August 3, 2006

We're all facing chemical dangers
Many harmful products untested

Lesley Simpson

The Hamilton Spectator

When it comes to household products, we know the skull- and-crossbones icon could be our own horror movie. We lock cleaning supplies away from toddlers who might mistake Windex for Kool-Aid.

But how about hazards such as nail hardener, mothballs and laundry detergent with carcinogens? Or grease remover with ethoxylated nonyl phenols, known to create female characteristics in male fish? Or lotions, perfumes, deodorants and hair products with phthalates, a compound linked to reproductive defects in the uterus?

When it comes to products from detergent to lipstick, "Canadian citizens have less protection than any other industrialized country in the world," said Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence. "Most people assume, justifiably, that government is protecting them from harmful products, and that is not the case," Smith said.

Environmental Defence is a Toronto-based environmental advocacy organization.

Canada allows products -- such as phthalates -- that are outlawed elsewhere. What makes it worse is that companies are not required to disclose ingredients by law. Some do. Some don't. Disclosure will become mandatory for personal care products in November.

A political battle is emerging about risk. Environmental organizations are asking whether ingredients in some common products -- from cellphones to plastic water bottles -- might be turning healthy cells sick.

What's underpinning much of this is fear of cancer. It's expected that two of five Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetime, according to 2006 statistics from the Canadian Cancer Society.

What's clear is that much is not known. Risk is often misunderstood, research incomplete.

But for the first time, Canadians will soon start to get a picture of what household products and other chemicals are doing to our bodies, thanks to a new study that will measure what's in our blood and urine.

The Canadian Health Measures Survey tracks what you might expect: blood pressure, height, weight, fitness, oral health, smoking habits, alcohol use, medical history, nutrition, infectious diseases, sexual behaviour and demographics.

But for the first time, starting in 2007 until 2009, the survey will measure compounds including lead, mercury and pesticides in the bodies of 5,000 randomly selected Canadians aged 6 to 79.

Their blood will be tested for arsenic, cadmium, mercury, lead, nickel, uranium, zinc, pesticides and perfluorinated compounds. (Perfluorinated compounds are found in many products including fast food wrappers, water-repellent clothing, non-stick cookware, shaving cream and microwave popcorn bags, as well as products with Scotchgard and Teflon.)

Their urine will be tested for substances including mercury, pesticides and phthalates. (Phthalates are common in nail polish, perfume, deodorant, lotion and hair products but are often not listed.)

It's hard to imagine anyone emerging toxic-free.

House of Horrors: Go 6

This testing is called biomonitoring. Health Canada says information could be used to look at links between exposure and illness. In the United States, a survey in the 1960s showed Americans had too much lead in their blood. Lead contamination is linked to learning disabilities. That finding pushed the American government to mandate removal of lead from gasoline.

Health Canada considered various factors to determine which chemicals to track, including the likelihood of exposure, the available science and international research. That means Canadians will be able to compare ourselves with other countries. Health Canada says the information will give a national picture for a broad range of environmental chemicals, and provide a baseline for emerging patterns.

That baseline is important so that Health Canada can measure whether levels of chemicals are rising or falling, said Paul Glover, director-general of Health Canada's safe environments program. Some chemicals are linked to cancer, others to reproductive or developmental illness. If levels rise, the government can ask industry to ban products. If the levels decrease, it may mean regulation has worked.

"Will it happen next year? No," said Glover, who said this study represents the beginning of a long-term investigation.

For some people, the numbers may be no surprise. Environmental Defence recently revealed blood test results for painter and naturalist Robert Bateman. Thirty two carcinogens, 19 hormone disruptors, 16 respiratory toxicants and 42 reproductive/developmental toxicants listed on toxicnation.ca.

This is what the site means when it says, "Pollution. It's in you!"

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a World Health organization, estimates that 80 per cent of cancers are linked to environmental factors including chemical exposure as well as lifestyle factors such as obesity, smoking and inactivity.

In contrast, the Canadian Cancer Society estimates the risk of cancers linked to environmental causes as somewhere above 2 per cent but below 20 per cent.

The two agencies assess risk differently.

The Canadian Cancer Society is developing a logo that will show products free of known or probable carcinogens, said Heather Logan, the society's director of cancer control policy.

If you ask the Canadian Cancer Society's telephone-based Cancer Information Service about products, an information officer might suggest the CancerSmart Consumer Guide, a booklet published by the Labour Environmental Alliance Society (LEAS) in B.C. While the booklet is helpful, LEAS is a tiny grassroots organization with a staff of four (including a few part-timers) who have done a heroic job making information available across Canada.

What's surprising is that neither the Canadian Cancer Society nor Health Canada has published a comprehensive product guide. (The Americans do it better. Check out the National Institute of Health's http://householdproducts.nlm.nih.gov/products.htm)

The Canadian Cancer Society says it is Health Canada's job to keep unsafe products off the shelf.

Health Canada says "known hazards" are labelled, including carcinogens such as formaldehyde, (found in wood pulp, plastics, paints and nail hardeners.) While household chemicals are "inherently dangerous," Health Canada says products are safe as long as directions and precautions are followed. It's the position of the government that products are safe, even those with identified carcinogens inside such as nail hardener or laundry detergent, because real risk depends on duration and dosage.

You can't reduce exposure to zero. Think of the fumes we breathe near a gas station, said Kapil Khatter, president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. But allowing carcinogens and suspect chemicals into products is a different matter, he said.

It's up to the federal government to keep Canadians safe. "I don't want to put that responsibility onto consumers. It's a lot of work to figure out," he said, referring to indecipherable labels with chemical names nobody understands.

Janet Jacks, owner of Goodness Me! Natural Food Market, uses research from the IARC to help determine what she's going to stock. If a product has a compound that has been shown to cause cancer in an animal, "that's good enough for me" not to buy it, said Jacks.

The IARC classifies carcinogens as known carcinogens, potential carcinogens (with a lesser degree of evidence in human, but evidence in animals) and possible carcinogens (with evidence in animal studies but insufficient evidence in people) as well as those for which there is not enough evidence either way.

What's troubling is how much we don't know. Consider that only 2,000 of 100,000 chemicals in commercial production have been tested for cancer in animals, said the IARC's Vince Cogliano. He heads the program that evaluates toxicity. Testing is expensive and time consuming. Scientists are trying to develop ways of testing rather than injecting mice with chemicals and waiting years for results, but, "we're not there yet," said Cogliano.

The American National Toxicology Program is the largest testing program in the world and it's still incomplete.

"It's a sorry state for chemical testing."

lsimpson@thespec.com

905- 526- 3207