January, 26 2011, 03:58pm EDT
NIH Panel Links Vitamin A in Sunscreen to Skin Tumors
WASHINGTON
A key independent science advisory panel has voted to confirm federal
researchers' conclusion that retinyl palmitate, a form of vitamin A
found in two-fifths of U.S. sunscreens, speeds the development of skin
tumors and lesions when applied to the skin in the presence of sunlight.
The panel, meeting at a National Institutes of Health research center
in North Carolina, today concurred with a pivotal draft assessment
published last month by the National Toxicology Program, an interagency
federal body that uses toxicology and molecular biology to evaluate
chemicals for possible human health risks.
"A compound that causes skin damage and tumors on sun-exposed skin
has no place in sunscreens or other daytime skin products," said Jane
Houlihan, EWG senior vice president for research.
The NTP assessment, confirmed by its advisory board of 11 scientists
from leading academic medical and industry research groups, found that
when test animals coated with a mix of retinyl palmitate and skin cream
are exposed to ultraviolet light, a major component of sunlight, the
cream with retinyl palmitate has the perverse effect of stimulating the
growth of skin tumors.
Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., senior scientist with Environmental Working
Group, addressed the panel today, urging them to support the NTP
assessment. "This research will help fill the long-standing data gap on
the safety of retinyl palmitate in personal care products used on
sun-exposed skin," Naidenko said.
The panel's action is likely to have a significant impact on the U.S.
sunscreen industry, which adds vitamin A to 41 percent of its
sunscreens, ostensibly to combat aging (EWG 2010). Among the popular
brands that contain vitamin A are Coppertone, Banana Boat, Panama Jack,
Hawaiian Tropic, and Neutrogena.
The conclusions of the NTP and its advisory panel mirror EWG's analysis of raw NTP study data
published early last year. EWG's findings drew widespread attention in
the press and on health information sites on the Internet.
Today's action effectively demolishes objections from sunscreen
industry-funded groups, including the Personal Care Product Council,
paid consultants to sunscreen makers and the Skin Cancer Foundation,
which receives money from sunscreen makers in exchange for its seal of
approval.
More than 200 sunscreens from 44 companies listed vitamin A or
retinyl palmitate on their labels in 2010, according to EWG's analysis
of beach and sport sunscreens with SPF ratings of 15 or higher.
Following the release of EWG's May 2010 indictment of vitamin A in
sunscreen, two manufacturers - Mexitan and Dr. T's Supergoop! -
responded within weeks by marketing new, vitamin A-free formulas.
In light of the NTP's troubling findings, now confirmed by the
advisory body, more sunscreen makers can be expected to offer vitamin
A-free products for the 2011 summer season.
It is not clear how the federal Food and Drug Administration will
react to the NTP conclusions. The agency announced it would set rules
for sunscreens back in 1978, but despite repeated promises, it has yet
to issue comprehensive sunscreen regulations.
In the spring, EWG plans to release its fifth annual sunscreen guide,
rating this year's crop of products for safety and efficacy. As was the
case last year, sunscreens free of vitamin A will garner higher
ratings.
The NTP's December 2010 draft assessment summarizes a one-year cancer
study that culminated more than a decade of research by the National
Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR), jointly funded by the NTP and
FDA. Since 2001 the center has published 17 studies and reviews on the
toxicity and chemistry of retinyl palmitate on skin. These documents
show that the chemical breaks down in sunlight to photomutagenic
compounds, forms skin damaging-free radicals, and "[causes] events that
affect a large segment of the chromosome" (Mei 2005, 2006; Xia 2006).
The NTP studied the effects of ultraviolet light exposure on test
animals whose skin had been treated with vitamin A-laced cream.
Scientists concluded that vitamin A hastened tumor and lesion growth and
caused the number of skin lesions and cancerous tumors to proliferate.
In light of those findings, EWG recommends that manufacturers of
cosmetics, sunscreens and other personal care products remove retinyl
palmitate from all products to be used on sun-exposed skin and that
consumers avoid buying products that contain this chemical.
Read EWG's technical comments on NTP study of retinyl palmitate.
The Environmental Working Group is a community 30 million strong, working to protect our environmental health by changing industry standards.
(202) 667-6982LATEST NEWS
'Dirty and Dumb!' Trump May Cancel Contracts to Electrify USPS Fleet
"It's stuff like this that will cost us manufacturing jobs/opportunities," warned one critic.
Dec 06, 2024
As part of President-elect Donald Trump's mission to roll back the Biden administration's climate policies, the Republican may cancel contracts to electrify the U.S. Postal Service's fleet, Reutersrevealed Friday, citing unnamed sources familiar with transition team discussions.
"The sources told Reuters that Trump's transition team is now reviewing how it can unwind the Postal Service's multibillion-dollar contracts, including with Oshkosh and Ford for tens of thousands of battery-driven delivery trucks and charging stations," according to the news agency.
The USPS in December 2022 announced a five-year $9.6 billion investment that involved electrifying 75% of its next-generation delivery vehicles and installing modern charging infrastructure. That came just months after President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which included $3 billion in funding for the endeavor.
Ford did not respond to Reuters' requests for comment on Friday, while Oshkosh said that it "is fully committed to our strong partnership with the USPS and looks forward to continuing to provide our postal carriers with reliable, safe, and sustainable modern delivery vehicles, even as USPS' needs continue to evolve."
The USPS also did not respond to requests for comment and Trump transition team spokesperson Karoline Leavitt declined to address his Postal Service plans, only saying that "President Trump will protect the freedom of Americans to drive whichever vehicle they choose, enhance his tough tariffs on Chinese-imported cars, and save the U.S. auto industry for generations to come. No policy should be deemed official unless it comes directly from President Trump."
During the campaign, Trump pledged to roll back Biden's climate policies if Big Oil poured $1 billion into getting him elected. He also attacked the Democrat's efforts to promote a shift to electric vehicles (EVs). Transportation accounts for the largest portion of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and the United States is the world's top historic emitter.
Even under Biden, U.S. plans to limit planet-heating pollution did not align with the country's contributions to the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency—but climate scientists and advocates widely backed his and later Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign leading up to last month's election, recognizing the threat posed by Trump.
John Hanger, a Democrat who previously held various envirnomental and energy positions in Pennsylvania's government, responded to the Reuters reporting on social media: "Ugh! Canceling contracts to electrify transportation of USPS would be dirty and dumb!"
Meanwhile, Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, said that "it's stuff like this that will cost us manufacturing jobs/opportunities."
Some critics also speculated whether such contracts may be redone to benefit Tesla. The company's CEO is Elon Musk, who is the richest man in the world, dumped around $270 million into super political action committees backing Trump's reelection bid, and is set to co-lead his forthcoming Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) with fellow billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy.
Last month, Reuters reported on the Trump transition team's plans to kill Biden's fuel efficiency standards and a $7,500 consumer tax credit for EV purchases, which Musk was asked about while he and Ramaswamy were on Capitol Hill Thursday to meet with Republican lawmakers.
"I think we should get rid of all credits," Musk told reporters—despite his own company's reliance on Biden's EV policies.
Responding to Musk's comment in a Friday statement, Will Anderson, EV policy advocate with Public Citizen's Climate Program, said that "as someone who's asking to work for the American people through his so-called DOGE, Musk should not perpetuate crony capitalism that only benefits himself and others with access to Trump."
"If we want the American automobile industry to stay competitive in a global market," he added, "then not only should Musk recognize the benefit of the EV tax credit for American-made vehicles, but he should also recognize the negative impact billions of dollars in continuing oil and gas subsidies will have on a society that needs to transition to a zero-emission and clean-energy future."
Keep ReadingShow Less
CBO Provides 'Stark Preview of Healthcare Under Donald Trump'
Millions of Americans could lose coverage if the GOP allows the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium tax credits to expire.
Dec 06, 2024
As Congress negotiates the extension of Affordable Care Act tax credits, a nonpartisan government analysis warned this week that letting the ACA subsidies expire next year would cause millions of Americans to lose health coverage in the years ahead.
The American Rescue Plan Act "reduced the maximum amount eligible enrollees must contribute toward premiums for health insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act, and it extended eligibility to people whose income is above 400% of the federal poverty level," wrote Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Phillip Swagel.
His Thursday letter came in response to an inquiry from U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) along with Reps. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) and Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.) about "the effects on health insurance coverage and premiums that will result from not extending—either for one year or permanently—the expanded premium tax credit structure."
"Without an extension through 2026, CBO estimates, the number of people without insurance will rise by 2.2 million in that year," Swagel said. "Without a permanent extension, CBO estimates, the number of uninsured people will rise by 2.2 million in 2026, by 3.7 million in 2027, and by 3.8 million, on average, in each year over the 2026-2034 period."
"Without an extension through 2026, CBO estimates, gross benchmark premiums will increase by 4.3%, on average, for that year," the director continued. "Without a permanent extension, CBO estimates, gross benchmark premiums will increase by 4.3% in 2026, by 7.7% in 2027, and by 7.9%, on average, over the 2026-2034 period."
"If Congress fails to act, healthcare will become out of reach for millions of Americans, leaving middle-class families to struggle and choose between seeing a doctor or keeping a roof over their heads or groceries in the fridge."
The analysis comes as the world braces for GOP control of Congress and the White House, with President-elect Donald Trump set to be sworn in next month. Since President Barack Obama signed the ACA—also known as Obamacare—in 2010, elected Republicans including Trump have repeatedly tried to gut or fully repeal the law.
In response to the CBO report, Wyden said, "This is a stark preview of healthcare under Donald Trump: higher insurance premiums for families who buy health coverage on their own, and more uninsured Americans who can't afford health insurance at all."
"Republicans have an opportunity to end their ideological crusade against the Affordable Care Act and work in a bipartisan manner to make healthcare more affordable for working families, but instead they seem poised to hand another big tax break to corporations and the wealthy," warned Wyden, the outgoing Senate Finance Committee chair.
In September, Shaheen and Underwood introduced a bill to make the ACA's enhanced premium tax credits permanent. Shaheen said Thursday that the "new data from CBO confirms what we feared: if Congress fails to extend these tax credits, healthcare costs will skyrocket for millions of families and 3.8 million Americans will lose coverage entirely."
"At a time when Americans are already facing higher prices, we should do everything we can to lower costs when and where we can," she added. "It's time we pass my Health Care Affordability Act to permanently extend the tax credits so many families rely on."
Advocacy groups echoed demands for Congress to at least extend the subsidies following the CBO's findings.
"If Congress fails to act, healthcare will become out of reach for millions of Americans, leaving middle-class families to struggle and choose between seeing a doctor or keeping a roof over their heads or groceries in the fridge," said Protect Our Care executive director Brad Woodhouse in a statement.
"Instead of helping hardworking families, Republicans have opposed measures to lower healthcare costs and have instead focused on delivering tax breaks to big corporations and the wealthiest Americans," he continued. "Health coverage gives people peace of mind knowing they won't go bankrupt over an injury or illness. Democrats stand ready to extend the tax credits to ensure everyone has access to affordable healthcare. It's time for Republicans to get on board."
While the CBO found with the expiration of the credits, "on average, those with health insurance will see their unsubsidized gross monthly premiums increase by as much as 8% each year," Anthony Wright, executive director of Families USA, pointed out that "for people who now receive premium assistance, the increases will be far steeper."
"Taking into account the cuts in premium assistance, nonpartisan organizations, such as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, report that people will experience estimated premium increases ranging from 41% to 218%, with a median increase of 91%—a near doubling of their monthly costs," he explained.
"For nearly 20 million Americans, these enhanced tax credits have been the difference between getting access to the healthcare and coverage they need or going without it," Wright stressed. "At a time when so many families are struggling to pay for the basics, these tax credits have been a literal lifeline for millions of people to get healthcare they can afford."
"Voters just made it clear in the 2024 election that they want action to lower costs—and so it would be cruel to have the result be inaction that allows these tax credits to expire, and monthly healthcare costs to jump," he added. "For many millions of working Americans, premiums will double. For some, the spike will be not just hundreds but thousands of dollars of additional costs, leading many millions to lose coverage altogether. Congress must protect the health and financial security of our nation's families right now by extending these critical tax credits."
Citing several unnamed sources, The Washington Postreported Friday afternoon that Democrats on Capitol Hill privately proposed a deal to extend the ACA subsidies by a year, which "accompanied a broader package of healthcare proposals submitted to Republicans on Thursday night ahead of year-end spending negotiations."
"It is not yet clear whether Republican leaders, who control the House, will agree to any of the proposals," the Post noted. "Spokespeople for Republicans on the House Ways and Means and the Senate Finance committees declined to comment."
Despite efforts to salvage the ACA subsidies due to the pain and economic suffering that would follow if they are not extended, progressives across the board continue to argue that Obamacare—which sends billions of federal dollars to the private insurance industry—is a far inferior solution compared with Medicare for All, which would cover everyone in the United States at a lower overall cost than the current system.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Wealth of World's Richest Has Doubled Over Past Decade
The total wealth of billionaires increased by 121% from 2015-24.
Dec 06, 2024
Driven largely by the accumulation of massive wealth by the richest people in the United States, the Swiss wealth manager UBS said Thursday the assets of billionaires around the world more than doubled over the past decade.
Between 2015-24, the total wealth of billionaires increased by 121%, from $6.3 trillion to $14 trillion.
Meanwhile, the MSCI AC World Index of global equities, which measures the performance of more than 3,000 stocks from both developed and emerging markets, rose by 73%.
The planet's total gross domestic product is about $105.4 trillion, with a population of just over 8 billion, underscoring the extreme concentration of wealth among the very richest people.
The number of billionaires rose from 1,757 to 2,682 over the past decade, while the wealthiest people in the world boasted significant gains over just the past year.
Billionaires' wealth jumped by about 17% in 2024, with the accumulation of wealth among the richest people in the U.S. offsetting a decline in China.
U.S. billionaires amassed wealth gains that were 27.6% higher than the previous year, accumulating a total of $5.8 trillion—more than 40% of international billionaire wealth.
The tax cuts pushed through by President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican Party in 2017 are still in effect in the U.S. Tax policy analysts have found that the law was skewed to the rich, with households in the top 1% of incomes expecting to receive an average tax cut of more than $60,000 in 2025 compared to an average tax cut of less than $500 for people in the bottom 60%.
As Common Dreams reported this week, the top 12 U.S. billionaires now control $2 trillion. The wealth of the four richest people in the U.S.—Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg—has hit $1 trillion.
"These four men were worth $74 billion 12 short years ago," said Americans for Tax Fairness. "Tax billionaires."
At the G20 Summit last month, world leaders agreed to "engage cooperatively to ensure that ultra-high-net-worth individuals are effectively taxed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular