Kids at Risk
Chemicals in the environment come under scrutiny as the number of childhood learning problems soars
The lead factor. Although inconclusive, the studies on neurotoxicants are intriguing. Researchers at the State University of New York-Oswego, in a federally funded study, showed that babies who had significant amounts of PCBs in their umbilical cords performed more poorly than unexposed babies in tests assessing visual recognition of faces, ability to shut out distractions, and overall intelligence. Herbert Needleman, of the University of Pittsburgh, examined 216 youths convicted in the juvenile court of Allegheny County, Pa., and 201 nondelinquent youths. In a study released last month, Needleman found that the delinquents had significantly higher bone-lead levels. In March, Frederica Perera, of Columbia University's Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health, reported that air-sampling "backpacks" worn by 72 pregnant women in New York City picked up high concentrations of three neurotoxic pesticides that could cause disorders in their fetuses.
Chemical manufacturers--as well as some researchers and regulators--are not convinced by such findings. "There is no reason to believe we have an epidemic [of chemical-related illness] on our hands," says Robert MacPhail, chief of the EPA's Neurobehavioral Toxicology Branch. "There are still a jillion tests that have to be carried out." Robert Kaley, director of environmental affairs for Solutia, a 1997 spinoff of Monsanto's chemical operations, says that "everybody's jumping to conclusions. These kinds of links are premature at best and speculative at worst."
But the new findings, coming on the heels of more than two dozen earlier studies, have prompted the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to dig deeper into the issue. The agency is expected to ask Congress for $1 billion to track up to 100,000 children from the womb through high school to assess the effects of chemical exposure on childhood development. U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher, who grew up in Anniston, finds the existing evidence compelling enough. "How long do you wait," he asks, "before you take the necessary action to protect children?"
The answer, in the case of the EPA, appears to be a long time. More than a dozen high-ranking current and former EPA officials say the agency has failed to exert its authority to obtain data on chemical exposure from manufacturers and to restrict the use of neurotoxicants that may be harmful to kids. The EPA's enforcement record with the chemical industry is hardly an activist one. Between 1989 and 1998, it managed to get neurotoxicity data on only nine pesticides and three industrial chemicals.
The chemical industry, meanwhile, has effectively rebuffed the few efforts the EPA has made to address the issue. In 1998, the agency tried to force makers of some of the most common chemicals to test their products for hazards to children. But the EPA backed down under election-year pressure from both political parties and decided on a voluntary system. The agency and industry are still arguing about what tests will be required. Chemical companies are among the best-connected businesses in Washington. Since January 1999, chemical manufacturers have given nearly $4.2 million to presidential candidates, congressional campaigns, and national political parties. The revolving door is nothing new in the nation's capital, but it seems to spin to particularly good effect for the Chemical Manufacturers Association. This year, the CMA retained a former top White House environmental aide who helped Al Gore develop a plan to address what the vice president called "the special impact industrial chemicals may have on children." Today, the aide, Beth Viola, is working to make the plan more industry friendly, thus contributing to delays.
advertisement
