophy (pgs. xvi, 206, 256, 648);

** Whatever industry's stance may have been in the past, today industry's attitude is "respectful environmental behavior" (pg. 623);

** Nature makes far worse environmental problems than people do (pgs. xvii, 21, 145);

** No one in the general public has ever been harmed by radiation associated with nuclear power reactors (pg. 493) and humans are not exceptionally sensitive to radiation exposure (pg. 506);

** Radioactive waste disposal is not really a problem because even at the WIPP site in southern New Mexico, built to hold long-lived transuranic military wastes, most of the radioactivity will have disappeared within 300 years (pg. 514);

** There is no ozone hole over the north pole (pg. 539);

** Toxic waste isn't an important problem because the National Academy of Sciences in a 1991 report said there is "no clear relationship between proximity to toxic wastes and cancer;" (pg. 604);

** Environmental problems developed in the old days, back when "government was tucked snugly in bed 

with industry" but times have changed (pg. 372);

** Chemicals are, today, assumed to be dangerous, and the burden of proof is on the manufacturers of chemicals to prove safety before new chemicals can be introduced into commerce (pg. 231);

** Most forms of cancer are in decline (pg. 246);

** Dioxin is in the same chemical family as table salt (pg. 414); the largest study of dioxin and human health found only a "slight" increase in cancer (pg. 235); dioxin is natural, caused mainly by forest fires (pg. 238); and, anyway, new emissions of dioxin have already been "nearly eliminated" (pg. 238).

I'll stop here because the catalog of optimism goes on and on, but the drift is clear to everyone.

Unfortunately, most of the ecorealists' platform is simply wrong. Let's examine some of its assertions.

** According to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has been "reassessing" dioxin for the past 4 years, at least half of the dioxin sources in the U.S. have not been identified (REHW #390, #391), so Gregg Easterbrook cannot know that new sources of exposure have been eliminated. EPA says forest fires are a minor source of dioxin and even that minor source may be caused not by nature but by industrial releases of chlorine settling onto the leaves of trees. The largest study of dioxin and human health found a 46% increased hazard of cancer among workers whose exposure lasted at least a year and began at least 20 years ago (thus allowing the cancer latency period to run its course); 46% is not a "slight" increase by any reasonable person's reckoning (RHWN #219, #270, #290, #353). True, dioxin is a chlorinated chemical, and so is table salt, but dioxin is only in the "same family" as table salt in the sense that an AK-47 and a pea shooter are in the "same family" --both can be used as weapons to hurt people.

** The incidence rates of 14 out of 16 types of cancer are increasing, not decreasing. The death rates for 8 of 16 types of cancer are increasing. (See RHWN #385.) Easterbrook is wrong when he says most forms of cancer are in decline.

** Today in the U.S., new chemicals are introduced at the will of the manufacturer, and it is up to the public to prove that they cause harm before a chemical can even be regulated, much less banned. Mr. Easterbrook has it backwards.

** What the National Academy of Sciences actually said about toxic wastes and human health was this: "A limited number of epidemiologic studies indicate that increased rates of birth defects, spontaneous abortion, neurologic impairment, and cancer have occurred in some residential populations exposed to hazardous wastes. We are concerned that other populations at risk might not have been adequately identified." And the Council said, "Millions of tons of hazardous materials are slowly migrating into groundwater in areas where they could pose problems in the future, even though current risks could be negligible." (RHWN #272, #371)

** No ozone hole over the north pole? In 1993, Canadian scientists reported measuring 35% more ultraviolat light on the ground in Toronto, due to a large hole in the ozone layer over the north pole. [3]

** Most WIPP radioactive wastes gone in 300 years? The WIPP radioactive waste dump in New Mexico is slated to hold, at a minimum, one ton of plutonium-239 with a half-life of 24,400 years. Plutonium is one of the two or three most potent carcinogens around. According to the government's environmental impact statement, WIPP may eventually hold up to 44 tons of plutonium. It will take 10 half-lives, or 240,400 years (far longer than HOMO SAPIENS has walked the earth), for this plutonium to decay away, not 300 years.

** No one ever harmed by nuclear power reactors? The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the industry-dominated standards-setting body for the nuclear industry worldwide, estimates that nuclear reactors in the U.S. (annually producing 80 gigawatt-years of power) cause 4000 deaths and 2500 serious genetic defects each year in future populations. (REWH #200, #201, #202) The 

U.S. National Academy of Sciences estimates that the true number is 50% greater than the ICRP's estimate. Long after the reactors have been shut down, this damage will continue year after year for aeons into the future as radioactive gases waft into the air from uranium mill tailings piles, and other radioactive wastes. Just because the deaths will not occur today does not mean nuclear energy is "clean." Dead is dead, and immoral is immoral, today and tomorrow.

** Humans are insignificant compared to nature's damage? True for hurricanes and earthquakes. But for long-term distribution of toxic chemicals and certain key nutrients into the environment, humans surpassed nature some decades ago. For example, each year humans inject twice as much arsenic into the atmosphere as nature does, seven times as much cadmium, and 17 times as much lead. Measured by the elements that nature moves into the oceans via river discharges, we humans mobilize (through mining) 13 times as much iron as nature does each year, 36 times as much phosphorous, and 110 times as much tin. Nature mobilizes 63 million tons of nitrogen each year, but humans (through fertilizer and fossil fuel combustion) mobilize 215 million tons. Yes, nature is large and sturdy, but in several important respects, human activities have already dwarfed natural processes. (REWH #155).

Gregg Easterbrook reserves special treatment for the main problem that drives the grass-roots environmental movement: health damage from toxic chemicals. He begins by sneering at the first scientist who reported harm to the children living near Love Canal, Dr. Beverly Paigen. Easterbrook says "Paigen essentially assumed that if a Love Canal resident stated that a health condition was caused by toxic wastes, it must be so." (pg. 605) With that, Easterbrook dismisses health problems among children living near Love Canal and lays the foundation for his claim that toxic chemicals aren't a serious problem. But anyone who reads Paigen's work can see that she did not rely merely on peoples' claims that toxic waste had harmed them. Using objective measures, Paigen and others clearly revealed a pattern of harm to children and wildlife near Love Canal. At least six peer-reviewed studies have indicated harm to living things near Love Canal (RHWN #104, #276, #371). Easterbrook's account is disgracefully distorted and false.

Gregg Easterbrook has been an environmental writer for NEWSWEEK for several years. He has traveled the world, gleaning first-hand information reported in this book. He has read hundreds of scientific studies, and he spent 5 years preparing his manuscript. Yet he feels compelled to support his case by omissions, distortions, and fabrications. As a consequence, none of the book seems trustworthy, or even worth reading. Easterbrook comes across as a sophisticated Rush Limbaugh. What a sad waste of a talented writer.

 --Peter Montague

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

[1] Sylvia N. Tesh, "Causal Debates in Environmentalism," JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY (Autumn 1994), pgs. 298-309.

[2] Gregg Easterbrook, A MOMENT ON THE EARTH (New York: Viking Penguin, 1995); $27.95 but not worth it.

[3] J.B. Kerr and C.T. McElroy, "Evidence for Large Upward Trends of Ultraviolet-B Radiation Linked to Ozone Depletion," SCIENCE, Vol. 262 (Nov. 12, 1993), pgs. 1032-1034.

Descriptor terms: environmentalists; environmental movement; environmentalism; public policy; journalism; ecorealism; population; genetic engineering; chlorine; landfilling; incineration; natural disasters; radioactivity; radiation; radioactive waste; military wastes; ozone depletion; toxic waste dumps; superfund; onus; reverse onus; dioxin; epa; dioxin reassessment; cancer; plutonium; wipp; waste isolation polit plant; icrp; uranium; metals; nutrients; beverly paigen; love canal; wildlife; gregg easterbrook;

#436: The Dogs of War

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #436
---April 6, 1995---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net ==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library. Dioxinnz.com =======================Original Source========================

Somewhere between 2.6 and 3.8 million American men and women served in Vietnam during the years 1965 through 1971, the years when chemical herbicides were being used to denude the jungle and destroy enemy crops. Military records do not allow a more accurate determination of the true number who served. [1]

Alongside the humans serving in Vietnam, there were 3895 military working dogs, almost all of them purebred German shepherds. [2] (Among the 3895, there were 64 Labrador or golden retrievers used as trackers; the other 98.3 percent were German shepherds.) These dogs served as scouts, sentries, trackers, mine detectors, and tunnel explorers. About 91% of these dogs were "intact" (uncastrated) males.

When a military working dog dies, regardless of the circumstances of death or the duty location, an autopsy is performed by a veterinarian, and a standardized set of tissue specimens and organs are sent to the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Washington, D.C.

During the late 1980s, researchers compared autopsy records of 1167 military working dogs with Vietnam service against autopsy records of 791 military working dogs who served in the continental U.S. and saw no Vietnam service. In a separate study, the stateside dogs were also compared to 437 dogs that died in Okinawa, because many dogs that served in Vietnam were sent to Okinawa after the war. [3]

These studies showed that dogs who served in Vietnam were about twice as likely (1.8 times as likely) to have cancer of the testicles, compared to military working dogs who served only in the states. Likewise, military dogs that died in Okinawa were about twice as likely (2.2 times as likely) to have testicular cancer as dogs who served only in the states. A separate study was then conducted, excluding the dogs who had testicular cancer. Among the non-cancer dogs, there was clear evidence of significant deterioration of the testicles in those dogs who served in Vietnam (compared to dogs who served only in the U.S.): degeneration of the testicles, atrophy (shrinking) of the testicles, and evidence of a below-normal ability to produce sperm.

Dogs have often served as sentinels of human disease. Back in 1938, the well-known researcher W.C. Hueper showed that beta-naphthylamine caused bladder cancer in dogs. [4] In 1954, researchers showed that another industrial chemical, 4-aminodiphenyl, produced bladder cancer in dogs. [5] In 1980, a study of 8760 pet dogs showed that bladder cancer in dogs correlated with residence in industrialized counties in the U.S. and Canada; this same study showed that bladder cancer in men and women was similarly correlated with residence in industrialized areas. "The findings of this study suggest that the bladder cancer experience of pet dogs resembles that of human beings living in the same general locale," the study concluded. [6]

Pet dogs are particular relevant in such studies because 40 million pet dogs share their owner's domestic environment yet do not indulge in behavior that could confuse or confound the interpretation of epidemiologic studies: dogs don't smoke, and they usually don't work. In 1983, a study of pet dogs with the asbestos-related lung disease, mesothelioma, showed that their disease correlated with household members who (a) worked in an asbestos-related job, or (b) had an asbestos-related hobby or (c) applied flea powder to their dog. [7]

For these reasons, the finding of testicular cancer and testicular dysfunction in dogs who served in Vietnam was an eye-opener, and it soon led to a comparison of 271 human veterans with testicular cancer to 259 veterans without testicular cancer, to see whether Vietnam service was related to testicular cancer. This study revealed that, like dogs, human veterans of Vietnam were about twice as likely (2.5 times as likely), to have testicular cancer compared to veterans who did not serve in Vietnam. [8]

Naturally, the question occurs, what aspects of military service in Vietnam caused testicular cancer in men, and testicular cancer and dysfunction in military working dogs?

An obvious suspect is Agent Orange, which was sprayed in large quantities (11.2 million gallons, or 42.4 million liters) over 3.6 million acres (1.5 million hectares) of Vietnam. Agent Orange, named for the orange stripe on its 55-gallon storage containers, was a 50-50 mixture of two herbicides: 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. One of these, 2,4,5-T, was banned in the U.S. about 1980 because evidence indicated that it could cause birth defects in humans; the other half of Agent Orange, 2,4-D, remains in wide use throughout the U.S. where it is popular for killing dandelions and other broad-leaf plants in lawns, and as an agricultural weed killer.

During manufacture, the herbicide 2,4,5-T becomes contaminated with dioxin unavoidably. According to the National Academy of Sciences, the average dioxin contamination in Agent Orange in Vietnam was 2 parts per million (ppm). An estimated total of 368 pounds of dioxin was sprayed onto Vietnam's land and people during the 7-year spray program. [9]

However, a recent study of Vietnam veterans that tried to estimate 2,4,5-T exposure and link it to testicular cancer found that only Navy men had elevated levels of testicular cancer associated with 2,4,5-T exposure; men in the other services showed no such effect of exposure to 2,4,5-T. [10] The authors of that study speculated that Navy men might also have been exposed to fuels (oil and gasoline), which previous studies have linked to testicular cancer.

The other half of Agent Orange, herbicide 2,4-D, is also a suspect. Although the manufacturers of 2,4-D claimed for years that their products were not contaminated with dioxin, this claim has now been shown to be false, using the manufacturers' own data. [11]

Dioxin has been shown to damage the reproductive organs and systems of many animal species, including men and women. [12]

A study of pet dogs in the U.S. found excess cancers (lymphomas) associated with 2,4,-D lawn spraying. [13] And a study of 32 farmers who sprayed 2,4-D, compared to a control group of 25 unexposed farmers, revealed significant effects on the exposed farmers: diminished sperm count, increased number of sperm with poor motility (swimming ability); increased numbers of dead sperm; and increased numbers of malformed sperm. [14]

No federal agency keeps close track of pesticide use in the U.S.; however U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that farmers apply 25 to 30 million pounds (11.3 to 13.6 million kilograms) of "active ingredient" of 2,4-D each year in the U.S. Non-agricultural use of 2,4-D in the U.S. is estimated to total another 12 to 15 million pounds (5.4 to 6.8 million kilograms) of "active ingredient" per year. [15] The "active ingredient" of a pesticide is only 0.5% to 5% of the total formulation so these "active ingredient" amounts must be multiplied by anywhere from 20 to 200 to get the total 2,4-D formulation used each year. The bulk of the formulation is secret ingredients (called "inerts") which are, themselves, often toxic solvents. [16]

Other chemicals suspected of causing testicular cancer and dysfunction in dogs and humans who served in Vietnam are the antibiotic tetracycline and the pesticide malathion. Many military dogs in Vietnam suffered from ear infections and other diseases. [17]Therefore, many received one or more doses of tetracycline during their tour of duty. Tetracycline is strongly absorbed by sperm in mammals, and is known to cause testicular atrophy (shrinkage), and diminished sperm quality in humans and dogs.

The other suspicious candidate is malathion. The same military unit that sprayed Agent Orange also sprayed DDT and malathion extensively in the vicinity of U.S. troops, to reduce the dangers of malaria carried by mosquitoes. It has been reported that 44% of the land of southeast Asia, mainly Vietnam, was sprayed with malathion during the war. [18]Furthermore, military working dogs in Vietnam were dipped in a 0.5% solution of malathion to kill disease-carrying ticks. Malathion is known to cause testicular atrophy and damage to the sperm-generating cells of laboratory animals. [19]

Malathion is widely use throughout the U.S. today for mosquito control though not for fear of malaria. Mosquitoes are simply a nuisance. EPA estimates that 4 to 6 million pounds (1.8 to 2.7 million kilograms) of "active ingredient" of malathion are sprayed in the U.S. each year. The yearly total of malathion formulation sprayed is, again, 20 to 200 times this amount.

Sperm count in men throughout the industrialized world appears to be dropping. (See RHWN #343.) Testicular cancer is the most prevalent cancer among white males between the ages of 25 and 34 years and the second most common in the 35-to-39 age group. The causes of testicular cancer are thought to be environmental because the rates vary widely from one location to another. During the last 15 years, the rates have increased rapidly (2.3% to 3.4% per year) in many industrialized countries. [20]

It may take scientists many decades to tell us all we would like to know about a complex chemical like dioxin, or malathion. However, we already know enough to act: To guide our personal choices, and new public policies, to minimize the danger to ourselves, our families, and our communities, we need only to remember that chemicals not used cannot cause harm. This we can learn from the dogs of war.

 --Peter Montague

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

[1] Harold Fallon and others, VETERANS AND AGENT ORANGE: HEALTH EFFECTS OF HERBICIDES USED IN VIETNAM (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1993), pg. 3-1.

[2] Howard M. Hayes and others, "U.S. Military Working Dogs with Vietnam Service: Definition and Characteristics of the Cohort," MILITARY MEDICINE Vol. 159, No. 11 (November 1994), pgs. 669-675.

[3] H. M. Hayes and others, "Excess of Seminomas Observed in Vietnam Service U.S. Military Working Dogs," JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Vol. 82, No. 12 (June 20, 1990), pgs. 1042-1046.

[4] W.C. Hueper and others, "Experimental Production of Bladder Tumors in Dogs by Administration of Beta-Naphthylamine," The JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE AND TOXICOLOGY Vol. 20, No. 1 (January 1938), pgs. 46-84.

[5] A.L. Walpole and others, "Tumours of the Urinary Bladder in Dogs After Ingestion of 4-aminodiphenyl," BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE Vol. 11 (1954), pgs. 105-109.

[6] Howard M. Hayes and others, "Bladder Cancer in Pet Dogs: A Sentinel for Environmental Cancer?" AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 114, No. 2 (1981), pgs. 229-233.

[7] Lawrence T. Glickman and others, "Mesothelioma in Pet Dogs Associated with Exposure of Their Owners to Asbestos," ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH Vol. 32, No. 2 (December 1983), pgs. 305-313.

[8] Robert E. Tarone, and others, "Service in Vietnam and Risk of Testicular Cancer," JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Vol. 83, No. 20 (October 16, 1991), pgs. 1497-1499.

[9] Fallon, cited above, pg. 2-4.

[10] Tim A. Bullman and others, "Risk of Testicular Cancer Associated with Surrogate Measures of Agent Orange Exposure among Vietnam Veterans on the Agency Orange Registry," ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY Vol. 4, No. 1 (January 1994), pgs. 11-16.

[11] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ESTIMATING EXPOSURE TO DIOXIN-LIKE COMPOUNDS VOL. II PROPERTIES, SOURCES, OCCURRENCE AND BACKGROUND EXPOSURES [EPA/600/6-88/005Cb June 1994 External Review Draft] (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994), Table 3-18 on pg. 3-58.

[12] Arnold Schecter, editor. DIOXINS AND HEALTH (New York: Plenum Press, 1994); see, for example, pgs. 26, 145, 318, and 332, among others.

[13] Howard M. Hayes and others, "Case-Control Study of Canine Malignant Lymphoma: Positive Association With Dog Owner's Use of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid Herbicides," JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE Vol. 83, No. 17 (September 4, 1991), pgs. 1226-1231.

[14] D. Lerda and R. Rizzi, "Study of reproductive function in persons occupationally exposed to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)" MUTATION RESEARCH Vol. 262 (1991), pgs. 47-50.

[15] Arnold L. Aspelin, PESTICIDES INDUSTRY SALES AND USAGE; 1992 AND 1993 MARKET ESTIMATES [733-K-94-001] (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, June 1994), pg. 19.

[16] John H. Bukowski and Leroy W. Meyer, "Simulated Air Levels of Volatile Organic Compounds Following Different Methods of Indoor Insecticide Application," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Vol. 29, No. 3 (1995), pgs. 673-676.

[17] Paul B. Jennings and others, "A Survey of Diseases of Military Dogs in the Republic of Vietnam," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION Vol. 159, No. 4 (August 15, 1971), pgs. 434-440.

[18] Fallon, cited above, pg. 3-14.

[19] K. Balasubramanian and others, "Effect of malathion on the testis of male albino rats," MEDICAL SCIENCE RESEARCH Vol.15 (1987), pgs. 229-230.

[20] Hans-Olav Adami and others, "Testicular Cancer in Nine Northern European Countries," INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER Vol. 59 (1994), pgs. 33-38.

Descriptor terms: vietnam war; military; army; navy; marines; air force; herbicides; veterans; dogs; german shepherds; labrador retrievers; golden retrievers; okinawa; testicular cancer; sperm count; testicular atrophy; 4-aminodiphenyl; beta-naphthylamine; bladder cancer; asbestos; mesothelioma; flea powder; agent orange; 2,4,5-t; 2,4-d; birth defects; agriculture; farming; dioxin; fuel; oil; gasoline; lymphoma; pesticide use data; inert ingredients; secret ingredients; antibiotics; tetracycline; malathion; mosquito control;

#438: Warning on Male Reproductive Health

=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #438
---April 20, 1995---
News and resources for environmental justice.
==========
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net ==========
RACHEL-4CM = DIOXIN FOCUSED DIRECTORY Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library. Dioxinnz.com =======================Original Source========================

The Danish Environmental Protection Agency in Copenhagen, Denmark released a report April 18th entitled MALE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICALS WITH ESTROGENIC EFFECTS. The 175-page English-language report, which we have obtained, says male reproductive health is deteriorating in many countries, and that the most likely cause is exposure to low levels of industrial chemicals that contaminate food, water, and many consumer products.

The Danish report says many industrial chemicals mimic sex hormones (chiefly the female hormone, estrogen) and thus interfere with the normal development of creatures (including humans) that become exposed before, or shortly after, birth. The report identifies many consumer products as sources of such hormone-like chemicals: pesticides, detergents, cosmetics, paints, and packaging materials, including plastic containers and food wraps. [1] The report calls for an aggressive, coordinated international research effort to describe the extent of the problem, and to design programs of "prevention and intervention."

Meanwhile in the U.S., the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) has funded a report by a scientist who says these problems are not real. "The suggestion that industrial estrogenic chemicals contribute to an increased incidence of breast cancer in women and male reproductive problems is not plausible," the CMA's 6-page study concludes. [2]

In contrast, the Danish report says, "It is now evident that several aspects of male reproductive health have changed dramatically for the worse over the past 30-50 years. The most fundamental change has been the striking decline in sperm counts in the ejaculate of normal men; recent evidence from Paris indicates that this decrease amounts to about two percent per year over the last two decades. The result is that many, otherwise normal, men now have sperm counts so low that their fertility is likely to be impaired. Over the last half-century, the incidence of testicular cancer has increased progressively in many countries to become now the most common cancer in young men. Other disorders of the male reproductive tract may also be increasing in incidence, with several European countries reporting a progressive rise in hypospadias (a malformation of the external genitalia) and an apparently emerging trend towards an increasing incidence of testicular maldescent [undescended testicles]....

"While the etiologies [causes] underlying these apparent changes are currently not clear, both clinical and laboratory research suggest that all of the described changes in male reproductive health appear inter-related and may have a common origin in fetal life or childhood. This means that the increase in some of the disorders seen today originated 20-40 years ago and that the prevalence of such defects in male babies born today will not become manifest for another 20-40 years or more," the report says.

The Danish report was prepared by 19 scientists and physicians, including 13 from Denmark, two from France, one from England, one from Scotland, and two from the U.S.

The report says that declining reproductive health has also been widely observed in wildlife: "Trends in the reproductive health of species other than man also raise the possibility of environmental factors as partial etiologic [causal] contributions in a decline noted in the male reproductive health of wildlife. For example, wild panthers in the United States have been reported to have an increase in undescended testes and a decrease in semen quality, whereas male alligators in some lakes in Florida have been shown to have abnormalities in their sex hormone levels (tending towards femaleness) and to have smaller than normal genitalia. Male fish in some parts of the United Kingdom have been shown to express a 'female-like response' when studied in a relatively natural setting. Earlier studies of fish eating birds in the United States demonstrated nests containing male hatchlings that were apparently feminized. A recent report of lactating [milk-producing] male fruit bats suggested that the males were, in some way, exposed to a female sex hormone. Recent laboratory studies showed that when estrogenic forms of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were painted on turtle eggs, the male hatchlings were sex-reversed to females. Taken together, this growing body of evidence suggests that environmental factors that resemble female sex hormones may be having an adverse effect on the reproductive capacity and wellbeing of diverse species," the report says.

The report summarizes evidence indicating that all of these problems have a common origin: the exposure of male fetuses to estrogen-like chemicals before birth. "The wealth of experimental [laboratory animal] results and associated clinical [human] reports suggests strongly that prenatal exposure to exogenous [external] estrogens may play an etiologic role in the trends observed in male reproductive health," the report says.

The report lists many ways in which humans become exposed to chemicals that mimic hormones: "Estrogen effects are not restricted to a small group of therapeutic agents but appear in several groups of compounds that are in daily use in industry, agriculture or in the home," the report says. "A major problem is determining which chemicals are estrogenic... At present, tens of thousands [of] man-made chemicals are used, yet the effects on the endocrine [hormone] system have been studied for only a few of these. The estrogenic activity of most chemicals (e.g., alkylphenols, phthalate esters, bisphenol-A) has been detected by accident, not by intent; that is, no systematic screening, even on individual groups of chemicals, has been attempted. Hence it is highly possible that other estrogenic chemicals remain unidentified... Thus, the present situation is that man and wildlife are exposed to a very wide range of chemicals, and for the majority of them we do not know whether these chemicals are, or are not, estrogenic, whether their effects are additive, or even what the true exposure to these chemicals is."

The report points out that even weakly estrogenic chemicals may be of concern if they remain in the bodies of humans and wildlife for long periods. Natural hormones are created by the body, circulate in the blood stream very briefly to carry out a particular task, and are then destroyed by natural mechanisms. In contrast, many industrial chemicals that enter the body are not readily broken down so they circulate in the blood for long periods --in some cases many years --mimicking natural hormones.

The Danish report lists the following chemicals and classes of chemicals as known to have estrogenic activity:

Organochlorine pesticides: DDT, DDD, DDE, dicofol, perthane, methoxychlor, chlordane, oxychlordane, trans-nonachlor, heptachlor, heptachlorepoxide, aldrin, dieldrin, hexachlorobenzene, hexachlorocyclohexanes, lindane (gamma HCH), mirex, and toxaphene. Although these chemicals have been banned in several industrial countries, including the U.S., some of them are still manufactured [in the U.S. or overseas, by U.S. corporations--PM] and sold in developing countries where they are "widely used" today, the Danish report says.

Other known estrogenic chemicals include:

** Many of the 109 types of PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls); 

** Dioxins and furans (unwanted by-products of all incinerators; paper-making mills; metal smelters; and the manufacture of some chemicals and pesticides); 

** Alkylphenols, the breakdown products of alkylphenol polyethoxylates (APEs) which are widely used in detergents, paints, herbicides and cosmetics. Some 300 million kilograms (660 million pounds) of APEs are produced each year and ultimately released into the environment. 

** Phytoestrogens, or plant-produced estrogens, including isoflavones and coumestans found in rye, wheat, cabbage, sprouts, spinach and soybeans. "Soybean is far and away the richest source of plant estrogens and is used ubiquitously [everywhere] in the food industry as a protein source including the production of infant milk formula substitutes," the Danish report says. Depending upon the dose, phytoestrogens have an estrogenic, or an anti-estrogenic, effect, the Danish report says. Unlike many of the other estrogenic chemicals identified in the Danish report, phytoestrogens do not bioaccumulate or biomagnify, but are readily metabolized and excreted. 

** Many common chemicals found in plastics, in-cluding bisphenol-A, phthalate esters (butylbenzyl phthalate and di-n-butylphthalate): "Phthalates are the most abundant man-made environmental pollutants, and human intake per day via various routes, especially via the diet, is measured in tens of milligrams," says the Danish report. Some plastics contain up to 40% phthalate esters (by weight). These esters leach out of, or volatilize out of, the plastics as time passes. Many foods in the U.S. and elsewhere are packaged in phthalate-containing plastics. Even blood for transfusions is sometimes packaged in phthalate-containing plastics. 

** Herbicides, such as the popular crab-grass and dandelion killer, 2,4-D, and the now-banned 2,4,5-T, both of which were widely used by U.S. forces in Vietnam. (See REHW #436.) Other herbicides with estrogenic effects include: alachlor; amitrole; atrazine; metribuzin; and trifluralin. 

** Fungicides: benomyl and its principal breakdown product, carbendazim, used on apples and bananas, among other food crops; and ethylene bis dithiocarbamates (EBDCs, including mancozeb, maneb, metiram, and zineb). 

** Hexachlorobenzene. Although this pesticide was banned in many countries in the 1970s, it "continues to be released to the environment as a byproduct and contaminant in many other chlorinated chemicals including chlorinated solvents," the Danish report says. 

** Tributyltin compounds. Tributyltin compounds, until very recently, were used in large quantities as antifouling paints on ships, boats, and mariculture pen nets. Now banned in many countries. 

** Malathion, heavily sprayed around residential areas of the U.S. to kill nuisance mosquitoes.

And finally the Danish report warns that exposure to low levels of many chemicals may be harming the reproductive health of humans and wildlife by mechanisms that have nothing to do with estrogen: "Although not the subject of this report, in considering and evaluating the possible role of estrogenic chemicals in male reproductive disorders, it should not be forgotten that many chemicals may have a detrimental effect on male reproductive health through other mechanisms than an estrogenic effect," the Danish report says.

 --Peter Montague

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

[1] Our thanks to Lisa Finaldi of Greenpeace International for helping us obtain a copy of the Danish EPA report.

[2] Stephen H. Safe, "Environment and Dietary Estrogens and Human Health: Is There a Problem?" ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES Vol. 103, No. 4 (April, 1995), pgs. 346-351.

Descriptor terms: endocrine disrupters; strogen; hormones; reproductive system; pesticides; detergents; cosmetics; paints; packaging materials; plastics; packaging; cma; chemical manufacturers association; denmark; sperm count; hypospadias; undescended testicles; testicular cancer; cryptorchidism; wildlife; panthers; alligators; penis size; fish; birds; bats; turtles; pcbs; chlorine; organochlorine compounds; pesticides; DDT; DDD; DDE; dicofol; perthane; methoxychlor; chlordane; oxychlordane; trans-nonachlor; heptachlor; heptachlorepoxide; aldrin; dieldrin; hexachlorobenzene; hexachlorocyclohexanes; lindane (gamma HCH); mirex; toxaphene; dioxin; furans; alkylphenols; alkylphenol polyethoxylates; apes; metal smelting; paper mills; incineration; phytoestrogens; bisphenol-A; phthalate esters; herbicides; 2,4-d; 2,4,5-t; agent orange; vietnam veterans; alachlor; amitrole; atrazine; metribuzin; trifluralin; benomyl; carbendazim; ethylene bis dithiocarbamates; ebdcs; mancozeb; maneb; metiram; zineb; hexachlorobenzene; tributyltin; malathion;


Next issue