|
Endocrine Disrupters and the Pill
- Introduction
- How EDs Work
- Our Stolen Future
- Drugs in the Environment
-
Examples of EDs
- Government Testing
- Laws
- The Pill as an ED
- History of the Pill
- Case Study: Coastal Waters
- Case Study: Fish
- Case Study: Men in Italy
- Solutions
- What you can do!
- Further Information
Comments & questions to:
khornbach@macalester.edu
|
 |
Government Testing
In 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
created The Endocrine Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC)
whose goal was to develop ways to screen and test for endocrine disrupters(EDs). By September
of 1998, the EDSTAC had put their own scientists to work to continue to
explore the role of EDs. Their findings were similar to Colborn's own,
showing that certain chemicals disrupted the body's natural endocrine
systems functions. Through the EDSTAC's testing (done in a
laboratory on animals), they found that EDs affect the reproductive
system of both males and females, causing disruption of normal sexual
differentiation, sperm production, and can cause preterm births. The
EDSTAC also found that EDs could affect the thyroid gland, which
affects metabolism. They, however, conclude that while these affects
are seen on lab animals, there is no clear indication that the same
problems will occur with humans if they are exposed to EDs. It is also
noted that additional research is needed to determine whether EDs
affect breast and prostate cancer and nervous system development. Their
report also included further research into the environmental impacts of
EDs. The list of affected animals given by the EDSTAC includes: snails,
oysters, fish, alligators, reptiles, and birds. The EDSTAC, however,
did not want to draw too many conclusions or point any fingers, instead
they note that the problems in the wildlife are not linked to any
specific chemical and many in fact may not be even directly related to
the problem of EDs. They also note that many of these substances, such
as DDT and PCBs, have already been banned or are heavily regulated,
therefore reducing current risk. The EDSTAC concludes from their
further research that they are concerned with the problems of EDs
especially in regards to human health and the environment and worry
about possible toxic like reactions to the chemicals. At this point,
the EDSTAC simply said they were going to continue to monitor and
research EDs hoping to reduce the risks for humans and the environment.
To comply with the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the
EPA created a screening program to determine which chemicals act as
EDs. They created the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). It
took two more years, till 2000, for the EPA to have a full report to
give to Congress. This is where they fully explain the EDSP, which
consists of a two-tiered system to examine possible EDs. Tier one tests
chemical that may be EDs, and tier two confirms that they are EDs. In
their report to Congress the EPA explains they are working on fully
implementing the EDSP, including developing new software to help decide
which chemicals should be tested first. Also at this time the EPA was
working to create procedure on how exactly to test possible EDs.
Basically, while the EPA had excellent motives in being pro-active and
attempting to deal with the mounting problems of EDs, two years after
establishing a system for testing and four years after the beginning of
their testing, the EPA had accomplished little to actual screen for or
protect against EDs. While attempting to do science and create
policy at the same time, the EPA has been able to do anything
meaningful in either field. This conflict at the EPA between science
and policy is troublesome. Instead of having the two concepts working
together to create policy around the new emerging science and therefore
helping to immediately create solutions to the problems, there is a
disconnect. Science is being done, though very slowly, and policy is
being created to help deal with the problems. However, the EPA has not
created a solution that works. Policy can be used to solve some of the
problems related to EDs, such as the banning of EDs in pesticides and
plastics, but policy will be able to do little to deal with the
problems of other EDs such as synthetic estrogen. Instead, technology
to deal with these problems should occur simultaneously with science
and policy. This would solve serious problems, such as that of EDs,
instead of letting it fester for long periods of time. This current
disjoint is part of the bureaucratic problem of the EPA.
In 2001 the EPA created another body to work on EDs
called the Endocrine Disruptor Methods Validation Subcommittee (EDMVS).
In their mission statement they claim their function to be "the
development and choice of initial protocols; prevalidation study
designs; validation study designs; and the integration of prevalidation
and validation study results into EDSP Tier 1 and Tier 2 methods
documents suitable for external peer review." (EDMVS) This organization
had a life span of three years making one report to Congress and being
replaced by the Endocrine Disruptor Methods Validation Advisory
Committee (EDMVAC) in 2004. This continual changing in power formats
has gotten little actual work done in the EPA, and instead the ED time
line on their website reads more like a list of all the committees
created and disbanded. In fact the screening process has not even begun
yet. The EPA has gotten nothing done that will contribute to the
understanding and removal of EDs from our environment. So far the EPA
has not acted in accordance with 1996 Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) or the amendments of the same year to the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA). The acts required the EPA to:
Develop a screening
program, using appropriate validated test systems and other
scientifically relevant information, to determine whether certain
substances may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect
produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine
effect as the Administrator may designate.
There are requirements for the EPA to reach, they know that EDs exist
and are a real threat; the problem is bureaucracy has tied up the
system so that almost nothing has gotten done.
Information on this page from the EPA's Endocrine Disrupter website
|
Last updated: 5/2/2006
|
