May, 19 2022, 11:32am EDT

FDA Allows Hormone-Disrupting Phthalates in Food Packaging
WASHINGTON
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today denied petitions submitted by health and environmental advocates in 2016 to ban phthalates from food packaging and food production equipment. Studies show that these toxic petrochemicals leach into food and drinks, causing serious harm to human health. Today's decision allows for phthalate contamination of food and drinks--ranging from infant formula to meat, milk, spices, and cooking oils--to continue, despite the fact that Congress determined more than a decade ago that several of these chemicals are too dangerous to use in children's toys. At the same time, FDA acknowledged that its safety assessment for food-contact uses of phthalates is out of date and requested new information from the public.
Phthalates interfere with hormone-regulated processes in the body and are linked to a range of health harms including birth defects, infertility, miscarriage, breast cancer, diabetes, and asthma. Phthalates also harm the developing brain, leading to reduced IQ and attention and behavior disorders in children. Babies and young children are most vulnerable to harm from phthalates and suffer the greatest exposure. People of color in all age groups, as well as economically insecure people, also face higher risks of serious health problems from exposure to phthalates compared to the general population. Safer substitutes for these chemicals are readily available.
"FDA's decision recklessly green-lights ongoing contamination of our food with phthalates, putting another generation of children at risk of life-altering harm and exacerbating health inequities experienced by Black and Latina women," said Earthjustice attorney Katherine O'Brien. "FDA's announcement that it will now start reviewing new data on phthalate safety--six years after advocates sounded the alarm--is outrageous and seeks to sidestep FDA's legal duty."
Federal law prohibits the use of chemical additives in food or food-contact materials, unless the available scientific evidence establishes that the additives are safe, taking into account the cumulative effect of all related chemicals in the diet. FDA is charged with implementing this mandate by evaluating new food additives and reviewing the safety of additives already on the market when new evidence shows that they are not safe.
Given the well-established--and growing--body of studies linking phthalate exposure through food and drinks to serious health harms, a coalition of advocacy groups submitted two related petitions asking FDA to ban phthalates as food additives in March 2016. Despite a legal mandate to make a final decision on the principal petition within 180 days, FDA sat on the petition for years. Advocates sued FDA in federal court in December 2021, forcing the agency to finally make a decision.
FDA today also granted a plastics industry petition to revoke federal approval for multiple phthalates added to food packaging and processing equipment based on industry assertions that those uses have been abandoned. But FDA's decisions leave multiple phthalates--including substances with the most well-developed body of scientific evidence demonstrating their toxic effects--on the market. In addition to food and drinks, phthalates can be found in personal care products, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, cleaning products, building materials, and other consumer products. The cumulative exposure that people experience to multiple phthalates from numerous sources increases their risk of health harms.
The 2016 petitions were submitted by Earthjustice, Environmental Defense Fund, Center for Environmental Health, Center for Food Safety, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Clean Water Action, Consumer Federation of America, Improving Kids' Environment, Learning Disabilities Association of America, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, and Natural Resources Defense Council. Defend Our Health and Alaska Community Action on Toxics joined the litigation to force FDA action on the petitions after years of delay.
Quotes from our clients:
"We submitted these petitions in 2016. The law required a decision several years ago. FDA's failure to act until they were sued is consistent with its broader failings laid bare by Politico last month," said Tom Neltner, Senior Director, Safer Chemicals for the Environmental Defense Fund. "Despite the extra time, FDA has continued to ignore the widespread contamination of food by ortho-phthalates and related chemicals in our food and the cumulative effect these chemicals have on children's health. It's outrageous that FDA decided chemicals banned from children's toys should remain in the food we eat. Families deserve better from FDA."
"Phthalates which put children at risk for lifelong learning challenges, ADHD and lower IQ don't belong in our food supply," said Tracy Gregoire, Director of the Healthy Children Project at the Learning Disabilities Association of America. "FDA has the power and the responsibility to protect children's brain health but is once again failing to protect our children."
"For too long, the FDA has largely remained on the sidelines as concerns have mounted over phthalates in food, exposing all of us to unnecessary risk, especially infants, young children, and Black and Latina women," said Dr. Peter G. Lurie, president of Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). "With today's decision, the FDA is signaling its intent to remain planted on the sidelines, prolonging an already protracted and profound environmental injustice. I fear it's a decision the agency will come to regret as we learn even more about the adverse health impacts of these discredited chemicals on vulnerable members of our society."
"FDA has failed the public by ignoring the growing evidence of phthalates' harmful effects on our health," said Kristina Sinclair, associate attorney at Center for Food Safety. "The agency's refusal to listen to the science and ban phthalates from our food supply will have significant, detrimental health effects on women, children, and other vulnerable populations for years to come."
"We are deeply disappointed with this decision and FDA's continued failure to safeguard public health," said Sue Chiang, Food Program Director at the Center for Environmental Health. "For years we have asked the FDA to ban phthalates in food packaging and food-production materials. We know phthalates migrate into food, and we are particularly concerned about their harmful effects on vulnerable populations like babies and children."
"For far too long, the FDA has failed to protect American families from toxic chemicals in our food; and this decision is yet another example of that failure. As 1 in 8 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in their lifetime (causing over 44,000 U.S. deaths per year), the FDA must do better to keep breast-cancer linked, toxic ingredients like phthalates out of our food," said Lisette van Vliet, Senior Policy Manager for Breast Cancer Prevention Partners.
"It's inexcusable that the FDA is continuing to allow some of the same chemicals prohibited for use in children's toys over a decade ago to still be in direct contact with our families' food," said Patrick MacRoy, Deputy Director of Defend Our Health. "Fortunately, states, including Maine and Vermont, along with many leading food manufacturers, have already taken action to start reducing our exposure to phthalates in packaging. The fact that the FDA will not just demonstrates how incredibly broken chemical regulation at the agency is."
"The decision of FDA to deny the petitions is unconscionable and flies in the face of the Administration's commitment to environmental justice and science. We know that these chemicals can harm our children and future generations and that our Indigenous Peoples face a disproportionate burden. Environmental justice demands that federal agencies end the cumulative impacts of toxic chemical exposures in our communities." said Margaret Yellow Wolf Tarrant, environmental justice organizer with Alaska Community Action on Toxics.
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
'Unconscionable': Trump Ready to Garnish Wages for Indebted Student Loan Borrowers
"They're just cruel and want to take as much as possible from the folks who have very little," said one student borrower advocacy group.
May 05, 2025
With the Trump administration restarting collection efforts on defaulted student loans after a five-year reprieve on Monday, Mike Pierce of the Student Borrower Protection Center said the move "will further fan the flames of economic chaos for working families across this country"—particularly as the White House threatens to garnish the wages of people who struggle to make higher monthly payments.
The SBPC joined nearly 200 other organizations in sending a letter to the acting undersecretary of education, James Bergeron, condemning the administration's efforts to gut income-driven repayment options and eliminate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which has delivered student debt relief to 1 million public service workers since it was implemented in 2007.
"The administration should move to enact policies that better protect student borrowers, rather than pursue misguided policies that will drive up costs and weaken protections," wrote the groups.
More than 42 million Americans have student debt, with more than $1.6 trillion owed in total. More than 5 million borrowers are currently in default, and that number could grow to about 10 million as the Trump administration ends programs that have been aimed at helping people pay off their loans in manageable amounts each month.
Collections are beginning months after Republican-led lawsuits succeeded in blocking former President Joe Biden's Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) plan, and days after the GOP members of the House Education and Workforce Committee advanced more than $350 billion in proposed funding cuts for education programs—cuts that government watchdog Accountable.US said are "paving the way for tax cuts for themselves, billionaire donors, and corporations."
The Republicans approved:
- Slashing federal student aid by capping unsubsidized and Parent PLUS loans and eliminating subsidized loans for undergraduates and Grad PLUS loans entirely, which would disproportionately impact low-income families, especially those with students at HBCUs;
- Repealing a set of Biden-era protections—including rules establishing forgiveness for students of schools that closed or failed to lead to gainful employment—that have canceled at least $17.2 billion in federal student loans for nearly 1 million borrowers misled by predatory institutions;
- Repealing the Biden administration's SAVE plan and replacing it with just two fixed or income-based repayment plans, a change that could raise costs for millions of borrowers, including those making modest incomes; and
- Changing Pell Grant eligibility by altering the definition of full-time college attendance to 30 credit hours per year and requiring at least half-time attendance to qualify for any grant at all.
"To pay for tax cuts for the richest in this country, congressional Republicans are willing to gut the programs tens of millions of Americans rely on," said Tony Carrk, executive director of Accountable.US. "Their education markup makes it abundantly clear that they're not just going to gut Medicaid, they're proposing hundreds of billions of dollars of cuts to programs that provide more opportunities for everyday Americans to access higher education. These cuts are a betrayal of congressional Republicans' promise to make government work for Americans and to lower their costs; in fact, it will do quite the opposite."
The Debt Collective, a union of student loan borrowers, pointed out that the Trump administration isn't required by law to begin collecting student debt on Monday.
"They're just cruel and want to take as much as possible from the folks who have very little," said the group.
Aside from garnishing borrowers' wages, the administration could further devastate millions of people as credit scores could tank when the Education Department begins collection activity.
The Federal Reserve projected in March that people with delinquencies could see their credit scores plummet by as many as 171 points, leading to higher costs for borrowers who later take out mortgages, car loans, and sign up for credit cards.
U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) called President Donald Trump's threat to garnish wages in order to collect student debt "unconscionable."
The president and Education Secretary Linda McMahon, said Pressley, "should NOT be seizing people's hard-earned wages, tax refunds, and Social Security checks."
Keep ReadingShow Less
20 AGs Sue Trump Admin Over Dismantling of Health Agencies
"This administration is not streamlining the federal government; they are sabotaging it and all of us," said New York Attorney General Letitia James.
May 05, 2025
A coalition of 20 attorneys general on Monday sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and other Trump administration officials in federal court over cuts to the agency, arguing that "dismantling" and "paralyzing" it through terminations and reorganizations is an "unlawful effort" to undercut Congress.
The lawsuit focuses on a March 27 directive that unveiled sweeping changes to HHS, and the plaintiffs are requesting that the court declare the directive unlawful, arguing that it is unconstitutional and violates the Administrative Procedure Act.
"This administration is not streamlining the federal government; they are sabotaging it and all of us," said New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of the attorneys general leading the lawsuit, in a statement on Monday. "When you fire the scientists who research infectious diseases, silence the doctors who care for pregnant patients, and shut down the programs that help firefighters and miners breathe or children thrive, you are not making America healthy—you are putting countless lives at risk."
The lawsuit argues that prior to March 27 the administration had sought to "systematically deprive" HHS of necessary resources, but the March directive was an escalation of this effort, announcing the agency's intention to terminate thousands HHS employees, restructure 28 divisions down to 15, and reduce regional offices from 10 to 5.
"Secretary Kennedy refused to undertake this restructuring legally or carefully," according to the suit, which also highlights that the steep reductions in staff were not slated to yield significant savings.
"The March 27 directive came after scores of probationary employees were laid off and many employees took a buyout offer. None of these layoffs were necessary to accommodate a funding shortfall—Congress's appropriations have remained steady, or in many cases, grown in recent years. All told, 20,000 full-time employees—almost 25% of HHS headcount—would be terminated in a few months to save, by defendants' own estimate, less than 1% of HHS expenditures," according to the suit.
The attorneys general argue that cuts to HHS and its subagencies have prevented them from carrying out their "statutorily required functions." The lawsuit ticks through changes to various agencies within HHS and explains how the March 27 directive has made them unable to do their work.
At the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), for example, some 2,400 employees were dismissed on April 1, according to the complaint.
Per the suit, all workers that handled Freedom of Information Act requests have been fired, as have members of the communication team. The cuts have reduced the Division of Global HIV & Tuberculosis's staff by roughly a quarter and also meant that infectious disease laboratories have either been shuttered or reduced their capacity.
"The closure and cuts to infectious diseases laboratories within CDC are perhaps the most egregious example of how the March 27 directive is destroying CDC's ability to meet its statutory mandates to investigate, detect, and identify diseases," according to the suit.
"Since day one, this president and his administration have attempted to illegally decimate agencies across the federal government upon which the American people rely," said Rhode Island Attorney General Neronha, who is also co-leading the suit, in a statement on Monday. "In a world where the next pandemic could be right around the corner, and cases of measles are on the rise, taking an axe to the agency responsible for the health and safety of Americans is wildly irresponsible."
In addition to attorneys general from Rhode Island and New York, the plaintiffs includes state attorneys general from Washington; Arizona; California; Colorado; Connecticut; Delaware; Washington, D.C.; Hawaii; Illinois; Maine; Maryland; Michigan; Minnesota; New Jersey; New Mexico; Oregon; Vermont; and Wisconsin.
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Chief 'Alarmed' by Israel's Gaza Conquest Plan—But Minister Says No Concerns From Trump
"I don't feel that there is pressure on us from Trump and his administration," said Ze'ev Eklin. "They understand exactly what is happening here."
May 05, 2025
The office of United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres on Monday condemned Israeli Cabinet ministers' vote to capture the entire Gaza Strip amid Israel's ongoing genocidal assault, while a prominent Knesset lawmaker claimed that U.S. President Donald Trump would not object to his far-right government's plans to indefinitely occupy the Palestinian enclave.
Fugitive Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Security Cabinet unanimously approved Operation Gideon's Chariots, an expansion of the 577-day onslaught that has left more than 185,000 Gazans dead, wounded, or missing and millions more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened. The Israel Defense Forces said Saturday that it was calling up tens of thousands of reservists ahead of the planned offensive.
An unnamed Israeli official toldThe Times of Israel that the plan involves the "conquering of Gaza," indefinitely occupying the Palestinian territory, and forcibly expelling its inhabitants to the southern part of the strip in order to defeat Hamas and secure the release of all remaining hostages kidnapped on October 7, 2023.
The official said the plan won't be implemented until after Trump's scheduled visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates later this month.
"We are occupying Gaza to stay—no more going in and out."
Discussing the plan, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that "we are occupying Gaza to stay—no more going in and out."
"This is a war for victory, and it's time we stop fearing the word occupation," he added. "We will settle the battle with Hamas—we will not surrender; they will."
The conquest, ethnic cleansing, and recolonization of Gaza is a top objective of many far-right Israelis. Last July, the International Court of Justice—which is currently weighing a genocide case against Israel—found that the country's 58-year occupation of Palestine is an illegal form of apartheid that must end as soon as possible.
Guterres' office warned Monday that the planned Israeli offensive would have catastrophic consequences for Gaza's embattled population.
"I can tell you that the secretary-general is alarmed by these reports of Israeli plans to expand ground operations and prolong its military presence in Gaza," Guterres spokesperson Farhan Haq said at a press briefing, adding that the operation "will inevitably lead to countless more civilians killed and the further destruction of Gaza."
"What's imperative now is an end to the violence, not more civilian deaths and destruction," Haq stressed. "Gaza is, and must remain, an integral part of a future Palestinian state."
European Union spokesperson Anouar El Anouni also expressed deep concern over Operation Gideon's Chariots, which he said "will result in further casualties and suffering for the Palestinian population."
"We urge Israel to exercise the utmost restraint," El Anouni added.
Asked about the Israeli plan, Trump declined to comment on its military aspects and said the U.S.—which provides Israel with diplomatic support and billions of dollars in armed aid—would help deliver food to Palestinians, who humanitarian groups say are facing imminent famine amid Israel's tightened blockade of Gaza. The Washington Postreported Monday that "American contractors" would be hired to distribute aid in the strip.
"We're going to help the people of Gaza get some food," Trump told reporters on Monday. "People are starving, and we're going to help them get some food."
Israeli Cabinet Minister Ze'ev Elkin claimed Monday that Trump—who in February proposed a U.S. takeover of Gaza—would not object to Operation Gideon's Chariots.
"I don't feel that there is pressure on us from Trump and his administration—they understand exactly what is happening here," Elkin said.
Some critics of Israel's planned conquest of Gaza accused Netanyahu of impeding the hostages' release by unilaterally breaking a January cease-fire agreement with Hamas.
"The Israeli hostages would now have been free, along with hundreds of innocent Palestinians languishing in Israeli prisons, had indicted war criminal Netanyahu not chosen to violate the cease-fire deal he had signed," former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakissaid on social media Monday. "Lest we forget..."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular