January, 29 2009, 09:40am EDT
UCLA study: U.S. Women at Greater Risk from Teflon Chemical
Infertility Jumps Dramatically Among Those With High Exposures
WASHINGTON
A major new study published yesterday in Human Reproduction, a
European reproductive medicine journal, has found that pregnant women
and women of child-bearing age in the United States are at greater risk
than previously thought for infertility and reproductive problems as
result of exposure to the toxic Teflon chemical PFOA (perfluorooctanoic
acid).
Analyzing data from about 1,240 women from a well-known Danish
longitudinal study initiated in 1996, a team of scientists based at the
University of California-Los Angeles has found that women with elevated
blood levels of PFOA experienced more difficulties in conceiving and
were twice as likely to be diagnosed with infertility as women with
lower PFOA body burdens. For women with more than 3.9 parts per billion
(ppb) of PFOA in their bodies, the chances of conceiving were
dramatically reduced.
"These findings are quite alarming, but not completely unexpected
given the complete lack of health protections from chemicals like
PFOA," said Environmental Working Group (EWG) Senior Scientist Olga
Naidenko, Ph.D. "Until we reform the nation's chemical laws, we should
expect to discover more and more links between chemical exposures and
serious health conditions like infertility, childhood cancer, learning
disabilities and asthma."
"The UCLA team's findings provide important new evidence that
drastic declines in fertility rates in both the U.S. and Europe in
recent decades may be linked to exposure to toxic chemicals, including
PFOA, " Naidenko said. "These alarming findings reinforce the need for
strict regulation of PFOA and related chemicals, as well as other
industrial chemicals whose impact on humans and the environment may be
subtle but ultimately devastating."
The chemical PFOA is a member of a class of industrial chemicals
known as perfluorochemicals (PFCs). Chemicals in the PFC class are
found in a wide range of consumer products, including water, stain and
grease repellants, cookware, food wrap, carpeting, furniture and
clothing. Products containing PFCs are marketed under such trade names
as Teflon, Scotchguard, Stainmaster and Goretex.
A June 2008 study by the Environmental Working Group entitled
Credibility Gap: Toxic Chemicals in Food Packaging and DuPont's
Greenwashing: EWG's Guide to PFCs contains a downloadable consumer
guide to consumer products that contain PFCs and other advice on how to
avoid products containing the chemical.
Studies by EWG and other scientists have demonstrated that PFOA
exposure begins in the womb. EWG's benchmark study, Body Burden: The
Pollution in Newborns, an analysis of umbilical cord blood, found 287
industrial chemicals and pollutants in 10 newborns, among them PFOA and
other PFCs.
EWG's studies dovetail with U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention investigations that detected PFOA in the bodies of nearly
all Americans over 12, with average levels of 3.9 ppb. The chemical has
contaminated drinking water, food, and surface and ground water in at
least 11 states.
In the human body, PFOA is extraordinarily persistent, accumulating
100-fold and detectable for years, with the potential to act through a
broad range of toxic mechanisms to pose potential harm to numerous
organs. Research has shown that PFOA can disrupt fetal development,
hormonal function and the immune system and increase the risk of heart
disease and cancer. Contamination of the food and water supply has the
potential to damage the reproductive systems of a large number of women
of child-bearing age nationwide.
EWG's work has resulted in an international effort to phase out use
of PFOA and legal victories against major manufacturers of the chemical.
Yet more comprehensive protections are critical to protect the
public from industrial pollutants. Harmful human exposures to
industrial toxins such as PFOA and PFCs are a consequence of weak legal
safeguards, particularly the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, which
grandfathered 62,000 chemicals and allowed industry to bring 20,000
more chemicals into the marketplace with little nor no data to support
their safety. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has lacked the
legal power and funding to test the vast majority of man-made chemicals
that, like PFOA, may turn out to be reproductive toxicants or trigger
other serious diseases and conditions.
EWG is urging Congress to overhaul and modernize U.S. policy on
man-made toxins by adopting policy principles similar to those included
in the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act championed by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, Sen.
Barbara Boxer, and Rep. Henry Waxman. The Kid-Safe bill would place the
burden on chemical companies to prove that their products are safe
before they enter the marketplace.
Earlier this month, in the waning days of the Bush administration,
EPA made plans to issue an emergency health advisory for tap water
polluted with PFOA. The advisory, if adopted without change by EPA,
would set a non-binding standard of .4 micrograms per liter for PFOA.
According to an EWG analysis, such a standard would effectively allow a
significant level of pollution and discourage cleanup of PFOA
contamination in tap water in at least 9 states.
The Environmental Working Group is a community 30 million strong, working to protect our environmental health by changing industry standards.
(202) 667-6982LATEST NEWS
Listen Live: US Supreme Court Hears Outrageous Argument That Trump Is Above the Law
"The American people deserve a Supreme Court that does not hesitate to declare that no one is above the law, including a former president," said one campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
After months of delay, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday will hear oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from criminal charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss—an argument that legal experts say is both absurd and dangerous.
Listen live to the oral arguments, which are set to begin at 10:00 am ET:
Thursday's proceedings mark the high court's final argument of its current term, and pro-democracy campaigners are calling on the justices to quickly reject the former president's sweeping immunity claim so he can face trial on federal election subversion charges before his November rematch with President Joe Biden.
As Bloomberg's Greg Stohr noted earlier this week, Thursday's oral arguments give "Special Counsel Jack Smith only a narrow window to put the former president in front of a Washington jury before voters go to the polls on November 5."
"With the trial on hold until the high court rules," Stohr added, "Smith needs a clear-cut victory, and he needs it quickly."
Sean Eldridge, founder and president of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement Thursday that "the Supreme Court's right-wing majority has already handed Trump a temporary victory by stalling this case for months, allowing him to delay accountability for his criminal attempts to cling to power."
"With so much at stake for our democracy, the Supreme Court should rule swiftly and decisively in this case," said Eldridge. "Accountability delayed could mean accountability denied."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grand Jury Indicts Top Trump Aides, 11 Arizona Republicans Over 'Fake Electors' Scheme
Had it succeeded, said the state's attorney general, the scheme would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
Apr 25, 2024
A grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday charged seven aides to Donald Trump and nearly a dozen Republican officials over a "fake electors" scheme in the state that aimed to keep the former president in power after his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden.
Trump, who is currently facing nearly 90 charges across four criminal cases as he runs for another White House term, was described as "unindicted co-conspirator 1" in the 58-page indictment, which was announced by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.
"The people of Arizona elected President Biden," Mayes, a Democrat, said Wednesday. "Unwilling to accept this fact, the defendants charged by the state grand jury allegedly schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency. Whatever their reasoning was, the plot to violate the law must be answered for."
The indictment names former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, sitting state Republican Sens. Jake Hoffman and Anthony Kern, former U.S. Senate candidate Jim Lamon, and seven others as the "fake electors" who sought to declare Trump the rightful winner of the state's presidential contest.
The names of other individuals indicted by the state grand jury are redacted, but the document's descriptions make clear that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and top Trump legal strategist Boris Epshteyn are among those facing felony charges—including fraud, forgery, and conspiracy.
"In Arizona, defendants, unindicted coconspirators, and others pressured the three groups of election officials responsible for certifying election results to encourage them to change the election results," the document reads. "Discussions about using the Republican electors to change the outcome of the election began as early as November 4, 2020. Those plans evolved during November based on memos drafted by [an attorney for the Trump campaign, Kenneth Chesebro]."
Mayes said Wednesday that had the fake elector scheme succeeded, it would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
"It effectively would have made their right to vote meaningless," said Mayes.
A state grand jury, made up of everyday, regular Arizonans, has handed down felony indictments in the ongoing investigation into the fake elector scheme in Arizona. pic.twitter.com/Nu8GcD4ZqJ
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 24, 2024
Alex Gulotta, state director of All Voting Is Local Action Arizona, said Wednesday that "the indictment of the eleven fake electors is one of the first steps required in holding these election deniers accountable for their alleged attempts to take power away from voters by disrupting our free and fair elections."
"Arizonans deserve to trust the election officials responsible for administering our elections and preserving our democracy," said Gulotta, "and this is a positive step forward as we continue to strengthen the foundations of our democracy and restore faith in our elections."
The Arizona Republicreported Wednesday that "several of the Arizona electors have previously claimed they were merely offering Congress a backup plan, though nothing in the documents they sent to Congress and the National Archives backs up that assertion."
"The indictment includes several statements the false electors made on social media that contradict those claims," the newspaper observed.
Jenny Guzman, director of Common Cause's Arizona program, said the indictment "marks the start of a new chapter for the fake elector scheme that has plagued Arizona."
"Arizonans are still dealing with the fallout from the false electors and the Big Lie about the 2020 elections," said Guzman. "We are relieved that the investigation by Attorney General Mayes has concluded and Arizonans can now know that what comes next is accountability. These efforts by these fake electors to undermine the will of Arizona’s voters have had implications far beyond their failed attempt to overthrow the 2020 election."
"This indictment can reassure all Arizonans that if anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, attempts to undermine their vote, consequences will follow," Guzman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Urges FEC to Investigate Trump Campaign Over Scheme for Legal Fees
"By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much."
Apr 24, 2024
A campaign finance watchdog on Wednesday filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, affiliated political groups, and an accounting firm of violating U.S. law in a scheme "seemingly designed to obscure the true recipients of a noteworthy portion of Trump's legal bills."
The Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center (CLC) said that "evidence appears to show an illegal arrangement between several Trump-affiliated committees and a compliance firm named Red Curve Solutions that is designed to obscure the identities of those providing legal services and how much they are being paid."
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money."
CLC alleges that the Trump campaign, Trump's political action committee (PAC) Save America, and three affiliated organizations "violated federal reporting requirements based on a scheme in which the committees reportedly paid over $7.2 million—described as 'reimbursement for legal' costs or expenses"—to Red Curve.
The watchdog also said that Red Curve appears to be "making or facilitating illegal contributions that violate either federal contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions."
According to CLC:
Red Curve is a domestic limited liability company that offers compliance and FEC reporting services but does not appear to offer any legal services. It is managed by Bradley Crate, who also serves as the treasurer for each of the five Trump-affiliated committees concerned in this complaint, as well as over 200 other federal committees.
According to filings with the FEC, Red Curve appears to have been fronting legal costs for Trump since at least December 2022, with Trump-affiliated committees repaying the company later. This arrangement appears to violate FEC rules that require campaigns to disclose not only the entity being reimbursed (here, Red Curve) but also the underlying vendor. By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much they are being paid—through this arrangement.
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money," CLC senior director of campaign finance Erin Chlopak said in a statement. "When campaigns and committees obscure that information from the public, not only do they make it difficult to determine if the law has been violated, but they deny voters the ability to make an informed choice when casting a ballot."
"The steps taken by the Trump campaign, its affiliated committees, and Red Curve Solutions concealed information about how campaign funds were used to pay former President Trump's legal expenditures, including the amounts and ultimate recipients of these expenditures—and the FEC must investigate immediately," Chlopak added.
Trump—who is the presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee—faces 91 federal and state felony charges related to his role in the January 6 insurrection and his organization's business practices. He is currently on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The twice-impeached former president has been open about his use of campaign donations to pay his legal costs.
The new CLC filing comes a day after the watchdog filed separate FEC complaints urging investigations into a pair of Trump-affiliated "scam PACs," which "pretend to fundraise for major candidates or issues while secretly diverting almost all of their donors' money back into fundraising or the fraudsters' own pockets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular