environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-21--Are Artificial Sweeteners Safe for Your Child?

It ’ s no secret that children love sweets – and that parents often try to limit the sugary treats their kids consume , because of the range of health concerns , not to mention dental bills , associated with sugar .
Instead , many turn to food and drinks containing non-caloric or low-calorie sweeteners .
But those very substitutes – nonnutritive sweeteners , more commonly called artificial sweeteners – may themselves harm our health .
The latest epidemiological research shows artificial sweeteners are associated with obesity and diabetes , among other metabolic problems that are an issue for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , excessive consumption of sugar is also well known to harm health .
Yet artificial sweeteners do not seem to be a good alternative , especially not for children .
The three most common artificial sweeteners in the U.S. food supply are sucralose , acesulfame potassium and aspartame .
Also common are the sugar alcohols sorbitol , erythritol and maltitol , which are often used in combination with artificial sweeteners .
Sugar alcohol has fewer calories than regular sugar but can lead to some unpleasant , immediate side effects , such as abdominal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s read reviews of sugar-free gummy bears can attest , they can significantly upset a person ’ s day .
Despite lingering concerns about the safety of these ingredients , use of artificial sweeteners has gone up in recent years : A 2012 study showed that consumption of low-calorie-sweetened drinks increased in the previous decade among all weight , age , socioeconomic and ethnic groups , and doubled among children .
In one study , Allison Sylvetsky , Ph.D. , professor of exercise and nutrition sciences at the George Washington University Milken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 25 percent of kids and 41 percent of adults say they consume foods and/or beverages that contain these sweeteners .
In a separate study , among children who report nonnutritive sweetener use , 80 percent consume them every day .
Consumption of artificial sweeteners is higher among women and girls and people with obesity .
Yet parents often don ’ t know they ’ re consuming these sweeteners , or giving them to their kids .
Consumers who read labels may see an artificial sweetener listed as an ingredient , but because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the label , they can ’ t know how much of it a food product contains .
Parents who intentionally buy artificially sweetened products may be disappointed if they ’ re purchasing them in an attempt to counteract their kids ’ increasing consumption of sugar .
Studies show no connection between artificial sweeteners and lower rates of obesity .
In fact , they show the opposite : According to one study , sweeteners “ promote weight gain and metabolic dysregulation.
” Some research even connected artificial sweeteners consumed during pregnancy with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infants one year of age .
In a recent conversation with EWG scientists about artificial sweeteners , Sylvetsky explained the science behind what she calls an evolving area of investigation with many unanswered questions .
Several mechanisms may explain why the findings of some studies demonstrate that nonnutritive sweeteners may not be as helpful for weight management and chronic disease prevention as we would like to think .
These mechanisms include potential effects on metabolic hormones that may be mediated through taste receptors located throughout the body , a disruption in energy metabolism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected calories , and a blunted brain reward response relative to what ’ s observed following the consumption of caloric sugars , among others .
Because artificial sweeteners are 180 to 20,000 times sweeter than sugar , data suggest they may increase taste preferences for sugar .
Some studies have proposed that continuous exposure to sweet rewards can produce an addictive-like response and over time create a desire for more .
Six artificial sweeteners have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the U.S : acesulfame potassium , advantame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sucralose .
Plant-derived nonnutritive sweeteners – stevia and luo han guo , or monk fruit – are becoming more common .
Can stevia , if used widely , cause some of the similar negative effects on weight control and metabolism as artificial sweeteners ?
Such studies have not yet been conducted , but the question should be considered .
Some studies also raised concerns about the safety of lifelong ingestion of artificial sweeteners , unrelated to the metabolic and weight concerns .
The Center for Science in the Public Interest , a nonprofit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and sucralose may increase the risk of cancer .
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that people avoid nonnutritive sweeteners , except in certain circumstances , for instance , by people with Type 1 diabetes .
The organization further calls for regulations requiring manufacturers to label food and drink products with the amount of artificial sweetener they contain , rather than just listing them on the ingredients label .
EWG has long recommended limited sugar consumption , especially for children .
We suggest water and other unsweetened beverages rather than juice , smoothies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that too much sugar is bad for a person ’ s health , and there is still some uncertainty about the harms associated with the consumption of artificial sweeteners .
EWG is continuing to investigate how food additives , including artificial sweeteners , colorants and preservatives , can affect human health .
Our advice : Read ingredient labels to avoid these additives , and choose fresh whole foods when possible .

It’s no secret that children love sweets – and that parents often try to limit the sugary treats their kids consume, because of the range of health concerns, not to mention dental bills, associated with sugar. Instead, many turn to food and drinks containing non-caloric or low-calorie sweeteners. But those very substitutes – nonnutritive sweeteners, more commonly called artificial sweeteners – may themselves harm our health.
The latest epidemiological research shows artificial sweeteners are associated with obesity and diabetes, among other metabolic problems that are an issue for an increasing number of Americans. Of course, excessive consumption of sugar is also well known to harm health. Yet artificial sweeteners do not seem to be a good alternative, especially not for children.
The three most common artificial sweeteners in the U.S. food supply are sucralose, acesulfame potassium and aspartame. Also common are the sugar alcohols sorbitol, erythritol and maltitol, which are often used in combination with artificial sweeteners. Sugar alcohol has fewer calories than regular sugar but can lead to some unpleasant, immediate side effects, such as abdominal discomfort and diarrhea. As anyone who’s read reviews of sugar-free gummy bears can attest, they can significantly upset a person’s day.
Despite lingering concerns about the safety of these ingredients, use of artificial sweeteners has gone up in recent years: A 2012 study showed that consumption of low-calorie-sweetened drinks increased in the previous decade among all weight, age, socioeconomic and ethnic groups, and doubled among children.
In one study, Allison Sylvetsky, Ph.D., professor of exercise and nutrition sciences at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, found about 25 percent of kids and 41 percent of adults say they consume foods and/or beverages that contain these sweeteners. In a separate study, among children who report nonnutritive sweetener use, 80 percent consume them every day. Consumption of artificial sweeteners is higher among women and girls and people with obesity.
Yet parents often don’t know they’re consuming these sweeteners, or giving them to their kids. Consumers who read labels may see an artificial sweetener listed as an ingredient, but because information about quantities isn’t required on the label, they can’t know how much of it a food product contains.
Parents who intentionally buy artificially sweetened products may be disappointed if they’re purchasing them in an attempt to counteract their kids’ increasing consumption of sugar. Studies show no connection between artificial sweeteners and lower rates of obesity. In fact, they show the opposite: According to one study, sweeteners “promote weight gain and metabolic dysregulation.” Some research even connected artificial sweeteners consumed during pregnancy with a higher risk of gaining excess weight for infants one year of age.
Get Your Free Guide: EWG's Guide to Food Additives
In a recent conversation with EWG scientists about artificial sweeteners, Sylvetsky explained the science behind what she calls an evolving area of investigation with many unanswered questions.
Several mechanisms may explain why the findings of some studies demonstrate that nonnutritive sweeteners may not be as helpful for weight management and chronic disease prevention as we would like to think. These mechanisms include potential effects on metabolic hormones that may be mediated through taste receptors located throughout the body, a disruption in energy metabolism caused by a disconnect between sweetness and expected calories, and a blunted brain reward response relative to what’s observed following the consumption of caloric sugars, among others.
Because artificial sweeteners are 180 to 20,000 times sweeter than sugar, data suggest they may increase taste preferences for sugar. Some studies have proposed that continuous exposure to sweet rewards can produce an addictive-like response and over time create a desire for more.
Six artificial sweeteners have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the U.S: acesulfame potassium, advantame, aspartame, neotame, saccharin and sucralose. Plant-derived nonnutritive sweeteners – stevia and luo han guo, or monk fruit – are becoming more common.
Can stevia, if used widely, cause some of the similar negative effects on weight control and metabolism as artificial sweeteners? Such studies have not yet been conducted, but the question should be considered.
Some studies also raised concerns about the safety of lifelong ingestion of artificial sweeteners, unrelated to the metabolic and weight concerns. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit organization, has pointed out that aspartame and sucralose may increase the risk of cancer.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that people avoid nonnutritive sweeteners, except in certain circumstances, for instance, by people with Type 1 diabetes. The organization further calls for regulations requiring manufacturers to label food and drink products with the amount of artificial sweetener they contain, rather than just listing them on the ingredients label.
EWG has long recommended limited sugar consumption, especially for children. We suggest water and other unsweetened beverages rather than juice, smoothies or soda. Published research clearly shows that too much sugar is bad for a person’s health, and there is still some uncertainty about the harms associated with the consumption of artificial sweeteners.
EWG is continuing to investigate how food additives, including artificial sweeteners, colorants and preservatives, can affect human health. Our advice: Read ingredient labels to avoid these additives, and choose fresh whole foods when possible.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-22--New USDA Records Show Trade Bailout and Coronavirus Payments Went to the Largest Farms

The largest and wealthiest U.S. farm businesses received the biggest share of almost $ 33 billion in payments from two subsidy programs – one created by the Trump administration to respond to the president ’ s trade war and the other by Congress in response to the coronavirus pandemic , according to updates to EWG ’ s Farm Subsidy Database .
The Market Facilitation Program , or MFP , was intended to offset the perceived damage done by the administration ’ s trade war , which reduced many farmers ’ access to lucrative Chinese markets .
Payments for the 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 23 billion – more than $ 8.5 billion for 2018 and $ 14.5 billion for 2019 .
EWG ’ s analysis of Department of Agriculture records , obtained under the Freedom of Information Act , shows : • The top 1 percent of farms , the largest agribusinesses in the country , received 16 percent of MFP payments , or more than $ 3.8 billion .
The average total payment for a farm in the top 1 percent was $ 524,689 .
• The top 10 percent of farms received more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ farms in the top 10 percent getting an average payment of $ 185,412 .
• The bottom 80 percent of farms , the small- and mid-sized operations struggling the most , got just 23 percent of MFP payments , with an average per-farm payment of $ 9,109 .
The Coronavirus Food Assistance Program , or CFAP , was intended to help farmers hurt by the pandemic-induced economic downturn .
As of Sept. 13 , CFAP payments totaled more than $ 9.9 billion , but the Department of Agriculture has not yet responded to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the most recent payments .
Last week , President Trump announced a second round of CFAP payments , sending an additional $ 14 billion to farmers .
We have obtained and analyzed records for $ 5 billion in CFAP payments through June 30 , and they show that CFAP payments through that date went to the largest farm operations , even more than the MFP .
• The top 1 percent of farms got 22 percent of CFAP payments , for an average payment of $ 352,432 .
• The smallest 80 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CFAP payments , for an average payment of $ 4,677 .
Unlike other stringently controlled welfare programs , like food stamps , farm subsidies place few requirements on people who receive them , and few limits on payments .
Many recipients never have to set foot on the farm or ride in a tractor to get paid .
That ’ s why EWG has found thousands of people who live in cities , and some who live on golf courses , who have received MFP payments .
A new Government Accountability Office report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The GAO found that for eight of 25 farms that got the largest payments in 2019 , the recipients qualified only through “ active personal management.
” To qualify under that definition , recipients need only dial in to a few shareholder conferences a year .
Part of the reason MFP payments were larger in 2019 than in 2018 was because the Trump administration increased the per-person payment limit from $ 125,000 to $ 250,000 .
In 2019 , his increase sent an extra $ 519 million to the largest farms .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals : Farms can have an unlimited number of people who get payments , and each person can get up to $ 250,000 .
EWG has found multiple farms that have received millions of dollars through different farm subsidy programs .
For example , two of the largest MFP recipients were Smith & Sons , based in Bishop , Texas , which got total payments of more than $ 3.2 million , and Deline Farms Partnership of Charleston , Mo.
, which received more than $ 2.9 million .
The largest CFAP payment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ireton , Iowa , which received more than $ 2.5 million .
Records of 2019 top recipients also list several banks and financial institutions .
If a farm had an operating loan with a bank , the bank received the farm ’ s bailout check , and USDA listed them as recipients in response to our FOIA request .
Many of the biggest MFP recipients in the Farm Subsidy Database are now banks – another blow against federal farm program transparency , because if the checks are sent to banks , taxpayers do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money .
As with older , traditional farm subsidy programs , the largest farms , which need the help the least , received the most taxpayer dollars from these two new programs .
USDA must make changes to ensure the money goes to small struggling farms and to farmers who actually do the work .
In a welcome change , the Farm Service Agency recently released rules that would require anyone who receives traditional subsidies through “ active personal management ” alone to contribute at least 25 percent of the farm ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ management , a year .
These rules will go far in reducing subsidies for people who don ’ t provide a significant contribution to the farm , and it is hoped they will lower the number of “ city slickers ” in every major American city , from Manhattan to Las Vegas , who receive government payments .
But the new rules apply only to traditional farm subsidy programs established in the farm bill .
The USDA should apply these rules to any future MFP , CFAP or other ad hoc farm subsidy @ @

The largest and wealthiest U.S. farm businesses received the biggest share of almost $33 billion in payments from two subsidy programs – one created by the Trump administration to respond to the president’s trade war and the other by Congress in response to the coronavirus pandemic, according to updates to EWG’s Farm Subsidy Database.
The Market Facilitation Program, or MFP, was intended to offset the perceived damage done by the administration’s trade war, which reduced many farmers’ access to lucrative Chinese markets. Payments for the 2018 and 2019 crop years were just over $23 billion – more than $8.5 billion for 2018 and $14.5 billion for 2019.
EWG’s analysis of Department of Agriculture records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, shows:
The top 1 percent of farms, the largest agribusinesses in the country, received 16 percent of MFP payments, or more than $3.8 billion. The average total payment for a farm in the top 1 percent was $524,689.
The top 10 percent of farms received more than half of all MFP payments, with farms in the top 10 percent getting an average payment of $185,412.
The bottom 80 percent of farms, the small- and mid-sized operations struggling the most, got just 23 percent of MFP payments, with an average per-farm payment of $9,109.
The Coronavirus Food Assistance Program, or CFAP, was intended to help farmers hurt by the pandemic-induced economic downturn. As of Sept. 13, CFAP payments totaled more than $9.9 billion, but the Department of Agriculture has not yet responded to EWG’s FOIA request for records of the most recent payments. Last week, President Trump announced a second round of CFAP payments, sending an additional $14 billion to farmers.
We have obtained and analyzed records for $5 billion in CFAP payments through June 30, and they show that CFAP payments through that date went to the largest farm operations, even more than the MFP.
The top 1 percent of farms got 22 percent of CFAP payments, for an average payment of $352,432.
The smallest 80 percent of farms received 23 percent of CFAP payments, for an average payment of $4,677.
Unlike other stringently controlled welfare programs, like food stamps, farm subsidies place few requirements on people who receive them, and few limits on payments. Many recipients never have to set foot on the farm or ride in a tractor to get paid. That’s why EWG has found thousands of people who live in cities, and some who live on golf courses, who have received MFP payments.
A new Government Accountability Office report released last week found the same trend. The GAO found that for eight of 25 farms that got the largest payments in 2019, the recipients qualified only through “active personal management.” To qualify under that definition, recipients need only dial in to a few shareholder conferences a year.
Part of the reason MFP payments were larger in 2019 than in 2018 was because the Trump administration increased the per-person payment limit from $125,000 to $250,000. In 2019, his increase sent an extra $519 million to the largest farms. And this payment limit applies only to individuals: Farms can have an unlimited number of people who get payments, and each person can get up to $250,000.
EWG has found multiple farms that have received millions of dollars through different farm subsidy programs. For example, two of the largest MFP recipients were Smith & Sons, based in Bishop, Texas, which got total payments of more than $3.2 million, and Deline Farms Partnership of Charleston, Mo., which received more than $2.9 million. The largest CFAP payment through June went to Titan Swine of Ireton, Iowa, which received more than $2.5 million.
Records of 2019 top recipients also list several banks and financial institutions. If a farm had an operating loan with a bank, the bank received the farm’s bailout check, and USDA listed them as recipients in response to our FOIA request. Many of the biggest MFP recipients in the Farm Subsidy Database are now banks – another blow against federal farm program transparency, because if the checks are sent to banks, taxpayers do not know who is actually getting the money.
As with older, traditional farm subsidy programs, the largest farms, which need the help the least, received the most taxpayer dollars from these two new programs. USDA must make changes to ensure the money goes to small struggling farms and to farmers who actually do the work.
In a welcome change, the Farm Service Agency recently released rules that would require anyone who receives traditional subsidies through “active personal management” alone to contribute at least 25 percent of the farm’s total management, or 500 hours of management, a year.
These rules will go far in reducing subsidies for people who don’t provide a significant contribution to the farm, and it is hoped they will lower the number of “city slickers” in every major American city, from Manhattan to Las Vegas, who receive government payments.
But the new rules apply only to traditional farm subsidy programs established in the farm bill. The USDA should apply these rules to any future MFP, CFAP or other ad hoc farm subsidy programs.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-22--Study: More Than 125,000 Farmworkers Have Contracted Covid-19

The Covid-19 virus has infected more than 125,000 U.S. farmworkers , according to the latest estimates in an ongoing study by Purdue University .
To arrive at their estimates , researchers applied the county-by-county rate of the infection ’ s spread to the number of farmworkers and farmers in those counties .
As could be expected , the states with the most farmworkers – as estimated by farm labor spending in the U.S .
Agricultural Census – top Purdue ’ s list .
Three of the five states with the most farmworkers lead the list of infections .
Texas has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Florida has 6,380 .
But after the top states , outliers pop up .
The fourth through sixth highest number of farmworker infections are in Iowa ( 5,680 ) , Tennessee ( 4,410 ) and Missouri ( 3,960 ) .
Each of those states ranked much higher in Covid-19 infections than in number of farmworkers .
What could account for the disparity ?
Each of those states is notable for having no mandatory protections for farmworkers to fight Covid-19 .
Missouri and Tennessee have not even developed a set of voluntary guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Iowa has recommended guidelines but no mandatory rules .
The Purdue study goes further into the data to calculate the lost productivity for key sectors of the agricultural market that result from the workforce lost due to COVID-19 .
For example , the Florida agricultural sector is estimated to have lost 3.5 percent of production due to the coronavirus-triggered decline in the workforce .
Florida is among the 26 states that have failed to issue either voluntary or mandatory requirements to protect farmworkers .
The lost farm productivity , across all states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ farmers face other decreases in productivity related to Covid-19 , as well as lost sales from President Trump ’ s ongoing trade wars .
Replacing farmworkers who get sick will not be easy .
Even before the pandemic , farmers were facing labor shortages .
Now that the Trump administration has suspended immigration , fewer farm and food workers will be able to come to the U.S .
In addition , food and farm work can be difficult and dangerous , so food processors and farm labor contractors may struggle to find other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work in meat plants , packing sheds or produce fields .
These factors are almost certain to affect the cost of food at the grocery store .
Food prices are mostly driven by the cost of labor , transportation and marketing , not by the wholesale price of ingredients .
Although the salaries earned by food processing workers and farmworkers are near or below the poverty line , the cost of labor is often a major factor in the price of food .
This means that as more food and farm workers become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ labor increases , the retail price of food will likely rise as well .
Food already accounts for 12 percent of household spending , but the poorest Americans spend about one-third of their income on food , and almost one out of eight households already struggles with hunger .
A survey of farmworkers in California has shown that few employers in the state are providing face masks , and many farmworkers lack access to healthcare .
Studies have also shown that working and living conditions make farmworkers more vulnerable to the virus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ has issued an interim guidance it calls “ a template of action ” to protect farmworkers from the virus .
But employers are not required to follow it .
The CDC says the recommendations can be adapted by agricultural employers and state and local health departments , and that work sites should follow them only “ as feasible.
” Officials at the USDA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration have rejected calls to adopt mandatory emergency worker safety standards for farmworkers .
Legislation passed in May by the House of Representatives would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so far failed to act .
Congress may provide funds for personal protective equipment in spending bills , but that is far from certain .

The Covid-19 virus has infected more than 125,000 U.S. farmworkers, according to the latest estimates in an ongoing study by Purdue University.
To arrive at their estimates, researchers applied the county-by-county rate of the infection’s spread to the number of farmworkers and farmers in those counties. As could be expected, the states with the most farmworkers – as estimated by farm labor spending in the U.S. Agricultural Census – top Purdue’s list. Three of the five states with the most farmworkers lead the list of infections. Texas has 15,410 farmworker infections, California has 10,640 and Florida has 6,380.
But after the top states, outliers pop up. The fourth through sixth highest number of farmworker infections are in Iowa (5,680), Tennessee (4,410) and Missouri (3,960). Each of those states ranked much higher in Covid-19 infections than in number of farmworkers.
What could account for the disparity?
Each of those states is notable for having no mandatory protections for farmworkers to fight Covid-19. Missouri and Tennessee have not even developed a set of voluntary guidelines for employers and employees to follow, and Iowa has recommended guidelines but no mandatory rules.
The Purdue study goes further into the data to calculate the lost productivity for key sectors of the agricultural market that result from the workforce lost due to COVID-19. For example, the Florida agricultural sector is estimated to have lost 3.5 percent of production due to the coronavirus-triggered decline in the workforce. Florida is among the 26 states that have failed to issue either voluntary or mandatory requirements to protect farmworkers.
The lost farm productivity, across all states and sectors, is especially damaging as farmers face other decreases in productivity related to Covid-19, as well as lost sales from President Trump’s ongoing trade wars.
Replacing farmworkers who get sick will not be easy. Even before the pandemic, farmers were facing labor shortages. Now that the Trump administration has suspended immigration, fewer farm and food workers will be able to come to the U.S. In addition, food and farm work can be difficult and dangerous, so food processors and farm labor contractors may struggle to find other workers willing to risk their lives to work in meat plants, packing sheds or produce fields.
These factors are almost certain to affect the cost of food at the grocery store. Food prices are mostly driven by the cost of labor, transportation and marketing, not by the wholesale price of ingredients. Although the salaries earned by food processing workers and farmworkers are near or below the poverty line, the cost of labor is often a major factor in the price of food.
This means that as more food and farm workers become sick, and the cost of their labor increases, the retail price of food will likely rise as well. Food already accounts for 12 percent of household spending, but the poorest Americans spend about one-third of their income on food, and almost one out of eight households already struggles with hunger.
A survey of farmworkers in California has shown that few employers in the state are providing face masks, and many farmworkers lack access to healthcare. Studies have also shown that working and living conditions make farmworkers more vulnerable to the virus.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has issued an interim guidance it calls “a template of action” to protect farmworkers from the virus. But employers are not required to follow it. The CDC says the recommendations can be adapted by agricultural employers and state and local health departments, and that work sites should follow them only “as feasible.”
Officials at the USDA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration have rejected calls to adopt mandatory emergency worker safety standards for farmworkers. Legislation passed in May by the House of Representatives would require protections, but the Senate has so far failed to act. Congress may provide funds for personal protective equipment in spending bills, but that is far from certain.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-23--EWG Statement on House Bill To Increase Anti-Hunger Assistance

The following is a statement from Scott Faber , senior vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group @ @ @ @ @ H.R .
8319 .
We applaud House leaders for increasing and extending nutrition assistance programs @ @ @ @ @ .
President Trump ’ s mismanagement of the Covid-19 pandemic has dramatically increased hunger , @ @ @ @ @ are disappointed that House leaders did not also provide food and farm workers threated by @ @ @ @ @ did not do more to help struggling family farms and restaurants .
Although it is @ @ @ @ @ hungry , it is equally important that we protect and support those who keep us @ @

The following is a statement from Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, on House passage of H.R. 8319.
We applaud House leaders for increasing and extending nutrition assistance programs, especially for school children. President Trump’s mismanagement of the Covid-19 pandemic has dramatically increased hunger, especially among children. We are disappointed that House leaders did not also provide food and farm workers threated by Covid-19 with more protections and did not do more to help struggling family farms and restaurants. Although it is critical that no American goes hungry, it is equally important that we protect and support those who keep us fed.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-25--EWG News Roundup (9/25): EWG Calls for CDC Director To Resign, Farmer Bailout and Covid-19 Payments

EWG News Roundup (9/25): EWG Calls for CDC Director To Resign, Farmer Bailout and Covid-19 Payments Flowing to Rich Farmers and More

This week , EWG President Ken Cook called for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Robert Redfield to step down .
Cook cited overwhelming mismanagement of the Covid-19 crisis at the behest of anti-science political leaders as the reason for the director to leave his post .
“ Never before has a CDC leader dragged the agency through such a series of manifestly deadly misstatements of science , willful communications blunders and life-threatening guidance flip-flops , ” said Cook .
“ All at the behest of political leaders whose publicly avowed goal is to minimize the mortal danger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people.
” This week , EWG analyzed new data that shows the largest and wealthiest of farms have received the lion ’ s share of the $ 33 billion in payments handed out due to President Trump ’ s farmer bailout and Covid-19 assistance .
A recent Purdue University study estimates that more than 125,000 farmworkers have been infected with Covid-19 .
The study found that some of the most affected states – Iowa , Tennessee and Missouri – have no mandatory protections in place to safeguard workers from the virus .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Health site , EWG took a look at artificial sweeteners and what they mean for your child ’ s health .
Here ’ s some news you can use going into the weekend .
W3ll People has successfully fused skincare and makeup for 13 years now .
Their products are approved by the Environmental Working Group last 2016 which indicates the complete absence of toxic material .
The chemicals used in some brands are cancer-inducing or carcinogenic .
EWG ’ s Call for the Resignation of Dr. Redfield , Head of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC retracts its guidance that stipulated the airborne danger of the coronavirus Ken Cook , president and co-founder of the Environmental Working Group , has recently called for the resignation of Dr. Robert Redfield , the head of the CDC , for his politicization of the institution and acquiescing to pressures .
“ So Congress has to allocate that funding if this is really going to happen , ” said Anne Schechinger , an economic analyst at the Environmental Working Group .
In the 2018-2019 crop years , more than half of about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Market Facilitation Program went to the top 10 % of farms , according to the Environmental Working Group , a critic of agribusiness subsidies .
HuffPost : Lawmakers Don ’ t Have To Disclose Federal Loans .
2 Democrats Want To Change That .
In 2017 , the Environmental Working Group found that more than 30 lawmakers from both parties and their immediate family members collected upward of $ 15 million in federal farming subsidies , while farm bill negotiations were ongoing .
The Environmental Working Group , which monitors farm subsidies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program ( CFAP ) received one-fifth of disbursements , or nearly $ 1.1 billion of the $ 5 billion paid during June , the first month of CFAP .
Detroit Free Press : Despite tough times , Michigan 's farmers say Trump has their back .
Here 's why A recent study by the Environmental Working Group , using U.S. Department of Agriculture data , found that nationwide the top 1 % of farms received 16 % of Market Facilitation Program payments , to address the trade war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Assistance Program payments , while the bottom 80 % of farms received just 23 % of the payments made under both programs .
Washington Examiner : Trump administration doling out billions to farmers before the election “ The Trump administration wants the farm subsidies to give a lot of money to his base of voters in rural areas less than two months before election , ” said Anne Schechinger , senior economic analyst at the Environmental Working Group , a nonprofit advocacy group .
“ It makes one wonder about the timing.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Loeffler ’ s Family Has Taken In $ 3 Million in Farm Subsidies The information is listed publicly in a farm subsidy database maintained by the Environmental Working Group .
The nonprofit collects records from the U.S. Department of Agriculture through Freedom of Information Act requests and posts them to the database—because the government won ’ t .
Citizen Petition : FDA Needs to Consider Cumulative Effects of Food Chemicals CNN : FDA must do more to regulate thousands of chemicals added to your food , petitioners say The petition is currently supported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Strategy Center , the Environmental Working Group , and Healthy Babies Bright Futures .
To understand the severity of this matter , the Environmental Working Group ( EWG ) commissioned laboratory tests to determine the effects of pollutants .
The tests found as many as 232 chemicals in newborns in the study ; the chemicals included mercury , fire retardants , pesticides , and Teflon chemicals .
( Reprinted from Associated Press ) U.S. News & World Report : Small Minnesota Farmers Challenge Conventional Agriculture In June , the DNR decided to not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It decided that any potential impacts from the irrigation plan were minimal or could be managed through regulations .
Connell joined an appeal of the department ’ s decision led by the Environmental Working Group and other clean water advocacy organizations .
Look for eco-friendly cleaning products with natural , biodegradable ingredients — you can consult with the Environmental Working Group ’ s ( EWG ) Guide to Healthy Cleaning for verified cleaning products .
Healthy : By Marlowe : 6 Reasons An Air Purifier is Worth the Money EWG and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of carpet in your home , ventilating by opening doors and windows , especially within the first 72 hours of installation , or choosing natural materials like wool , bamboo or jute , which don ’ t have this off-gassing problem .
Forbes : How To Use Your Spending And Investing To Increase Your Civic Power You can do a web search for activist or advocacy groups that are aligned with your values .
For example , the Environment Working Group or EWG is considered to be a touchstone for concerned citizens looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Hello Glow : Here ’ s What You Need to Know About Hormones and Acne Makeup , lotions , shampoo , and other beauty and skincare products contain toxic ingredients such as parabens , triclosan , and SLS .
Check the products you ’ re currently using on the EWG Skin Deep website and swap them out for cleaner alternatives .
Even better—make your own !
Who What Wear : 5 Sneaky Face-Wash Ingredients That Dry Out Your Skin—and What to Buy Instead As the Environmental Working Group reports , that probability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are `` allowed to use almost any ingredient they wish '' when formulating products , and `` the U.S. government does n't review the safety of products before they 're sold , '' writes the EWG .
The EWG Verified seal means that they meet the strictest standards for transparency and healthfulness as set by the Environmental Working Group , so you can be sure they ’ re free from the EWG ’ s chemicals of concern .
In April 2018 , Kardashian teamed with the Environmental Working Group for a trip to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brief staffers on the Personal Care Products Safety Act introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Sen. Susan Collins , which proposed updating the Food and Drug Administration ’ s over 80-year-old guidance on the beauty industry .
Los Angeles Times : Op-Ed : One water district is trying to make sure agriculture cleans up its own mess One of the most pervasive forms of groundwater pollution is nitrate , a key component of farm fertilizer and manure .
In 2017 , water systems serving 10.9 million Californians were contaminated with nitrate at or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study published in June by the Environmental Working Group .
Army Times : Are military efforts to clean up and replace toxic ‘ forever chemicals ’ cutting it ?
But PFAS contamination has become a military-wide problem , with more than 700 military installations having either confirmed or suspected cases of contamination , according to the Environmental Working Group .
Consumer Reports and The Guardian : Why Dangerous 'Forever Chemicals ' Are Still Allowed in America 's Drinking Water Indeed , PFAS have been detected in the drinking water of more than 1,400 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research by the PFAS Project at Northeastern University in Boston and the Environmental Working Group ( EWG ) , an advocacy organization that estimates that 110 million people may have tap water contaminated with the chemicals .
International Business Times : US Is Still Drinking Water With Dangerous 'Forever Chemicals' The PFAS Project at Northeastern University in Boston and the Environmental Working Group ( EWG ) has estimated that more than 100 million people may have had tap water contaminated with PFAS , said Consumer Reports .
“ The research team said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cause-and-effect relationship between the filtration of drinking water containing high amounts of PFAS and better reproductive outcomes , ” the Environmental Working Group explained .
Easy Health Options : How not to get breast cancer from your salad Finally , the Environmental Working Group ( EWG ) is an excellent source of information .
Their annual Dirty Dozen and Clean Fifteen produce lists will help you stay away from the fruits and vegetables more likely to be contaminated , in favor of those that are generally cleaner and free of pesticides .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 is one of the highly rated as one of the Best Beach & Sport Sunscreen by The Environmental Working Group .
Patch ( East Brunswick , N.J. ) : Environmental group says Perth Amboy Councilman is all wet Perth Amboy Councilman Jelmin J. Caba , one of five mayoral candidates and also the city 's Democratic Party chairman , accused critics of `` trying to frighten voters with 'fake news ' about water contamination , '' after another contender cited to a report from the Environmental Working Group that said there are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city 's drinking water .

This week, EWG President Ken Cook called for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Robert Redfield to step down. Cook cited overwhelming mismanagement of the Covid-19 crisis at the behest of anti-science political leaders as the reason for the director to leave his post.
“Never before has a CDC leader dragged the agency through such a series of manifestly deadly misstatements of science, willful communications blunders and life-threatening guidance flip-flops,” said Cook. “All at the behest of political leaders whose publicly avowed goal is to minimize the mortal danger the novel coronavirus poses to the American people.”
This week, EWG analyzed new data that shows the largest and wealthiest of farms have received the lion’s share of the $33 billion in payments handed out due to President Trump’s farmer bailout and Covid-19 assistance.
A recent Purdue University study estimates that more than 125,000 farmworkers have been infected with Covid-19. The study found that some of the most affected states – Iowa, Tennessee and Missouri – have no mandatory protections in place to safeguard workers from the virus.
And finally, over on our Children’s Health site, EWG took a look at artificial sweeteners and what they mean for your child’s health.
Here’s some news you can use going into the weekend.
Children’s Health
SunStar Davao (Philippines): Make-up safe for pregnant and breastfeeding mommies
W3ll People has successfully fused skincare and makeup for 13 years now. Their products are approved by the Environmental Working Group last 2016 which indicates the complete absence of toxic material. The chemicals used in some brands are cancer-inducing or carcinogenic.
EWG’s Call for the Resignation of Dr. Redfield, Head of the CDC
World Socialist Web Site: The CDC retracts its guidance that stipulated the airborne danger of the coronavirus
Ken Cook, president and co-founder of the Environmental Working Group, has recently called for the resignation of Dr. Robert Redfield, the head of the CDC, for his politicization of the institution and acquiescing to pressures.
Farm Subsidies
Marketplace: Farmer aid agreement removes obstacle to federal shutdown negotiations
“So Congress has to allocate that funding if this is really going to happen,” said Anne Schechinger, an economic analyst at the Environmental Working Group.
Bloomberg: Richest Farms Reap Bulk of U.S. Agriculture Aid, Study Shows
In the 2018-2019 crop years, more than half of about $23 billion in payments from the Market Facilitation Program went to the top 10% of farms, according to the Environmental Working Group, a critic of agribusiness subsidies.
HuffPost: Lawmakers Don’t Have To Disclose Federal Loans. 2 Democrats Want To Change That.
In 2017, the Environmental Working Group found that more than 30 lawmakers from both parties and their immediate family members collected upward of $15 million in federal farming subsidies, while farm bill negotiations were ongoing.
Successful Farming: Very Large Farms Collect One-Fifth of USDA’s Coronavirus Payments
The Environmental Working Group, which monitors farm subsidies, said the largest 1% of farms in the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) received one-fifth of disbursements, or nearly $1.1 billion of the $5 billion paid during June, the first month of CFAP.
Detroit Free Press: Despite tough times, Michigan's farmers say Trump has their back. Here's why
A recent study by the Environmental Working Group, using U.S. Department of Agriculture data, found that nationwide the top 1% of farms received 16% of Market Facilitation Program payments, to address the trade war, and 22% of Coronavirus Food Assistance Program payments, while the bottom 80% of farms received just 23% of the payments made under both programs.
Washington Examiner: Trump administration doling out billions to farmers before the election
“The Trump administration wants the farm subsidies to give a lot of money to his base of voters in rural areas less than two months before election,” said Anne Schechinger, senior economic analyst at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit advocacy group. “It makes one wonder about the timing.”
The American Prospect: Ultra-Rich Sen. Kelly Loeffler’s Family Has Taken In $3 Million in Farm Subsidies
The information is listed publicly in a farm subsidy database maintained by the Environmental Working Group. The nonprofit collects records from the U.S. Department of Agriculture through Freedom of Information Act requests and posts them to the database—because the government won’t.
Citizen Petition: FDA Needs to Consider Cumulative Effects of Food Chemicals
CNN: FDA must do more to regulate thousands of chemicals added to your food, petitioners say
The petition is currently supported by the Environmental Defense Fund…the Environmental Health Strategy Center, the Environmental Working Group, and Healthy Babies Bright Futures.
Body Burden
Insteading: 11 Steps to Minimize Indoor Pollutants and Live Greener
To understand the severity of this matter, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) commissioned laboratory tests to determine the effects of pollutants. The tests found as many as 232 chemicals in newborns in the study; the chemicals included mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and Teflon chemicals.
COVID-19 and Farm Workers
(Reprinted from Associated Press) U.S. News & World Report: Small Minnesota Farmers Challenge Conventional Agriculture
In June, the DNR decided to not order a more in-depth environmental impact study. It decided that any potential impacts from the irrigation plan were minimal or could be managed through regulations. Connell joined an appeal of the department’s decision led by the Environmental Working Group and other clean water advocacy organizations.
Cleaning Products
Earth911: Eco-Friendly Products and the Trickle-Down Effect
Look for eco-friendly cleaning products with natural, biodegradable ingredients — you can consult with the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) Guide to Healthy Cleaning for verified cleaning products.
Consumer Products
Healthy: By Marlowe: 6 Reasons An Air Purifier is Worth the Money
EWG and other consumer health organizations recommend limiting the amount of carpet in your home, ventilating by opening doors and windows, especially within the first 72 hours of installation, or choosing natural materials like wool, bamboo or jute, which don’t have this off-gassing problem.
Skin Deep® Cosmetics Database
Forbes: How To Use Your Spending And Investing To Increase Your Civic Power
You can do a web search for activist or advocacy groups that are aligned with your values. For example, the Environment Working Group or EWG is considered to be a touchstone for concerned citizens looking for ways to vet personal care items.
Hello Glow: Here’s What You Need to Know About Hormones and Acne
Makeup, lotions, shampoo, and other beauty and skincare products contain toxic ingredients such as parabens, triclosan, and SLS. Check the products you’re currently using on the EWG Skin Deep website and swap them out for cleaner alternatives. Even better—make your own!
Who What Wear: 5 Sneaky Face-Wash Ingredients That Dry Out Your Skin—and What to Buy Instead
As the Environmental Working Group reports, that probability is high. Cosmetic and personal-care companies are "allowed to use almost any ingredient they wish" when formulating products, and "the U.S. government doesn't review the safety of products before they're sold," writes the EWG.
EWG VERIFIED®
Camila Coelho: Meet Elaluz Skincare: Beauty Oil & All Day Beauty Water
The EWG Verified seal means that they meet the strictest standards for transparency and healthfulness as set by the Environmental Working Group, so you can be sure they’re free from the EWG’s chemicals of concern.
Kourtney Kardashian
Women’s Wear Daily: Kourtney Kardashian’s Poosh Virtual Wellness Festival to Offer Self-Guided Hypnosis, In-House Spiritual Coach
In April 2018, Kardashian teamed with the Environmental Working Group for a trip to Washington, D.C., where she helped brief staffers on the Personal Care Products Safety Act introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Sen. Susan Collins, which proposed updating the Food and Drug Administration’s over 80-year-old guidance on the beauty industry.
Nitrate Water Pollution
Los Angeles Times: Op-Ed: One water district is trying to make sure agriculture cleans up its own mess
One of the most pervasive forms of groundwater pollution is nitrate, a key component of farm fertilizer and manure. In 2017, water systems serving 10.9 million Californians were contaminated with nitrate at or above legal limits, according to a study published in June by the Environmental Working Group.
PFAS Contamination of Military Installations
Army Times: Are military efforts to clean up and replace toxic ‘forever chemicals’ cutting it?
But PFAS contamination has become a military-wide problem, with more than 700 military installations having either confirmed or suspected cases of contamination, according to the Environmental Working Group.
PFAS in Drinking Water
Consumer Reports and The Guardian: Why Dangerous 'Forever Chemicals' Are Still Allowed in America's Drinking Water
Indeed, PFAS have been detected in the drinking water of more than 1,400 communities in 49 states, according to research by the PFAS Project at Northeastern University in Boston and the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an advocacy organization that estimates that 110 million people may have tap water contaminated with the chemicals.
International Business Times: US Is Still Drinking Water With Dangerous 'Forever Chemicals'
The PFAS Project at Northeastern University in Boston and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) has estimated that more than 100 million people may have had tap water contaminated with PFAS, said Consumer Reports.
PFAS and Endocrine Disruption
Water Online: New Study Finds Cause-And-Effect Between PFAS Consumption, Reproductive Issues
“The research team said the study is the first to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between the filtration of drinking water containing high amounts of PFAS and better reproductive outcomes,” the Environmental Working Group explained.
Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce™
Easy Health Options: How not to get breast cancer from your salad
Finally, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) is an excellent source of information. Their annual Dirty Dozen and Clean Fifteen produce lists will help you stay away from the fruits and vegetables more likely to be contaminated, in favor of those that are generally cleaner and free of pesticides.
EWG Guide to Sunscreens
Patch (Downers Grove, Ill.): C'est Moi skincare raises the bar
The Gentle Mineral Sunscreen Lotion Broad Spectrum SPF 30 is one of the highly rated as one of the Best Beach & Sport Sunscreen by The Environmental Working Group.
Tap Water Database
Patch (East Brunswick, N.J.): Environmental group says Perth Amboy Councilman is all wet
Perth Amboy Councilman Jelmin J. Caba, one of five mayoral candidates and also the city's Democratic Party chairman, accused critics of "trying to frighten voters with 'fake news' about water contamination," after another contender cited to a report from the Environmental Working Group that said there are at least 25 cancer causing contaminants in the city's drinking water.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-25--EWG Comments to California OEHHA Supporting Their Decision on Synthetic Food Dyes

EWG Comments to California OEHHA Supporting Their Decision on Synthetic Food Dyes EWG submitted comments to the California Office of @ @ @ @ @ expressing support for the OEHHA ’ s conclusion that synthetic food dyes may cause or @ @ @ @ @ children .

Chewing gum has long been popular among people of all ages. It’s a convenient way to freshen your breath, curb cravings and relieve stress. But before you reach for that stick of gum, you may want to...


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-28--EWG Applaud HEROES 2.0 Act

EWG Applaud HEROES 2.0 Act

WASHINGTON – Today the House unveiled the HEROES 2.0 Act .
Here is a statement from EWG Senior Vice President @ @ @ @ @ : Millions of families are struggling with hunger , and millions of workers are risking @ @ @ @ @ fed .
Speaker Pelosi is right to boost funding to feed hungry Americans through the @ @ @ @ @ sick pay and personal protective equipment for food and farm workers , and to direct @ @ @ @ @ Administration to issue emergency standards to protect food and farm workers .
More than 20 @ @ @ @ @ , pack , process , transport , sell and serve our food .
But many @ @ @ @ @ us are unusually susceptible to the coronavirus sweeping the nation .
Farm and food workers @ @ @ @ @ at enormous personal risk , to feed us .
Congress , the Department of Agriculture @ @ @ @ @ effort to protect these essential workers and recognize the critical contribution they make to our @ @ @ @ @ leaders for making hungry families and the people who feed us a priority .

WASHINGTON – Today the House unveiled the HEROES 2.0 Act. Here is a statement from EWG Senior Vice President for Government Affairs Scott Faber:
Millions of families are struggling with hunger, and millions of workers are risking their lives to keep us fed. Speaker Pelosi is right to boost funding to feed hungry Americans through the SNAP program, to provide sick pay and personal protective equipment for food and farm workers, and to direct the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to issue emergency standards to protect food and farm workers.
More than 20 million people grow, harvest, pack, process, transport, sell and serve our food. But many of the people who feed us are unusually susceptible to the coronavirus sweeping the nation. Farm and food workers are working long hours, at enormous personal risk, to feed us. Congress, the Department of Agriculture and OSHA must make every effort to protect these essential workers and recognize the critical contribution they make to our nation.
We applaud House leaders for making hungry families and the people who feed us a priority.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-29--California Requires Millions of Children To Be Tested for Lead Exposure

SACRAMENTO , Calif. – California Gov .
Gavin Newsom on Monday signed into law a measure to protect millions of children from the developmental and health impacts of toxic lead exposure .
Assembly Bill 2276 ensures that the state screen and test the children most at risk of lead poisoning .
“ We thank Gov .
Newsom for ensuring that all toddlers on Medi-Cal are tested for lead , ” said Susan Little , EWG 's senior advocate for California government affairs .
“ The governor has demonstrated that safeguarding our children ’ s health is a priority.
” This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reyes ( D-San Bernardino ) , Cristina Garcia ( D-Bell Gardens ) , Bill Quirk ( D-Hayward ) and Rudy Salas ( D-Bakersfield ) .
A report by the state auditor found more than 1.4 million children covered by Medi-Cal , California ’ s Medicaid healthcare program , did not receive proper lead tests and that the state Department of Public Health was neglecting the prevention of lead poisoning .
AB 2276 holds Medi-Cal managed care plans accountable for testing children in their care .
Plans and doctors will have to pay careful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the state will clearly be able to sanction plans that fail to comply with the testing requirements .
State law already requires that children enrolled in Medi-Cal receive tests for elevated lead levels between the ages of one and two years old .
“ Lead is a major threat to children ’ s health , ” said Olga Naidenko , Ph.D. , vice president for science investigations at EWG .
“ Exposure to lead can result in developmental delays , attention deficit issues , cognitive disorders , behavioral disorders and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There is no safe level of lead in a child ’ s body.
” The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention agree there is no safe level of lead in children .
Lead is a carcinogen , harms kidney function and has been linked to delayed growth .
Lead exposure in children can lead to learning disabilities and serious health consequences .
“ Testing is essential to identify highly exposed children and the neighborhoods where kids are at greater risk of lead exposure , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Garcia , Quirk and Salas for elevating the issue of testing California ’ s most vulnerable children for lead and authoring this legislation.
” This law addresses many of the key issues identified in the state auditor ’ s report , and will require the Department of Health Care Services , managed care plans and providers to prioritize protective lead screening services for Medi-Cal children .
Under the law ’ s provisions , Medi-Cal managed care plans are required to identify enrolled children who have not received the required lead tests , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provider , as well as state regulators , about the missed tests .
With the enactment of AB 2276 , California can now clearly sanction managed care plans that don ’ t comply with lead testing requirements .
In addition , the bill codifies additional risk factors the Department of Public Health must consider when determining how doctors should screen children for lead .
The department is also required to update its funding formula for local lead poisoning prevention programs to account for the presence of all lead-exposed children in a county .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the California Coalition of Welfare Rights Organizations and the Western Center on Law and Poverty .
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit , non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment .
Through research , advocacy and unique education tools , EWG drives consumer choice and civic action .

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday signed into law a measure to protect millions of children from the developmental and health impacts of toxic lead exposure. Assembly Bill 2276 ensures that the state screen and test the children most at risk of lead poisoning.
“We thank Gov. Newsom for ensuring that all toddlers on Medi-Cal are tested for lead,” said Susan Little, EWG's senior advocate for California government affairs. “The governor has demonstrated that safeguarding our children’s health is a priority.”
This legislation was jointly authored by Assemblymembers Eloise Reyes (D-San Bernardino), Cristina Garcia (D-Bell Gardens), Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) and Rudy Salas (D-Bakersfield).
A report by the state auditor found more than 1.4 million children covered by Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid healthcare program, did not receive proper lead tests and that the state Department of Public Health was neglecting the prevention of lead poisoning. AB 2276 holds Medi-Cal managed care plans accountable for testing children in their care. Plans and doctors will have to pay careful attention to children’s lead-testing outcomes, and the state will clearly be able to sanction plans that fail to comply with the testing requirements.
State law already requires that children enrolled in Medi-Cal receive tests for elevated lead levels between the ages of one and two years old.
“Lead is a major threat to children’s health,” said Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., vice president for science investigations at EWG. “Exposure to lead can result in developmental delays, attention deficit issues, cognitive disorders, behavioral disorders and a lifetime of severe mental and physical ailments. There is no safe level of lead in a child’s body.”
The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention agree there is no safe level of lead in children. Lead is a carcinogen, harms kidney function and has been linked to delayed growth. Lead exposure in children can lead to learning disabilities and serious health consequences.
“Testing is essential to identify highly exposed children and the neighborhoods where kids are at greater risk of lead exposure,” said Little. “We thank Assemblymembers Reyes, Garcia, Quirk and Salas for elevating the issue of testing California’s most vulnerable children for lead and authoring this legislation.”
This law addresses many of the key issues identified in the state auditor’s report, and will require the Department of Health Care Services, managed care plans and providers to prioritize protective lead screening services for Medi-Cal children. Under the law’s provisions, Medi-Cal managed care plans are required to identify enrolled children who have not received the required lead tests, and notify the child’s healthcare provider, as well as state regulators, about the missed tests.
With the enactment of AB 2276, California can now clearly sanction managed care plans that don’t comply with lead testing requirements. In addition, the bill codifies additional risk factors the Department of Public Health must consider when determining how doctors should screen children for lead. The department is also required to update its funding formula for local lead poisoning prevention programs to account for the presence of all lead-exposed children in a county.
This legislation was cosponsored by EWG, the California Coalition of Welfare Rights Organizations and the Western Center on Law and Poverty.
###
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-28--EWG Applauds HEROES 2.0 Act

EWG Applauds HEROES 2.0 Act


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-30--Toxic Beaches: Hundreds of Closures and Health Warnings in 2020

WASHINGTON – Toxic algae and bacteria forced the closure of at least 116 U.S. beaches this year and triggered health warnings at 162 more this spring and summer , according to an investigation by the Environmental Working Group .
From May 5 to September 10 , health officials and other entities in 36 states issued 278 closures of or warnings about lake and ocean beaches , EWG found through a search of online news reports nationwide and a sampling of public health agency websites in nine states in the Southeast and upper Midwest .
“ We found a troubling mishmash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and bacterial contamination of beaches across the country , ” said Anne Schechinger , EWG senior analyst of economics and a coauthor of the report .
“ Dozens of different government agencies and other organizations issued warnings with inconsistent wording , unclear direction and insufficient explanations of human health threats.
” EWG identified 96 different entities that issued warnings .
More than half – 56 – were health officials at the city , county , regional or state level .
Others included cities , the Army Corps of Engineers , state agencies that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonprofit organizations .
They relied on an inconsistent array of terms for their warnings , such as beach advisory , beach closure , contact advisory , contamination advisory , health advisory , high bacteria advisory , recreational advisory , swim advisory and water quality advisory .
Sometimes it wasn ’ t clear what was actually meant by a warning , or whether a beach was closed to human activity .
And many warnings were vague about why they were issued – for example , recommending that people stay out of the water but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be unsafe .
Most advisories were posted online temporarily , and almost no entity archived older warnings .
Michigan had the most reported closures and advisories by far , with 69 .
Florida had 22 , and Iowa and Ohio each had 19 .
But more warnings could simply indicate that water quality monitoring in a given state is more thorough , or that it is easier to find information about warnings .
The bacteria that spurred the advisories were E. coli and enterococci , which are found in the digestive systems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of both bacteria can cause serious illness .
A toxic algae outbreak occurs when an algae bloom – made up of microscopic organisms called cyanobacteria – emits toxins that are dangerous to humans , pets and wildlife .
Farm runoff , a major cause of water pollution that largely is not regulated , is closely linked to toxic algae outbreaks and bacterial contamination .
It is likely that both issues coexist in many locations , but most health departments and other agencies monitor for one contaminant only .
“ Our investigation calls into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beach monitoring program , ” Schechinger said .
“ It also points to the need to hold the agriculture industry accountable for water pollution – and even more importantly , to prevent pollution before it contaminates our waters.
” Because no standard system exists for monitoring water quality at beaches , EWG ’ s report is almost certainly missing many sites where warnings were issued .
And there is no way to know how much contamination was not monitored at all or was found but not covered in the news media .
EWG @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throughout the year .
All of its work on the issue can be found at www.ewg.org/toxicalgae .
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit , non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment .
Through research , advocacy and unique education tools , EWG drives consumer choice and civic action .
Visit www.ewg.org for more information .

WASHINGTON – Toxic algae and bacteria forced the closure of at least 116 U.S. beaches and triggered health warnings at 162 more this spring and summer, according to an investigation by the Environmental Working Group.
From May 5 to September 10, health officials and other entities in 36 states issued 278 closures of or warnings about lake and ocean beaches, EWG found through a search of online news reports nationwide and a sampling of public health agency websites in nine states in the Southeast and upper Midwest.
“We found a troubling mishmash of public safety measures for toxic algae and bacterial contamination of beaches across the country,” said Anne Schechinger, EWG senior analyst of economics and a coauthor of the report. “Dozens of different government agencies and other organizations issued warnings with inconsistent wording, unclear direction and insufficient explanations of human health threats.”
EWG identified 96 different entities that issued warnings. More than half – 56 – were health officials at the city, county, regional or state level. Others included cities, the Army Corps of Engineers, state agencies that oversee parks or the environment, and nonprofit organizations.
They relied on an inconsistent array of terms for their warnings, such as beach advisory, beach closure, contact advisory, contamination advisory, health advisory, high bacteria advisory, recreational advisory, swim advisory and water quality advisory.
Sometimes it wasn’t clear what was actually meant by a warning, or whether a beach was closed to human activity. And many warnings were vague about why they were issued – for example, recommending that people stay out of the water but not specifying why going into the water could be unsafe. Most advisories were posted online temporarily, and almost no entity archived older warnings.
Michigan had the most reported closures and advisories by far, with 69. Florida had 22, and Iowa and Ohio each had 19. But more warnings could simply indicate that water quality monitoring in a given state is more thorough, or that it is easier to find information about warnings.
The bacteria that spurred the advisories were E. coli and enterococci, which are found in the digestive systems of people and animals. Some strains of both bacteria can cause serious illness.
A toxic algae outbreak occurs when an algae bloom – made up of microscopic organisms called cyanobacteria – emits toxins that are dangerous to humans, pets and wildlife.
Farm runoff, a major cause of water pollution that largely is not regulated, is closely linked to toxic algae outbreaks and bacterial contamination. It is likely that both issues coexist in many locations, but most health departments and other agencies monitor for one contaminant only.
“Our investigation calls into stark relief the need for a nationwide beach monitoring program,” Schechinger said. “It also points to the need to hold the agriculture industry accountable for water pollution – and even more importantly, to prevent pollution before it contaminates our waters.”
Because no standard system exists for monitoring water quality at beaches, EWG’s report is almost certainly missing many sites where warnings were issued. And there is no way to know how much contamination was not monitored at all or was found but not covered in the news media.
EWG tracks all news reports of algae outbreaks throughout the year. All of its work on the issue can be found at www.ewg.org/toxicalgae.
###
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action. Visit www.ewg.org for more information.


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-30--California Law Bans Toxic PFAS From Firefighting Foam

SACRAMENTO , Calif. – Today , California Gov .
Gavin Newson signed into law a measure to ban the toxic fluorinated chemicals known as PFAS from firefighting foams .
PFAS-based firefighting foams – known as aqueous film-fighting foam , or AFFF –are among the most significant sources of PFAS water contamination .
Authored by Sen. Ben Allen ( D-Santa Monica ) , the law bans the manufacture , sale and use of firefighting foam containing PFAS from use in most applications by January 1 , 2022 .
The state is required to track sales and keep the public informed of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also are barred , and manufacturers have to disclose to buyers whether firefighting gear contains the compounds .
The bill also restricts the disposal of unused foams .
Violations are subject to civil penalties of up to $ 5,000 for a first violation and $ 10,000 for each subsequent violation .
“ This year has made abundantly clear the crucial work of our heroic firefighters , ” said Bill Allayaud , EWG ’ s director of government affairs for California .
“ Toxic PFAS chemicals in firefighting foams put their health at risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We thank Gov .
Newsom for protecting them from this exposure by signing this bill into law , and thank Sen. Allen for authoring it.
” “ At least 7.5 million Californians have PFAS in their drinking water supplies , and the historic use of PFAS-based firefighting foams is one of the sources of this contamination , ” Allayaud said .
Given that the state is in the process of testing its drinking water sources for PFAS , the number is likely much higher .
Even very low doses of PFAS chemicals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an increased risk of cancer , reproductive and immune system harm , liver or thyroid disease and other health problems .
PFAS do not break down in the environment , spread quickly and bioaccumulate .
All of the detections in California water systems ’ sources exceeded 1 part per trillion , or ppt , the safe level recommended by the best independent studies and endorsed by EWG .
In 2019 , a white paper by an international team of experts at the International Pollutants Elimination Network , or IPEN , found “ unequivocal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with PFAS had “ unacceptably ” high levels of two types of PFAS in their blood .
“ We ask our brave firefighters day in and day out to put their lives at risk for our safety , ” said Sen. Allen .
“ It ’ s only right to put an end to further jeopardizing their health by continuing their exposure to these harmful chemicals .
There are better alternatives out there and now we can begin moving toward those better alternatives .
I ’ m grateful to the governor for prioritizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firefighters and keeping our drinking water clean.
” Viable non-PFAS alternatives to AFFF are already on the market and are used all over the world .
As of April 2019 , there were more than 100 fluorine-free foams available from 24 manufacturers .
These fluorine-free foams meet internationally accepted certifications and approvals , including the International Civil Aviation Organization Level B , an internal oil industry standard known as LASTFIRE , and the International Maritime Organization MSC.1/Circ .
1312 .
In December , Congress made the historic decision to phase out PFAS in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 , Congress directed the Federal Aviation Administration to change its rules so that airports could also switch to PFAS-free foams .
Increasingly , states aren ’ t waiting that long to move to safer and effective alternatives .
California joins Colorado , New Hampshire , New York and Washington to ban all PFAS in firefighting foam , with only limited exceptions , and require reporting of the presence of all PFAS in firefighting gear .
Legislatures in Connecticut , Illinois , Iowa , North Carolina and Vermont are also considering similar bans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in five Californians is contaminated with toxic PFAS , ” said Allayaud .
“ Gov .
Newsom understands it ’ s imperative that we do everything to limit this contamination and reduce the health risks of exposure.
” This legislation was co-sponsored by EWG , Breast Cancer Prevention Partners , the California Professional Firefighters Association , Clean Water Action and the Natural Resources Defense Council .
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit , non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment .
Through research , advocacy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice and civic action .
Visit https : //www.ewg.org/pfaschemicals/

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Today, California Gov. Gavin Newson signed into law a measure to ban the toxic fluorinated chemicals known as PFAS from firefighting foams. PFAS-based firefighting foams – known as aqueous film-fighting foam, or AFFF –are among the most significant sources of PFAS water contamination.
Authored by Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), the law bans the manufacture, sale and use of firefighting foam containing PFAS from use in most applications by January 1, 2022.
The state is required to track sales and keep the public informed of the ban. Use in training classes also are barred, and manufacturers have to disclose to buyers whether firefighting gear contains the compounds. The bill also restricts the disposal of unused foams.
Violations are subject to civil penalties of up to $5,000 for a first violation and $10,000 for each subsequent violation.
“This year has made abundantly clear the crucial work of our heroic firefighters,” said Bill Allayaud, EWG’s director of government affairs for California. “Toxic PFAS chemicals in firefighting foams put their health at risk for cancer and other serious health issues. We thank Gov. Newsom for protecting them from this exposure by signing this bill into law, and thank Sen. Allen for authoring it.”
“At least 7.5 million Californians have PFAS in their drinking water supplies, and the historic use of PFAS-based firefighting foams is one of the sources of this contamination,” Allayaud said. Given that the state is in the process of testing its drinking water sources for PFAS, the number is likely much higher.
Even very low doses of PFAS chemicals in drinking water have been linked to an increased risk of cancer, reproductive and immune system harm, liver or thyroid disease and other health problems. PFAS do not break down in the environment, spread quickly and bioaccumulate. All of the detections in California water systems’ sources exceeded 1 part per trillion, or ppt, the safe level recommended by the best independent studies and endorsed by EWG.
In 2019, a white paper by an international team of experts at the International Pollutants Elimination Network, or IPEN, found “unequivocal evidence” that firefighters using foams made with PFAS had “unacceptably” high levels of two types of PFAS in their blood.
“We ask our brave firefighters day in and day out to put their lives at risk for our safety,” said Sen. Allen. “It’s only right to put an end to further jeopardizing their health by continuing their exposure to these harmful chemicals. There are better alternatives out there and now we can begin moving toward those better alternatives. I’m grateful to the governor for prioritizing the health of our state’s firefighters and keeping our drinking water clean.”
Viable non-PFAS alternatives to AFFF are already on the market and are used all over the world. As of April 2019, there were more than 100 fluorine-free foams available from 24 manufacturers. These fluorine-free foams meet internationally accepted certifications and approvals, including the International Civil Aviation Organization Level B, an internal oil industry standard known as LASTFIRE, and the International Maritime Organization MSC.1/Circ. 1312.
In December, Congress made the historic decision to phase out PFAS in military firefighting foams by 2024. In 2018, Congress directed the Federal Aviation Administration to change its rules so that airports could also switch to PFAS-free foams.
Increasingly, states aren’t waiting that long to move to safer and effective alternatives. California joins Colorado, New Hampshire, New York and Washington to ban all PFAS in firefighting foam, with only limited exceptions, and require reporting of the presence of all PFAS in firefighting gear. Legislatures in Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, North Carolina and Vermont are also considering similar bans.
“Drinking water for almost one in five Californians is contaminated with toxic PFAS,” said Allayaud. “Gov. Newsom understands it’s imperative that we do everything to limit this contamination and reduce the health risks of exposure.”
This legislation was co-sponsored by EWG, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, the California Professional Firefighters Association, Clean Water Action and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
###
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action. Visit https://www.ewg.org/pfaschemicals/


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-30--California First State To Ban 24 Toxic Chemicals in Personal Care Products and Cosmetics

SACRAMENTO , Calif. – In a major victory for the movement for safer cosmetics , California Gov .
Gavin Newsom has signed the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act , Assembly Bill 2762 , into law .
This is the nation ’ s first state-level ban of 24 toxic ingredients , including mercury and formaldehyde , from the beauty and personal care products Californians use every day .
These ingredients are already prohibited from cosmetics and other personal care products sold in the European Union and some other countries , but are still used in personal care products sold throughout the U.S .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ impacts on health , such as cancer , birth defects , damage to the reproductive system , organ system toxicity and endocrine disruption .
The Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act was introduced by Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi ( D-Torrance ) , Bill Quirk ( D-Hayward ) and Buffy Wicks ( D-Oakland ) .
“ California is the first in the nation to ban 24 ingredients from the personal care products people use every day , ” said Susan Little , EWG 's senior advocate for California government affairs .
“ The Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act gives consumers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deserve.
” California consumers will join those of 40 other nations who are protected from harmful cosmetics .
“ Formaldehyde in bubble bath ?
” said Janet Nudelman , director of program and policy at Breast Cancer Prevention Partners , one of the bill sponsors .
“ Mercury in skin lightening creams ?
Congress has been asleep at the wheel for 82 years when it comes to cosmetic safety , which is why we so appreciate the important leadership Gov .
Newsom took today when he signed the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act into law.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chemicals banned by the bill are linked to breast cancer , this historic bill also takes us one step closer to preventing this devastating disease by removing a major source of women ’ s ongoing exposure to some of the most toxic substances on the planet , ” added Nudelman .
The U.S. cosmetics industry is notoriously underregulated .
For more than 80 years , Congress has neglected to increase the scope of the Food and Drug Administration ’ s authority over cosmetics , limiting the agency ’ s ability to ensure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that research has shown to be unsafe are legally permitted in the cosmetics sold to consumers in the U.S. “ Some of the most toxic ingredients are being aggressively marketed to Black women , ” said Nourbese Flint , policy director for the Los Angeles-based Black Women for Wellness .
“ Levels of formaldehyde that could be used to embalm a body are being used in hair straighteners , and Black women who dye their hair are 60 percent more likely to develop breast cancer .
That ’ s why we demand safe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can finally protect women from the toxic exposures they currently face on every trip to the salon.
” The list of banned chemicals includes the toxic fluorinated chemicals known as PFAS , mercury and formaldehyde , as well as endocrine-disrupting phthalates and long-chain parabens , preservatives used in skincare products .
“ Every day , Californians use soaps , shampoos , makeup and other personal care products without realizing that those products could contain chemicals that present serious health risks , '' said Emily Rusch , CALPIRG executive director .
“ By banning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in modern personal care products , the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act will finally start to give consumers the protections they deserve .
We applaud the authors for their hard work and dedication.
” By contrast , the EU has performed rigorous research to identify the chemicals that are not safe for use in cosmetics and other personal care products .
By following Europe ’ s science on chemical bans , Californians will be safer while also creating a more global standard for cosmetic safety .
“ This marks a momentous milestone in the history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Ken Cook .
“ California is the first state to ban 24 ingredients from personal care products .
And for the first time , groups like EWG and the industry ’ s trade association , the Personal Care Products Council , came together to pass legislation to modernize the rules governing these everyday products .
Thank you , Gov .
Newsom , for signing this absolutely necessary legislation into law , and thank you , Assemblymembers Muratsuchi , Quirk and Wicks , for authoring it.
” California has long been considered a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rest of the country in many areas of health and safety .
If a manufacturer is required to satisfy California standards , it will likely adhere to the same high standard with the products it sends to the rest of the country .
The Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act was cosponsored by EWG , Black Women for Wellness , Breast Cancer Prevention Partners and CALPIRG .
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit , non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment .
Through research , advocacy and unique @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and civic action .
https : //www.ewg.org/californiacosmetics Black Women for Wellness is committed to the health and well-being of Black women and girls through health education , empowerment and advocacy .
Learn more at www.bwwla.org/ Breast Cancer Prevention Partners is the leading national science-based , policy and advocacy organization focused on preventing breast cancer by eliminating our exposure to toxic chemicals and radiation .
Learn more at www.bcpp.org .
CALPIRG , the California Public Interest Research Group , is a statewide nonprofit organization that works to protect public health and consumers .
Learn @ @ @ @ @

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – In a major victory for the movement for safer cosmetics, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act, Assembly Bill 2762, into law. This is the nation’s first state-level ban of 24 toxic ingredients, including mercury and formaldehyde, from the beauty and personal care products Californians use every day.
These ingredients are already prohibited from cosmetics and other personal care products sold in the European Union and some other countries, but are still used in personal care products sold throughout the U.S. The banned chemicals are linked to harmful impacts on health, such as cancer, birth defects, damage to the reproductive system, organ system toxicity and endocrine disruption.
The Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act was introduced by Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance), Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) and Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland).
“California is the first in the nation to ban 24 ingredients from the personal care products people use every day,” said Susan Little, EWG's senior advocate for California government affairs. “The Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act gives consumers the healthier products they are demanding and deserve.”
A Groundbreaking Bill
California consumers will join those of 40 other nations who are protected from harmful cosmetics.
“Formaldehyde in bubble bath?” said Janet Nudelman, director of program and policy at Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, one of the bill sponsors. “Mercury in skin lightening creams? Congress has been asleep at the wheel for 82 years when it comes to cosmetic safety, which is why we so appreciate the important leadership Gov. Newsom took today when he signed the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act into law.”
“Given that the majority of the chemicals banned by the bill are linked to breast cancer, this historic bill also takes us one step closer to preventing this devastating disease by removing a major source of women’s ongoing exposure to some of the most toxic substances on the planet,” added Nudelman.
The U.S. cosmetics industry is notoriously underregulated. For more than 80 years, Congress has neglected to increase the scope of the Food and Drug Administration’s authority over cosmetics, limiting the agency’s ability to ensure the safety of cosmetic products. Ingredients that research has shown to be unsafe are legally permitted in the cosmetics sold to consumers in the U.S.
“Some of the most toxic ingredients are being aggressively marketed to Black women,” said Nourbese Flint, policy director for the Los Angeles-based Black Women for Wellness. “Levels of formaldehyde that could be used to embalm a body are being used in hair straighteners, and Black women who dye their hair are 60 percent more likely to develop breast cancer. That’s why we demand safe cosmetics now. This law means we can finally protect women from the toxic exposures they currently face on every trip to the salon.”
The list of banned chemicals includes the toxic fluorinated chemicals known as PFAS, mercury and formaldehyde, as well as endocrine-disrupting phthalates and long-chain parabens, preservatives used in skincare products.
“Every day, Californians use soaps, shampoos, makeup and other personal care products without realizing that those products could contain chemicals that present serious health risks," said Emily Rusch, CALPIRG executive director. “By banning some of the most toxic ingredients found in modern personal care products, the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act will finally start to give consumers the protections they deserve. We applaud the authors for their hard work and dedication.”
By contrast, the EU has performed rigorous research to identify the chemicals that are not safe for use in cosmetics and other personal care products. By following Europe’s science on chemical bans, Californians will be safer while also creating a more global standard for cosmetic safety.
“This marks a momentous milestone in the history of cosmetics regulation,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “California is the first state to ban 24 ingredients from personal care products. And for the first time, groups like EWG and the industry’s trade association, the Personal Care Products Council, came together to pass legislation to modernize the rules governing these everyday products. Thank you, Gov. Newsom, for signing this absolutely necessary legislation into law, and thank you, Assemblymembers Muratsuchi, Quirk and Wicks, for authoring it.”
California has long been considered a bellwether state, leading the way for the rest of the country in many areas of health and safety. If a manufacturer is required to satisfy California standards, it will likely adhere to the same high standard with the products it sends to the rest of the country.
The Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act was cosponsored by EWG, Black Women for Wellness, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners and CALPIRG.
###
More Media Contacts:
Erika Wilhelm, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, [email protected] TEL (415) 539-5005
Claudia Deeg, CALPIRG, [email protected], TEL (484) 683-5502
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action. https://www.ewg.org/californiacosmetics
Black Women for Wellness is committed to the health and well-being of Black women and girls through health education, empowerment and advocacy. Learn more at www.bwwla.org/
Breast Cancer Prevention Partners is the leading national science-based, policy and advocacy organization focused on preventing breast cancer by eliminating our exposure to toxic chemicals and radiation. Learn more at www.bcpp.org.
CALPIRG, the California Public Interest Research Group, is a statewide nonprofit organization that works to protect public health and consumers. Learn more at https://calpirg.org/


environmentalworkinggroupewg--2020-09-30--Consumer Protection Bill California AB 2762 Signed into Law

Washington , D.C. – The Environmental Working Group and the Personal Care Products Council applaud California Gov .
Gavin Newsom for signing into law Assembly Bill 2762 , which prohibits the sale and manufacture of cosmetics and personal care products with certain ingredients in California .
This landmark bill moves the industry one step closer to global regulatory alignment .
“ Californians now have greater assurance of the safety of the consumer products they use every day , like lotion and body wash , toothpaste , shampoo and conditioner , and makeup , ” said EWG President Ken Cook .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the history of cosmetics and personal care products regulation .
And for the first time , groups like EWG along with a diverse group of stakeholders and the industry ’ s trade association , the Personal Care Products Council , support legislation to modernize the rules governing these products.
” California is the first state to limit the use of these ingredients from all cosmetics and personal care products such as moisturizers , hand sanitizers , body washes and other essential products used every day .
The 12 ingredients are already prohibited from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the European Union and other countries .
“ We are pleased to have joined efforts with EWG and many other organizations on this important piece of legislation , ” said PCPC President & CEO Lezlee Westine .
“ Californians deserve a law that provides consumers with continued confidence in the products they use and trust every day .
We all agree that this bill helps protect public health in California while safeguarding the jobs of the more than the 415,000 Californians who work for the overall personal care industry and the more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state ’ s economy.
” The law was jointly authored by Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi ( D-Torrance ) , Bill Quirk ( D-Hayward ) and Buffy Wicks ( D-Oakland ) .
Black Women for Wellness , Breast Cancer Prevention Partners , CalPIRG and EWG were cosponsors , and other public health , environmental , consumer protection and faith-based organizations were integral to this joint effort .
We express special thanks for their leadership and dedicated staff that worked together to bring this legislation to fruition .
To contact the Personal Care Products Council , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 202 ) 615-6558 , [ email protected ] The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit , non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment .
Through research , advocacy and unique education tools , EWG drives consumer choice and civic action .
https : //www.ewg.org/californiacosmetics The Personal Care Products Council is the leading national trade association representing the global cosmetics and personal care products industry .
Founded in 1894 , PCPC represents approximately 600 member companies who manufacture , distribute , and supply the vast majority of finished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As the makers of a diverse range of products millions of consumers rely on every day , from sunscreens , toothpaste and shampoo to moisturizer , lipstick and fragrance , personal care products companies are global leaders committed to product safety , quality and innovation .
For more information on cosmetics and personal care products and their ingredients , please visit www.CosmeticsInfo.org .

Washington, D.C. – The Environmental Working Group and the Personal Care Products Council applaud California Gov. Gavin Newsom for signing into law Assembly Bill 2762, which prohibits the sale and manufacture of cosmetics and personal care products with certain ingredients in California. This landmark bill moves the industry one step closer to global regulatory alignment.
“Californians now have greater assurance of the safety of the consumer products they use every day, like lotion and body wash, toothpaste, shampoo and conditioner, and makeup,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “This marks a momentous milestone in the history of cosmetics and personal care products regulation. And for the first time, groups like EWG along with a diverse group of stakeholders and the industry’s trade association, the Personal Care Products Council, support legislation to modernize the rules governing these products.”
California is the first state to limit the use of these ingredients from all cosmetics and personal care products such as moisturizers, hand sanitizers, body washes and other essential products used every day. The 12 ingredients are already prohibited from cosmetics and other personal care products sold in the European Union and other countries.
“We are pleased to have joined efforts with EWG and many other organizations on this important piece of legislation,” said PCPC President & CEO Lezlee Westine. “Californians deserve a law that provides consumers with continued confidence in the products they use and trust every day. We all agree that this bill helps protect public health in California while safeguarding the jobs of the more than the 415,000 Californians who work for the overall personal care industry and the more than $28 billion contributed to the state’s economy.”
The law was jointly authored by Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance), Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) and Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland).
Black Women for Wellness, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, CalPIRG and EWG were cosponsors, and other public health, environmental, consumer protection and faith-based organizations were integral to this joint effort.
We express special thanks for their leadership and dedicated staff that worked together to bring this legislation to fruition.
###
To contact the Personal Care Products Council, please call: Stefanie Harrington, (202) 615-6558, [email protected]
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action. https://www.ewg.org/californiacosmetics
The Personal Care Products Council is the leading national trade association representing the global cosmetics and personal care products industry. Founded in 1894, PCPC represents approximately 600 member companies who manufacture, distribute, and supply the vast majority of finished personal care products marketed in the U.S. As the makers of a diverse range of products millions of consumers rely on every day, from sunscreens, toothpaste and shampoo to moisturizer, lipstick and fragrance, personal care products companies are global leaders committed to product safety, quality and innovation. For more information on cosmetics and personal care products and their ingredients, please visit www.CosmeticsInfo.org.