February, 18 2019, 11:00pm EDT
![Center for International Environmental Law](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012627/origin.jpg)
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Amanda Kistler, Communications Director, CIEL: +1.202.742.5832, akistler@ciel.org
New Report Reveals Plastic Threatens Human Health on a Global Scale
WASHINGTON
A new report released today reveals that plastic is a human health crisis hiding in plain sight. Plastic & Health: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet, authored by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), Earthworks, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), Healthy Babies Bright Futures (HBBF), IPEN, Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (t.e.j.a.s.), University of Exeter, and UPSTREAM, brings together research that exposes the distinct toxic risks plastic poses to human health at every stage of the plastic lifecycle, from extraction of fossil fuels, to consumer use, to disposal and beyond.
To date, research into the human health impacts of plastic have focused narrowly on specific moments in the plastic lifecycle, often on single products, processes, or exposure pathways. This approach fails to recognize that significant, complex, and intersecting human health impacts occur at every stage of the plastic lifecycle: from wellhead to refinery, from store shelves to human bodies, and from waste management to ongoing impacts of microplastics in the air, water, and soil. Plastic & Health presents the full panorama of human health impacts of plastic and counsels that any solution to the plastic crisis must address the full lifecycle.
According to the report, uncertainties and knowledge gaps often impede regulation and the ability of consumers, communities, and policymakers to make informed decisions. However, the full scale of health impacts throughout plastic's lifecycle are overwhelming and warrant a precautionary approach.
KEY FINDINGS
Plastic requires a lifecycle approach. The narrow approaches to assessing and addressing plastic impacts to date are inadequate and inappropriate. Making informed decisions that address plastic risks demands a full lifecycle approach to understand the full scope of its toxic impacts on human health. Likewise, reducing toxic exposure to plastic will require a variety of solutions and options because plastic has a complex lifecycle with a diverse universe of actors.
At every stage of its lifecycle, plastic poses distinct risks to human health, arising from both exposure to plastic particles themselves and associated chemicals. People worldwide are exposed at multiple stages of this lifecycle.
- Extraction and transportation of fossil feedstocks for plastic, which releases an array of toxic substances into the air and water, including those with known health impacts like cancer, neurotoxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and impairment of the immune system;
- Refining and production of plastic resins and additives, which releases carcinogenic and other highly toxic substances into the air, with effects including impairment of the nervous system, reproductive and developmental problems, cancer, leukemia, and genetic impacts like low birth weight;
- Consumer products and packaging, which can lead to ingestion and/or inhalation of microplastic particles and hundreds of toxic substances;
- Plastic waste management, especially "waste-to-energy" and other forms of incineration, releases toxic substances including heavy metals such as lead and mercury, acid gases and particulate matter, which can enter air, water, and soil causing both direct and indirect health risks for workers and nearby communities;
- Fragmenting and microplastics, which enter the human body directly and lead to an array of health impacts (including inflammation, genotoxicity, oxidative stress, apoptosis, and necrosis) that are linked to negative health outcomes ranging from cardiovascular disease to cancer and autoimmune conditions;
- Cascading exposure as plastic degrades, which further leach toxic chemicals concentrated in plastic into the environment and human bodies; and
- Ongoing environmental exposures as plastic contaminates and accumulates in food chains through agricultural soils, terrestrial and aquatic food chains, and the water supply, creating new opportunities for human exposure.
FROM THE AUTHORS
David Azoulay, Director of Environmental Health, CIEL
"From wellhead to refinery, and from kitchen shelves to water supplies, this report reveals how plastic poses toxic risks at every stage of its lifecycle. There is no silver bullet to solve this health crisis, but all solutions must ultimately reduce the production and use of plastic if they are serious about protecting human health.
"Both the supply chains and the impacts of plastic cross and re-cross borders, continents, and oceans. No country can effectively protect its citizens from those impacts on its own, and no global instrument exists today to fully address the toxic lifecycle of plastics. Countries must seize the opportunity of current global discussions to develop a holistic response to the plastic health crisis that involves reducing the production, use, and disposal of plastic worldwide."
Priscilla Villa, Earthworks
"Plastics poison people before they're ever used because they're produced at polluting petrochemical plants. And those plastics are made from fracking byproducts. This is a problem because oil and gas extraction and transport releases carcinogens like benzene. Any solution to our plastics problem must prioritize people's health ahead of Big Oil's profits."
Doun Moon, Research Associate, GAIA
"Plastic waste does not only pollute our oceans. Burning plastic in incinerators turns one form of pollution into another, whether it be air emissions, toxic ash, or wastewater. People living nearby incinerators are primarily low income communities and people of color, and bear the brunt of this toxic pollution. We can't burn our plastic problem away, leaving certain communities to suffer the consequences. We desperately need to turn off the plastic tap and build a more just and equitable society in the process."
Dr. Mariann Lloyd-Smith, Senior Policy Advisor, IPEN
"The twin crises of chemical and plastics pollution are decimating our oceans and its inhabitants. Plastics are not just unsightly litter, they are made with many toxic ingredients and collect many more persistent poisons over their incredibly long life time. Microplastics provide a pathway for hazardous chemicals into the marine foodchain on which humans depend. We can't dump, burn, or recycle our way out of this problem; it's time for industry and governments to turn off this toxic tap and for all of us to make deep changes in the way we live."
Lauren Moore, UPSTREAM
"What's toxic for the planet is just as toxic for human health. Why risk exposing our bodies to the thousands of chemicals found in plastic packaging when we have reusable options that do not pollute our health or the environment? When it comes to the safety of our families and our planet, reuse wins every time."
Von Hernandez, Global Coordinator, Break Free From Plastic Movement (BFFP)
"The heavy toxic burdens associated with plastic - at every stage of its life cycle - offers another convincing argument why reducing and not increasing production of plastics is the only way forward. It is shocking how the existing regulatory regime continues to give the whole plastic industrial complex, the license to play Russian roulette with our lives and our health. Plastic is lethal, and this report shows us why."
WHAT EXPERTS ARE SAYING ABOUT PLASTIC & HEALTH:
Ruthann Rudel, Director of Research, Silent Spring Institute
"Plastics are made of a complex mix of chemicals, many of them are endocrine disruptors or are of concern for other health effects. A recent National Academy of Sciences report found that the important vinyl ingredient DEHP is "a presumed hazard to human reproduction" at current exposures, and that's just one plastics ingredient! Plastics also contain many toxic additives, such as flame retardants, metals, anti-microbials, non-stick coatings, and more. The fantasy that plastics are an inexpensive material is just that - a fantasy that fails to acknowledge the tremendous costs we all pay."
Erica Jackson, Community Outreach & Communications Specialist, FracTracker Alliance
"The pervasiveness of plastic is a problem that spans space and time- it's all around us and it lasts for centuries. Therefore, the importance of this assessment of plastic's cumulative health impact cannot be understated. We know enough to justify taking immediate action to reduce our dependence on plastic, and that starts by keeping plastic feedstocks - oil and gas - in the ground."
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace Global Plastics Project Leader
"The health risks of the plastic pollution crisis have been ignored for far too long, and must be at the forefront of all decisions on plastics moving forward. Corporations and governments are risking our health to maintain the status quo and keep profits flowing. It's not just our oceans and marine animals that are suffering from this addiction to plastics, it's all of us. While there is still much to learn about all of the impacts of plastics on human health, we know enough to adopt a precautionary principle and start to phase out these throwaway plastics for good."
Mike Schade, Mind the Store Campaign Director, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
"The plastics industry is polluting the planet with poisonous chemicals like phthalates and halogenated flame retardants, which are commonly found in products like food packaging and electronics. Even babies are being born pre-polluted with these unnecessary dangerous chemicals. At a time when we are learning more about the dangers of chemicals such as these in plastics, the US federal government is rolling back critical environmental and public health safeguards. Big retailers must step up to drive toxic chemicals out of plastics and act swiftly to phase out the worst plastics of concern like PVC, the poison plastic."
Julie Teel Simmonds, Senior Attorney, Center for Biological Diversity
"It is alarming that the fossil fuel industry plans to increase plastic production by 40 percent over the next decade. Making plastic pollutes communities, and plastic trash is filling our oceans. It is clear that curbing plastic pollution and protecting public health cannot be achieved without curbing plastic production."
Stiv Wilson, Campaigns Director, Story of Stuff Project
"For years the petrochemical industry has ignored the upstream human health impacts in the extraction and refining process. Instead, they've chosen to frame the human health question narrowly, after plastic gets to the ocean where the science is a bit less smoking gun. Finally, we have a baseline for understanding the whole pollution matrix that surrounds this ubiquitous material called plastic."
ABOUT THE AUTHORING ORGANIZATIONS:
Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) uses the power of law to protect the environment, promote human rights, and ensure a just and sustainable society. CIEL seeks a world where the law reflects the interconnection between humans and the environment, respects the limits of the planet, protects the dignity and equality of each person, and encourages all of earth's inhabitants to live in balance with each other.
Earthworks is a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the adverse impacts of mineral and energy development while promoting sustainable solutions.
Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) is a worldwide alliance of more than 800 grassroots groups, non-governmental organizations, and individuals in over 90 countries whose ultimate vision is a just, toxic-free world without incineration.
Healthy Babies Bright Futures (HBBF) is an alliance of nonprofit organizations, scientists and donors that designs and implements outcomes-based programs to measurably reduce babies' exposures to toxic chemicals in the first 1,000 days of development. HBBF brings together the strongest and latest science, data analysis, critical thinking, performance measurement, campaign talent, communications skills and commitment to collaboration.
IPEN brings together leading public interest groups working on environmental and public health issues in over 100 countries to take action internationally to minimize and, whenever possible, eliminate hazardous, toxic chemicals.
Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (t.e.j.a.s.) is dedicated to providing community members with the tools necessary to create sustainable, environmentally healthy communities by educating individuals on health concerns and implications arising from environmental pollution, empowering individuals with an understanding of applicable environmental laws and regulations and promoting their enforcement, and offering community building skills and resources for effective community action and greater public participation.
UPSTREAM sparks innovative solutions to plastic pollution and brings people together to transform our throw-away society to a culture of stewardship. UPSTREAM envisions a world without plastic pollution and empowers business, community, and people to imagine and co-create this future with us.
Read the full report here.
Read the executive summary here.
Find this press release online here.
Since 1989, the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has worked to strengthen and use international law and institutions to protect the environment, promote human health, and ensure a just and sustainable society.
LATEST NEWS
Planned Parenthood Warns House GOP Appropriations Bills Attack Global Health
The "slate of dangerous and unpopular provisions" includes "eliminating the Title X family planning program and reinstating the Trump-era expanded global gag rule."
Jul 01, 2024
As the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives uses the appropriations process to promote the GOP agenda ahead of the November elections, Planned Parenthood Action Fund on Monday highlighted how the spending bills attack health within and beyond the United States.
"Once again, anti-abortion rights politicians in Congress are manipulating the federal appropriations process to push for a recycled slate of dangerous and unpopular provisions to block access to sexual and reproductive healthcare across the country and around the world," states the new PPFA memo.
The PPFA document details anti-health policies in spending legislation for fiscal year 2025 that House Republicans have advanced recently, which include provisions "eliminating the Title X family planning program and reinstating the Trump-era expanded global gag rule."
The global gag rule bars U.S. government funding for foreign groups that provide information, referrals, or services for abortion care, or advocate for decriminalization or increasing access. It was initially implemented by former Republican President Ronald Reagan as the Mexico City policy, then reinstated and expanded by former President Donald Trump.
"In all, anti-abortion rights politicians continue to act in defiance of the vast majority of their constituents who believe that the government has no right to control people's personal healthcare decisions with attacks on abortion, birth control, and gender-affirming care."
Despite Trump's ongoing legal battles, he is the presumptive Republican nominee to face Democratic President Joe Biden in November. Biden rescinded his predecessor's gag rule shortly after taking office in 2021. Reproductive freedom has been a key issue in not only that contest but races at all levels of U.S. politics this cycle, as GOP policymakers and candidates have set their sights on abortion care, birth control, and in vitro fertilization.
The gag rule was included in the appropriations bill for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs, which the House on Friday passed 212-200. The only Democrat who voted in favor was Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington—who supports reproductive rights and has shared her own abortion story.
That bill would also "cap funding for international family planning and reproductive health programs at $461 million, a nearly 25% cut," and end funding for United Nations entities including the U.N. Population Fund, as the PPFA memo notes. It would also "restrict information about and access to gender-affirming care," and "maintain the Helms Amendment in addition to restrictions on abortion coverage for Peace Corps volunteers."
Speaking out against the legislation last week, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, said that "much like last year, the fiscal year 2025 state and foreign operations bill resurrects the doomed isolationism of the early 20th century."
"For the sake of our national security, women's health globally, and our response to the climate crisis, Republicans must abandon this reckless and partisan path and join Democrats at the table to govern," declared DeLauro, who raised the alarm about House GOP appropriations proposals throughout June.
Taking aim at the labor, health and human services, and education legislation last week, she said that "in keeping with the majority's other partisan bills, this bill is chock full of dozens of poison pill riders, including multiple provisions that attack women's freedom and block abortion and reproductive healthcare services."
Specifically, as the PPFA memo points out, it would interfere with postgraduate training in abortion care, impose the Hyde and Weldon amendments, restrict access to gender-affirming care, block Biden administration executive orders intended to boost abortion care access in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, and eliminate funding for Title X family planning and teen pregnancy prevention programs while pouring money into abstinence-only-until-marriage initiatives.
It would also "defund" Planned Parenthood, preventing people in communities across the United States—particularly in rural and medically underserved areas—from accessing services including sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, cancer screenings, and birth control, as the memo outlines.
The recently introduced commerce, justice, and science bill would block most federal prisoners from attaining abortion coverage and prevent the U.S. Department of Justice from suing state or local governments over anti-choice laws, according to the memo. The financial services and general government legislation would reverse a District of Columbia law protecting workers from being fired for their reproductive healthcare choices, bar D.C. from using local funds to cover abortion care, and ban Federal Employee Health Benefits Program coverage of most abortions.
"In all, anti-abortion rights politicians continue to act in defiance of the vast majority of their constituents who believe that the government has no right to control people's personal healthcare decisions with attacks on abortion, birth control, and gender-affirming care," the publication states.
The document also targets provisions in multiple recently passed spending bills focused on homeland security, the Pentagon, and veterans—including attacks on abortion and gender-affirming care for current and former service members and their families as well as anyone in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody.
"Anti-abortion rights lawmakers recently included similar measures in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)—an annual must-pass bill," the memo highlights.
"Everyone deserves access to abortion and gender-affirming care, including service members and their families. But these lawmakers would rather play games with our fundamental rights in their attempt to control our bodies, lives, and futures."
After the mid-June NDAA vote, PPFA president Alexis McGill Johnson said that "it's like Groundhog Day. Anti-abortion rights House members use must-pass bills as a vehicle to force through their deeply unpopular and dangerous agenda—again and again and again. Everyone deserves access to abortion and gender-affirming care, including service members and their families. But these lawmakers would rather play games with our fundamental rights in their attempt to control our bodies, lives, and futures."
The NDAA and spending bills aren't expected to pass the Senate—which is narrowly controlled by Democrats—in their current forms, but they send a message about what Republicans would prioritize if they fully reclaimed Congress and the White House.
"The majority's policy riders do not belong in appropriations bills, and like last year, we will defeat them," DeLauro said last month. "But it is disappointing that we are going through this charade again, just months after Republicans and Democrats voted for the 2024 appropriations bills."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Campaign Collects 730,000+ Signatures for Ohio Amendment to End Rigged Maps
"Our chance to finally achieve fair maps in Ohio is just around the corner," said one supporter of the proposed constitutional amendment.
Jul 01, 2024
The campaign for an Ohio ballot measure for a state constitutional amendment to end gerrymandering has collected more than 730,000 signatures, according to the initiative's organizers.
The Citizens Not Politicians campaign said it delivered 731,306 signatures to the office of Ohio's secretary of state in Columbus on Monday, significantly more than the 413,487 valid signatures needed to qualify for November's ballot.
If approved, the Citizens Not Politicians Amendment will:
- Create the 15-member Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission made up of Republican, Democratic, and Independent citizens who broadly represent the different geographic areas and demographics of the state;
- Ban current or former politicians, political party officials, and lobbyists from sitting on the commission;
- Require fair and impartial districts by making it unconstitutional to draw voting districts that discriminate against or favor any political party or individual politician; and
- Require the commission to operate under an open and independent process.
Nearly 100 organizations, businesses, and thought leaders across Ohio are supporting the amendment. If the measure is certified for November's ballot and approved by voters, the new commission could draw maps for use as soon as the 2026 elections. Seven other states have similar independent commissions: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, and Washington.
After the delivery, hundreds of campaign staff, volunteers, and supporters rallied in the Statehouse Atrium to celebrate their achievement and send a message to gerrymandering politicians.
"This is our house, the people's house, and with today's signature turn-in, we move one giant step closer to ensuring that the citizens decide who serves here, not the politicians who just scheme and rig the game to stay in power," said retired Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor, a Republican who helped write the amendment. "This constitutional amendment will restore power to Ohio citizens and take it away from the self-serving politicians and their lobbyist friends and big-money donors."
Ted Linscott, a retired bricklayer from Appalachian Ohio, said: "Where I come from, we believe in fairness and working together to do what's right. For too long, career politicians and their lobbyist friends have manipulated our districts to serve their interests. It's time we put an end to this. We need a system that is open, transparent, and fair."
According to the Citizens Not Politicians campaign:
Nationally, Ohio is recognized as one of the worst states for gerrymandering, undermining proportional representation and leading to political stagnation and ineffective policy.
More than 9 million Ohioans, or 77% of the state population, live in districts where one party has a severe advantage in the 2024 Ohio House of Representatives elections, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law.
"In my work for voter access and education, I have seen firsthand how gerrymandering creates a Legislature that is ineffective and unresponsive to the needs of Ohio voters," amendment supporter Tucker Sutherland said. "They don't have to care what we think because they draw themselves into cozy districts where they often don't even face opposition for reelection."
Equal Districts, a coalition of 30 advocacy groups,
said on social media that "our chance to finally achieve fair maps in Ohio is just around the corner."
"Let's end gerrymandering in Ohio," the group added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Report Argues Private Rail Is a Train Wreck, Public Ownership Needed
"Our nation's rail system is in disarray," an expert said. "Dominated by a small group of giant for-profit companies, it is imperiling the health and safety of workers and communities."
Jul 01, 2024
Railword Workers United and a Brown University fellow on Monday published a white paper calling for the institution of a public rail system to replace America's corporate railroad giants.
The 110-page white paper, written by Brown University undergraduate Maddock Thomas and published as part of RWU's Public Rail Now campaign, argues that U.S. railroad corporations such as BNSF, Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern, and CSX have failed on safety, workers' rights, service, electrification, and expanding capacity to meet rising freight demand.
Instead of using profits to invest in critical infrastructure, the railroads have lined shareholder pockets with dividends and buybacks, Thomas wrote, advocating for a public system where that money could be spent to improve safety and decarbonize freight transport, among other goals.
Thomas M. Hanna, research director at the Democracy Collaborative, called for democratic, public ownership of railroads in a Public Rail Now statement.
"At a time when we need it most, our nation's rail system is in disarray," Hanna said. "Dominated by a small group of giant for-profit companies, it is imperiling the health and safety of workers and communities, providing poor service for customers, abandoning growth and development, and stalling the expansion of passenger rail services."
"These lands were given under a promise of providing a 'public highway' operated in the public interest, a deal that today's Class 1s have inherited along with their predecessors' easements... Perhaps it is time for Congress to retake control of our public rights-of-way."
The frequency of rail accidents rose by 28% between 2013 and 2022, which many critics attribute to the Precision Scheduled Railroading system that's become the industry standard. Thomas wrote that the system prioritizes "speed over safety."
Despite the alarming trend, the industry has lobbied against safety-minded legislation such as the Railway Accountability Act proposed by senators last year following a disastrous derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. The industry pushed against reforms strongly in the year after the disaster and that lobbying has continued in recent months, according toJacobin.
The current system has led to precarity and difficulty for railway workers. The number of jobs in the industry has gone down over the last 10 years, with nearly 30% of workers having been laid off since 2015, Thomas found. Railway workers also face tough conditions, with unpredictable schedules and forced overtime—some of the subjects of a 2022 labor dispute that ended with the controversial intervention of President Joe Biden.
The white paper emphasizes the underinvestment that private rail ownership has allowed. The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates that rail freight will nearly double by 2035. This growing demand has long been understood, but not acted on. A 2008 report commissioned by the Surface Transportation Board, a federal agency, found that the aforementioned major rail companies—called "Class 1" railroads—needed to spend $135 billion by 2035 to build up infrastructure to meet incoming demand.
They did not, the white paper says.
"Instead, the Class 1s spent $196 billion on buybacks and dividends for shareholders between 2010 and 2020," Thomas wrote.
Thomas presented a historical case for public rail. In the late 1800s, hundreds of millions of acres of public land, as well as other subsidies, were granted to railroad companies on the condition that their services benefited the public. Thomas wrote that the land grants were provided with the understanding that the railways would be like public highways, and that the federal government to this day "retains a reversionary interest of ownership and control" over the rights-of-way.
"There is a compelling case that every railroad that sits on a right-of-way granted from Congress merely possesses an easement over public land," he wrote. "Furthermore, Congress reserved the right to 'add to, alter, amend' the terms of its land grants. Ultimately, these lands were given under a promise of providing a 'public highway' operated in the public interest, a deal that today's Class 1s have inherited along with their predecessors' easements. One might argue that the Class 1s failed to live up to this deal and that perhaps it is time for Congress to retake control of our public rights-of-way."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular