report banner
EWG HOME   |   TEST RESULTS   |   REPORT CONTENTS  


test results
guest commentary content index peer statement



FULL REPORT

 

News Release

1: Executive summary

2: Babies are vulnerable to chemical harm

3: Human health problems on the rise

4: Recommendations



 

Detailed findings

Methodology

Questions and Answers

References

About This Report

Printer-Friendly Version (PDF)

Related News Coverage

Related EWG Investigations



RELATED DOCUMENTS

 

News Release: CDC Petition (21 July)

EWG Ltr to Chemical Companies (21 July)

EWG Letter to Chemical Lobby (PDF)

Chemical Lobby Response #1 (PDF)

Follow-Up Letter to Chemical Lobby (21 July)

Stmt from US Rep. Slaughter (PDF)

Stmt from Minority Leader Pelosi (PDF)




Support EWG - Donate Now



THE LATEST ON BODY BURDEN
Newsfeed from
Environmental Health News

 

 

Printable Version of This Page

 

Search www.ewg.org

Provided by Google

 

 

 

Dr. Jim Pirkle
Deputy Director for Science
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
National Center for Environmental Health
Division of Laboratory Sciences
Mail Stop F-20
4770 Buford Highway, NE
Atlanta, GA 30341-3724


Dear Dr. Pirkle:

I am writing to request that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) include umbilical cord blood in the battery of human tissues tested for industrial and environmental chemicals in the National Exposure Report biomonitoring program.

Last week our organization, the Environmental Working Group, released a study of chemicals in umbilical cord blood from ten babies born in U.S. hospitals in August and September 2004 (EWG 2005). Two commercial laboratories analyzed the samples for 413 industrial chemicals, environmental pollutants, and pesticides. The tests showed 287 chemicals altogether in these 10 samples, including PCBs, perfluorochemicals, methylmercury, commercial flame retardants (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), brominated and chlorinated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans, and more. Our study joins a wealth of other investigations of chemicals in umbilical cord blood that collectively document widespread exposures to chemicals that begin in utero.

As you know, studies have repeatedly shown that pre-natal and early childhood chemical exposures can be substantially more harmful than exposures later in life. A statement released last week by a group of scientists and pediatricians details reasons for this vulnerability, which include an immature blood-brain barrier, a diminished ability to excrete and detoxify certain chemicals, and a rate of cell growth and differentiation that opens possibilities for irreversible effects during windows of vulnerability (Aposhian et al. 2005).

In your Second National Exposure Report (CDC 2003), you write that the report's purpose is "to provide unique exposure information to physicians, scientists, and health officials to help prevent disease that results from exposure to environmental chemicals." We believe that adding umbilical cord blood testing to the national biomonitoring program would be a key means to realize this objective. Such testing would define exposures during a time in life when the human body is uniquely vulnerable to adverse effects from chemical exposures.

We have attached portions of our written cord blood investigation to this letter, which includes evidence on diseases arising in adulthood, and even in subsequent generations, that may derive from early life exposures like those measured in umbilical cord blood. We also invite you to read our full, online report for additional information at www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/.

We acquired samples for our study from the American Red Cross, which administers a national umbilical cord blood collection and storage program. We suggest this as one possible source of samples for CDC's national biomonitoring program.

We look forward to your response.

Regards,

Jane Houlihan
Vice President for Research

Copy: Ms. Dorothy Sussman, Dr. John Osterloh


References

  1. Aposhian HV, Bearer C, Greene A, Goldman L, Landrigan PJ, Lanphear B, Needleman H, Ozonoff D, Reigart JR, Snyder HM. 2005. Scientists' and Pediatricians' Statement on EWG Study of Industrial Chemicals in Umbilical Cord Blood. July 8, 2005. Available online at http://www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/statement.php.
  2. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2005. Body Burden: Pollution in Newborns. A benchmark investigation of industrial chemicals, pollutants, and pesticides in umbilical cord blood. Available online at http://www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/.
  3. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2003. Second national report on human exposure to environmental chemicals. NCEH Pub. No. 03-0022. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/2nd/pdf/secondner.pdf.



 



Support EWG - Donate Now