Fighting Reproductive Damage Together
(Chemical companies have taken our right to have healthy children. Diverse groups join in fight.)
Click
Here to Add Comment Subject:
Fighting Reproductive Damage Together
Date:
Thu, 8 Aug 2002 13:15:23 -400
From:
Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State of California, Department of Pesticide
Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
Fighting Reproductive Damage Together by Cynthia Cooper
Toxic chemicals may be harming women's ability to have children. This passionate issue is bringing together two of today's most effective -- and fiercely independent -- progressive movements. http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/6097
Enviros and Pro-Choicers Join Forces
The Movements Fight Reproductive Damage Together
Cynthia Cooper, an independent journalist in New York City, is the author of Mockery of Justice (Dutton).
When Valerie DeFillipo attended a seminar three years ago on environmental contamination, a topic seemingly unrelated to her work in reproductive rights, she heard about the effects of chemicals on wildlife and it reminded her instantly of the harms caused by a drug once prescribed to pregnant women.
Environmentalists at the seminar described how a phenomenon called endocrine disruption can cause sterility and deformed genitalia in the offspring of fish and birds exposed to synthetic chemicals. Traces of those chemicals can be found in contaminated air, water, or food.
Nothing could be more potent than not being able to reproduce, or having our children being unable to reproduce.
DeFillipo knew that DES (diethylstilbestrol), a chemical compound prescribed to pregnant women in the 1950s and 1960s to prevent miscarriage, caused a similar phenomenon. Many of the daughters and granddaughters of those who took DES were unable to bear children. The same mechanism -- endocrine disruption -- was at play.
"I saw the links," said DeFillipo, a senior director at Planned Parenthood Federation of America in Washington D.C. "I began to understand how what we put in the environment enters your body, and how it affects reproduction. I realized it's an important issue for our community in upcoming decades."
Soon after, DeFillipo became more involved with the issue of endocrine disruption. This July her program released a guide to educate the organization's affiliates entitled "Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals and Reproductive Health."
The link that DeFillipo recognized -- between the environment and human health -- is a link that both reproductive rights activists and environmentalists are giving increasing credence.
Forging Difficult Alliances
Fighting for three decades to preserve women's autonomy on abortion and contraception, reproductive rights organizations have earned a reputation as fiercely independent, rarely aligning with other movements or issues.
Environmental activists and reproductive rights activists have each worked in their own spheres, spheres that rarely overlapped. While environmentalists placed human health among a menu of concerns that also prominently included wildlife conservation, family planning activists concentrated on human rights, women's rights, and health care.
But in recent years, new scientific research on chemical endocrine disruption has allowed environmentalists to take a closer look at the effects of toxins on human reproduction. And the issue of endocrine disruption has linked reproductive rights advocates solidly with the environmental movement. The passionate issue of having babies is bringing together two of today's most effective progressive movements.
"It's time to look at new alliances," said Patricia Waak, director of the National Audubon Society's Population and Habitat Program, and a former Peace Corps reproductive-health nurse. "A lot could be accomplished. We could change the hearts and minds of policymakers."
In recent years, the National Audubon Society's Population and Habitat Program sponsored two dialogues on the environment and fertility, where activists explored strategies for presenting this environmental issue to the reproductive-rights community. Both Planned Parenthood and the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) attended the meetings.
NFPRHA later featured seminars on endocrine disruptors at its June 2001 annual national conference. Planned Parenthood also took the issue back to its bases and hired a former National Audubon Society policy analyst to educate the organization and its affiliates.
An Emotional Touchstone
For decades environmental health concerns focused on cancer caused by chemical exposure. But new research findings on so-called "low-dose" exposure to toxins have led environmentalists to draw public attention to the probable effects of minuscule amounts of human-made chemicals on the human endocrine system. The interest was partially sparked by the 1996 book Our Stolen Future, by Theo Colburn, Dianne Dumanoski and J.P. Myers.
Ordinary Americans regularly take in and retain in their bodies a wide array of toxic contaminants, according to a March 2001 Centers for Disease Control study measuring the levels of toxic substances -- including some synthetic chemicals -- carried in our bodies. Charlotte Brody, executive director of Health Care Without Harm, said chemicals residing in the bodies of pregnant women, including mercury and phthalates, are of particular concern. Mercury is known to cause developmental harm in wildlife and humans. The synthetic chemicals called phthalates are suspected to cause similar kinds of damage, based on early animal studies.
Edith Eddy, executive director of the Compton Foundation, said potential damage to the ability to bear children is an emotional touchstone. "Nothing could be more potent than not being able to reproduce, or having our children being unable to reproduce," Eddy said. "There is longing desire. It's a deeply motivating awareness."
A solid alliance between the two movements would give them more power to demand action from policy makers.
Public surveys reflect that concern. Chemical toxins rate as one of the greatest environmental worries in opinion polling, and anxiety is spiked when linked to reproductive issues such as lowered sperm counts or birth defects, according to a 2000 analysis conducted by the public research firm Beldon, Russonello & Stewart. The study was commissioned in preparation for a key meeting between pro-choice activists and environmentalists.
Health experts say endocrine disruption may be causing other harm to women as well. Diana Zuckerman, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based National Center for Policy Research for Women and Families pointed to a crescendo of problems related to early puberty in girls, which may be caused by endocrine disruption. "When you put it in the context of girls' health, people really care," said Zuckerman. The matter is attracting more and more people's attention, she said.
"The whole issue of environmental health is right below the surface, ready to explode," said Kathy Bonk, executive director of the Communications Consortium, a Washington, D.C. group that has worked on this topic with a variety of nonprofits including reproductive rights groups.
Environmentalists say women's health activists may be able to succeed where the environmental movement has faced challenges -- putting a human face on esoteric topics.
"Environmentalists mostly talk in terms of the 'impacts' on health and ecology, and that's appropriate," said Joe Thornton, a former researcher at Greenpeace and author of Pandora's Poison, about the effects of chlorine on reproductive health. "But there is this other dimension of what it means for people to be contaminated without their consent by chemicals."
Thornton and others say that a solid alliance between the two movements would give them more power to demand action from policy makers -- actions such as: more money for research on endocrine disruptors; regulations to stop the release of dangerous chemicals; development of alternatives; and industry regulation calling for a demonstration of safety before chemicals are introduced into the marketplace.
Collaboration 101
Despite the obvious advantages, some key issues may stand in the way of joint action by the two influential movements, even on the unifying topic of endocrine disruptors.
To date, environmental groups have tended to shy away from taking positions on issues like abortion and contraception, which are critical to reproductive rights advocates.
"Environmental groups equate reproductive health with abortion, and they don't want to take a stand on it," said Judith DeSarno, NFPRHA. In the interest of building public awareness, she set up a Web cast with Our Stolen Future author J.P. Myers.
DeSarno admitted that advocates for reproductive freedom are sometimes on edge about environmental messages, too. For example, population language of the 1990s stoked fears about the damage to the environment from overpopulation. But those concerned about the environment stressed measures needed for fertility control while seeming to overlook women's personal autonomy, DeSarno said.
Environmental groups have tended to shy away from taking positions on issues like abortion and contraception, which are critical to reproductive rights advocates.
The biggest obstacle for environmentalists and reproductive-rights groups alike has been the Bush administration's relentless push of pro-corporate and anti-liberty agendas. "You could hardly imagine a worse climate," said Eddy of the Compton Foundation. "It's anti-environment. It's anti-women's reproductive rights."
But others are hopeful. Planned Parenthood affiliates in Utah used their credibility on women's health to connect with activists opposing toxic storage. In May, Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., a staunch supporter of reproductive rights, introduced legislation seeking $500 million in research funds for endocrine disruption, drawing support from the World Wildlife Fund and DESAction, a nonprofit group that helps DES-exposed individuals.
And recently, Health Care Without Harm collaborated with the Environmental Working Group to draw attention to potential damage to pregnancies caused by phthalates in beauty products. The groups took out a full-page ad in The New York Times on July 11, and created a Web site, www.NotTooPretty.org, to highlight the issue.
"The same people -- think of Jesse Helms -- who are taking away reproductive rights are also the people who demand corporate autonomy and a free market for companies that expose people to reproductive toxins without their choice," said Charlotte Brody. "Any time we can amass our forces more elegantly, we have a better chance of winning."
Well Mr. Helliker, I can only repeat the following:
This is a government of the people, by the people and for the people no longer. It is a government of corporations, by corporations and for corporations. --- President Rutherford B. Hayes
Respectfully, Stephen L. Tvedten
Quotes to Ponder:
"The first task is population control at home. How do we go about it? Many of my colleagues feel that some sort of compulsory birth regulation would be necessary to achieve such control. One plan often mentioned involves the addition of temporary sterilants to water supplies or staple food. Doses of the antidote would be carefully rationed by the government to produce the desired population size." — Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb, p.135
"A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal." — Ted Turner - CNN founder and UN supporter - quoted in the The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor, June '96
"Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license ... All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing." — David Brower - first Executive Director of the Sierra Club; founder of Friends of the Earth; and founder of the Earth Island Insitute - quoted by Dixie Lee Ray, Trashing the Planet, p.166
"Truth is not what is; truth is what people perceive it to be." -- Adolf Hitler, Propaganda Maxim
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com.