Study the health effects of more chemicals at a time under TSCA (The Toxic Substances Control Act)

We need to study the health effects of more chemicals at a time under the 2016 updated version of the Toxic Substances Control Act (2016) (TSCA). [H.R. 2576 (2015-2016), known as the Frank R, Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act].

The TSCA is currently studying 20 chemicals at a time. The completion time for each study is about four years. So, if we complete 20 studies in four years, that means we are completing studies at a rate of about five chemicals per year. (20 completed chemical studies in 4 years = 5 completed chemicals per year).

According to a few articles from 2016, EPA scientists at that time were particularly concerned about the health effects of about 1,000 chemicals. At five studies per year, this means it will take 200 years to study all 1.000 chemicals.

To study all 1,000 chemicals in 20 years we need to study 200 chemicals at a time. (That means completing studies of 50 chemicals per year: 50 x 20=1,000).

Incidentally, there are 86,000+ chemicals currently registered with the EPA (and new ones coming in every year), of which 42,000+ are currently in use. Of course, some of the long-lasting chemicals not currently in use are still lingering in the environment. (e.g. DDT).

The EPA website does show a " TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments- 2014 update". This list contains 90 chemicals. To study all of these chemicals, 20 at a time, at the current rate of five completed chemicals per year, would take only 18 years.

So, how many chemicals are EPA scientists particularly concerned about at this time? If you have any idea, please put in the reply.

Phthalates, arsenic, mercury (also in all Vax), PFAs, PCBs. There’s just so many where do you focus.
Text SAFETY to 43428 to urge EPA to enforce Toxic Substances Act rather than cater to chemical lobbyists.

1 Like

We need to test each chemical of concern (and combinations of chemicals) at a faster rate than we are at present.

OR we could adopt the EU’s method of “No data, No market”. Put the burden of testing on the manufacturer of the chemical or product that uses the chemical. Until they can prove it’s safe, it doesn’t get approval. And those 30,000 chemicals that have been given approval even though not tested, well they get banned for use until they can prove they are safe as well.