There’s nothing quite like rich, powerful industry lobbyists to warm your heart, and poison your body and mind (literally), during the holiday season. Thank you, OMB, it’s just what I asked Santa for!
Clearly it’s best that American families know nothing about potential chemical dangers to their kids because the chemical industry doesn’t want the information to be published. The chemical industry surely knows what’s best for American families, right? And who really trusts peer-reviewed research anyway?
Public health officials view it as a source of one-stop shopping for the best information on what children and women of childbearing age are exposed to, how much of it remains in their bodies and what the health effects might be. Among the “health outcomes” listed as related to environmental exposures are childhood cancer, obesity, neurological disorders, respiratory problems and low birth weight….
In a section on perfluorochemicals (PFCs), for example, which are used to make nonstick coatings, and protect textiles and carpets from water, grease and soil, among other things, the draft notes that they are found in human breast milk.
Toxic chemicals in breast milk, nummy.
Sure, your kid might have serious health problems like asthma and learning disabilities from everyday chemicals, but how else are these businesses expected to make an easy buck? To deny Big Chemical is to deny freedom and profits, and that’s all that matters in the star-spangled-bannered-world.
Why does the EPA hate America? (And who’s OMB is this anyway, George Bush’s?)
Some present and former EPA staffers, who asked not to be named for fear of losing their jobs, blamed the sidetracking of the report on heightened political pressure during the campaign season. The OMB has been slow to approve environmental regulations and other EPA reports throughout the Obama Administration — as it was under George W. Bush according to reports by the Center for Progressive Reform, a nonprofit consortium of scholars, doing research on health, safety and environmental issues, which generally advocate for stronger regulation and better enforcement of existing law.
“Why is it taking so long? One must ask the question,” said a former EPA researcher who works on children’s health issues. “It is an important document and it strikes me that it’s falling victim to politics.”
The EPA states that the report is intended, in part, to help policymakers identify and evaluate ways to minimize environmental impacts on children.
That’s an unwelcome prospect to the $674 billion chemical industry, which stands to lose business and face greater legal liability if the EPA or Congress bans certain substances mentioned in the report or sets standards reducing the levels of exposure that is considered safe.