Kids at Risk
Chemicals in the environment come under scrutiny as the number of childhood learning problems soars
The chemical industry prefers to police itself, when given a choice. But this approach seldom works, as evidenced by the EPA's failed attempt to restrict a pesticide known as chromated copper arsenic, or CCA. The compound is applied to pressure-treated wood and commonly found on decks and playground equipment. Since the late 1970s, EPA researchers have reported that CCA poses a special threat to pregnant women and children because it combines three neurotoxic compounds. People can be exposed to CCA by breathing fumes from unfinished wood during home repair or construction. As a structure ages, the compound may leach out into the dirt. In lower doses, according to numerous studies, CCA can impair intelligence and memory.
The EPA tried to restrict CCA in 1984, but homebuilders' and wood preservers' groups lobbied Congress so hard that the EPA retreated, asking only that retailers distribute advisories that the compound could endanger children. A decade later, the effort had gone nowhere. "We checked retailers," said John McCauley of the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, "and they had no clue what a consumer information sheet was." The EPA promised to decide on new restrictions by 1998, but officials now say the agency won't act until at least next year.
Mercury. When toxicologist David Brown helped prepare a mercury study for eight Northeastern states and three Canadian provinces in 1997, he knew that fish in the region's lakes would contain mercury; he just didn't know how much. As it turns out, the numbers were considerably higher than he expected. "The most pristine lakes," he says, "had the highest levels." Brown, formerly with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, did the math and concluded that a pregnant woman who ate a single fish from one of these lakes could, in theory, consume enough mercury to harm her unborn child.
But the Food and Drug Administration has no enforceable limit for mercury in fish--only a guideline of 1 part per million, which the National Academy of Sciences deems "inadequate to protect the developing fetus." Mike Bolger, chief of the FDA's Division of Risk Assessment, says the agency hasn't set a limit primarily because "the science has to be sorted out."
That shouldn't be surprising. For years, operators of the coal-fired power plants and trash incinerators responsible for most mercury pollution have been working to quash attempts to further regulate mercury. When the EPA concluded in 1996, for example, that more than 1.6 million Americans were at risk of mercury poisoning, industry lobbyists persuaded the agency not to make the report public for more than a year. It was released only after a group of senators complained. Lawmakers in states with substantial fishing and utility interests responded to the report by calling for yet another study, this time by the NAS. The new report, to be released next month, is expected to agree that current mercury levels are unsafe. But advocates for tight-er regulations aren't expecting any quick changes in policy. "The reason," says Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, "is that mercury has a constituency in Washington."
advertisement
