Thursday, February 27, 2014
This tumored bottom-feeding catfish is a good indicator of what’s happening in the Anacostia River – the sediment includes dangerously high levels of metals, bacteria, pesticides, PCBs, and other toxic chemicals. It’s time to make the river safe again for people and wildlife. 
Tell DC to speed up the cleanup: http://bit.ly/1mHIueq

This tumored bottom-feeding catfish is a good indicator of what’s happening in the Anacostia River – the sediment includes dangerously high levels of metals, bacteria, pesticides, PCBs, and other toxic chemicals. It’s time to make the river safe again for people and wildlife. 

Tell DC to speed up the cleanup: http://bit.ly/1mHIueq

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Toxic flame retardant chemicals are saturated in the foam inside our furniture. These chemicals are linked to serious health effects and are worthless in preventing furniture fires. We need better regulation of these chemicals to address this problem. If you agree, take action.

Sunday, December 30, 2012
How Does the FDA Know What Is Safe to Eat or Buy If It Doesn’t Define Safe?More than 90 percent of Americans carry residues of the chemical BPA in our bodies, according to the Centers for Disease Control. We encounter the chemical through every day products such as plastic water bottles, canned food, and ATM receipts, and this steady exposure poses significant risks. Independent scientific studies show that BPA interferes with estrogen and alters the development of the brain, prostate, and breast tissue. The evidence is so strong that 11 states have begun to regulate BPA.
The Food and Drug Administration, however, has delayed taking action on BPA for more than five years—effectively leaving consumers to believe it is safe. Yet when public health organizations ask the agency to explain why it hasn’t protected Americans from this harmful chemical, the FDA stonewalls. NRDC recently had to sue the FDA just to make it comply with our Freedom of Information Act request for material on the agency’s BPA review.
It shouldn’t take a lawsuit for the public to find out what government officials think about health risks posed by consumer products. But as detailed in an exposé by Barry Estabrook in the latest edition of NRDC’s OnEarth Magazine, the agency repeatedly fails to protect Americans from known hazards. Not only does it discount the weight of scientific evidence on issues ranging from antibiotic use to raise livestock to mercury contamination in seafood. But it also has refuses to share how it determines something is free of harm. Read more.
Photo: Lisa Beebe

How Does the FDA Know What Is Safe to Eat or Buy If It Doesn’t Define Safe?
More than 90 percent of Americans carry residues of the chemical BPA in our bodies, according to the Centers for Disease Control. We encounter the chemical through every day products such as plastic water bottles, canned food, and ATM receipts, and this steady exposure poses significant risks. Independent scientific studies show that BPA interferes with estrogen and alters the development of the brain, prostate, and breast tissue. The evidence is so strong that 11 states have begun to regulate BPA.

The Food and Drug Administration, however, has delayed taking action on BPA for more than five years—effectively leaving consumers to believe it is safe. Yet when public health organizations ask the agency to explain why it hasn’t protected Americans from this harmful chemical, the FDA stonewalls. NRDC recently had to sue the FDA just to make it comply with our Freedom of Information Act request for material on the agency’s BPA review.

It shouldn’t take a lawsuit for the public to find out what government officials think about health risks posed by consumer products. But as detailed in an exposé by Barry Estabrook in the latest edition of NRDC’s OnEarth Magazine, the agency repeatedly fails to protect Americans from known hazards. Not only does it discount the weight of scientific evidence on issues ranging from antibiotic use to raise livestock to mercury contamination in seafood. But it also has refuses to share how it determines something is free of harm. Read more.

Photo: Lisa Beebe

Sunday, December 2, 2012
Lindane is the active ingredient in some shampoos and lotions used to treat lice and scabies. It has a lot of annoying side effects like skin irritation and numbness – and some very serious ones like seizures and death. What’s really scary is that seizures and death happened even when it was used as directed! And the effects are worst in young children and the elderly. In fact, FDA has issued a warning that lindane could cause serious problems in children under 110 pounds - but FDA won’t stop anyone from using it on children. Mae Wu, NRDC attorney. Read more in her blog: Loss for public health: FDA lags behind the rest of the world, refuses to remove toxic and ineffective lindane from the market
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Ever wondered what chemicals might lurk in your couch?  Sarah Janssen, NRDC senior scientist, explores flame retardant chemicals used in upholstered furniture and how they could be affecting your health in My Toxic Couch.

Ever wondered what chemicals might lurk in your couch?
Sarah Janssen, NRDC senior scientist, explores flame retardant chemicals used in upholstered furniture and how they could be affecting your health in My Toxic Couch.