According to the Associated Press a common chemical
found in plastic ducks, teething rings and other soft, chewable baby toys would
be banned in California
under a bill before an Assembly committee this week. The piece of Legislation to be heard by Committee Tuesday written by
Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco, would require that all toys or child
care products sold for children under 3 be free of six types of phthalates, a
chemical used to soften and smooth plastics
"The vulnerability to toxins is most prevalent in
childhood," Ma said. "It could cause harm to babies, and we should do
everything we can." Phthalates have been banned by the European
Union and at least 14 other countries after studies found that the chemical
mimics the hormone estrogen and could cause developmental problems.
Those could include early puberty in girls, low sperm counts, genital defects
and lower testosterone in boys. Scientists in the United States, however, are divided
on the health risks. A 1998 study by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission found that few if any children are at risk from the chemical because
the amount ingested from sucking on toys is at such low levels.
The commission
also noted that substitutes were unproven and could be more toxic. Toy
manufactures say the chemical, which has been used for the past 20 years in
baby items, poses no harm. In addition, they note substitutes could leave
plastic toys more brittle and prone to breaking."If you don't make a safe product, you'll never
succeed in the business," said Joan Lawrence, vice president of standards
and regulatory affairs at the Toy Industry Association. "If there was any
concern (about phthalates), we would not be having this conversation."
Environmentalists and public health advocates remain concerned that phthalates,
like other hormonal-mimicking chemicals such as the pesticide DDT, are
dangerous even in small amounts. "With hormones, its not just the
concentration of the exposure but the timing of the exposure, and that's why
developing fetuses and children are particularly vulnerable," said Cynthia
Li, a staff physician of internal medicine at San Francisco General Hospital.
"We should use foresight in really trying to reduce the number of
chemicals that pass through our bodies." California lists the chemical as a toxin under Proposition 65, a measure passed by
voters in 1986 that requires businesses to post warnings about dangerous
chemicals.
|