Critical Windows of Development was created by Theo Colburn, who is most often credited with the discovery of hormone mimicking chemicals, stating that she created the site as a way to “give scientists, policymakers, journalists and others immediate access to the information in a user-friendly, visually interesting way.”

When a Critical Windows user chooses a chemical, red lines appear on a timeline, displaying the areas of development where effects have been found in laboratory animals exposed to low doses. Clicking on a triangle retrieves a summary of each study, which then leads to direct access to the published article in a scientific journal.

The site shows how normal development should occur versus results obtained in lab results of development in the presence of these various chemicals, like BPA and phthalates.  It does focus on human gestation and compares to results found in mice gestation.

The site has links to where you can get the latest news, how you can contact the EPA and other agencies to ask for change, and all the definitions of the chemicals and the products they can be found in.  This is seriously the most comprehensive site for anyone concerned about the health of their babies and the impact from environmental factors. 

To read more about how to interpret results, please go to Environmental Health News.

The ban on toys and other products containing levels of toxic substances was set to take effect on Feb 10th.  However, under pressure by manufacturers and retailers, the testing requirements have been delayed by Congress, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The stay allows manufacturers, which have been hit hard by the recession, to put off costly product testing for levels of lead, used to stabilize the plastic in products, and phthalates, which are chemicals used to soften plastic.  Under the new laws, lead was not allowed above 600 ppm and phthalates had to be less than 1000 ppm.  

Producers and sellers of the products were concerned that in this economy the added cost to comply with the requirements would have put them out of business.

Many consumer groups, however, think this was a poor decision on the part of our lawmakers.  Citing most recent testing done on products out of CVS pharmacies, in which at least one toy tested at 15 times higher than the allowable limits, “there should be something to back up a claim that the products are safe, but without testing and certification there’s no assurance,” said Charles Margulis, a spokesman for the Center for Environmental Health.

Ever since the ban was voted into law, both sides have been very vocal about the pros and cons of the new requirements.  The manufacturers and sellers have been arguing that much of the product already on the shelves would have to be recalled, which also causes concern for many environmental groups because of the potential illegal dumping of contaminated product.  However, the flip side is that children should not be exposed to such products, either.  

This is a debate that will effect our lawmakers for years to come.  Making the wrong decision will be sure to hurt one party in irreversible ways.

Amniotic fluid and urine samples from 65 pregnant women undergoing amniocentesis were analyzed for five kinds of phthalates. At birth, the researchers measured the distance from the anus to the genitals in both male and female babies. This measure is called the anogenital distance (AGD) and indicates abnormal sexual development (specifically, differentiation) in the womb.

The metabolite monobutyl phthalate (MBP) in the amniotic fluid and urine was correlated in all newborns. This means the pollutant was able to pass from the mother, through the placenta and into the fetal circulation system.

Phthalates is a chemical that is, most commonly used, in the synthesis of plastics, but has also been found in fragrance used in everyday household items.  It acts as a hormone mimicker and has been linked to a higher occurrence of cancers, genital deformities and learning disabilities.

This is just another example proving that the approval of the chemical was premature on the part of the FDA and the chemical companies.

I have felt this for a long time.  I have made a point in my life to fully understand science, specifically the science and health behind global warming.  With each article I read about children’s exposure to chemicals, or increase in unnecessary diseases like diabetes and asthma, or the growing concern over food shortages or the decline of water, I make the logical conclusion that who will be most affected by these issues is our children.

I have spent much of my time on this site being polite; trying to educate and hoping that the public starts to understand the severity of climate destabilization. But that hasn’t seemed to be effective.  I used to worry about saying things controversial. I was apologetic to my friends with children when I hinted at my theories.  However, as I think about it more and more, I can’t help but think that this one is accurate.  

So, I decided to look up the legal definition:

 - Any recent act, or failure to act, on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation; or

 - An act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.

So, I ask you, do you not see how not doing everything imaginable to change how we are currently living is a form of child abuse?

The act or failure to act which results in death or serious physical harm.  

This site has spent a lot of time writing about phthalates, bisphenol-a, food shortages, water shortages, and air quality.  In many cases, especially the cases of toxic poisoning, study after study has shown the negative impact to children through premature cancers, genital deformities, male extinction, and the list goes on.  

If the result of such acts is physical harm to a child then I conclude that by using the products that contain chemicals that are known to hurt infants, you are abusing your child.

If a parent would go to jail for purposefully starving their child, then I argue by not providing your child with the best food in the present, and ensuring high quality of food in the future, you are abusing your child.

If you, as a parent, were to find out that a neighbor had done something inappropriate to your child, you would go after that neighbor with all of your force.  But, when your neighbor drives an SUV, polluting the air and creating a place where your child can’t live, you let it go by without a second glance.  You and your neighbor are negatively impacting the future of your child and that is neglect and abuse.

I can probably come up with an argument to prove in many cases that you are inflicting abuse on your child, or neighbors child, by your lifestyle.  It is quite pathetic that there is some level of acceptable abuse that we put onto the children of this world.  We have made a silent assent that convenience is more important than your child’s health.  We have made a silent assent that corporations can manipulate us into buying harmful products and that we will not hold them accountable.  We have made a silent assent that we will not demand that we, as a community, are accountable and responsible to future generations.

You are going to argue that child abuse is violent and sexual, by nature.  And, I would come back to you and ask you to read the legal definition.  Read it over and over and over again until it sinks in.  Anything you do (or fail to prevent) that causes physical harm or damage is abuse.  Being passive and ill-informed is not an valid defense.

By exposing your child to something that is toxic, causing physical harm is abuse.  By not investigating everything you bring into your home to ensure that it does not harm your child is neglect.

My hope is that I make you angry.  I don’t care if it is being angry at me, or angry at some corporation, or angry at our government or angry at yourself.  Be angry.  Anger is the place in which people tend to start doing something. I want you to get so angry that you start learning more and researching, in a way to defend your actions, because you will find that the science backs me up.   I want you to get so angry that you learn everything you can about global warming, find out that this is real, that we are in a dire position, and learn that every action you take is not inconsequential. 

I want you to get so angry that you prove me wrong, because in all honesty, I want to stop caring about your child, since you seem to not care about them.

Waste and pollution watchdog, EcoWaste Coalition, called on the Bureau of Customs to prevent entry of banned toys to the United States that could result in illegal dumping in this country, according to Business Mirror Online.

On February 10th a long awaited ban will be placed in children’s toys under the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.  As a result, many fear that millions of non-compliant toys will be dumped illegally unless some preventative measures are taken.

The new definitions of unsafe toys include new levels on lead an phthalates.  Lead will now be restricted to 600ppm. Lead, a heavy metal, is known to be a neurotoxin that can cause damage to the central nervous system, particularly in children.  A new level of no more than 0.1% of three types of phthalates will also go into effect.  Phthalates are hormone mimickers and are used in the synthesis of plastics.  The new law also requires third party mandatory testing.

Aside the fact that many toys currently in the country will be dumped, there is also the fear that toys that do not meet the requirements will be brought in illegally through a black market trade and parents will be unaware of what they are purchasing.  EcoWaste is calling on all regulatory agencies to create policy that will prevent this from happening.

For more information on phthalates and other chemicals that effect children’s health, you may find more in the Golden Spiral section: HERE

This is expected to create a new scientific domain called epigenetics.  The field is based on the idea that environmental factors can get the genes to turn on and off.  The significance is that the subsequent alterations of genes could lead to various diseases, such as cancer, as well as become an inherited trait.

In the multi-phase study the mothers’ “blood, hair, breast milk and urine samples will be tested for a host of chemicals, from such heavy metals as lead, cadmium and mercury, to bisphenol-A, fire retardants and certain pesticides. The women will also be questioned about their lifestyles, diet and occupations.”

One focus of the study will be on phthalates.  Much research has been released lately indicating the this chemical, like BPA, is the cause of many problems seen in infants.  

Many mothers are being encouraged to volunteer so that more data can be gathered to effectively evaluate environmental factors in child development and disease.

An investigation released by a committee from the National Research Council has found that the government risk assessment methods likely underestimate the effects of phthalates. The report has concluded that the EPA could understate the risk of phthalates if it does not consider the effect of combined exposure to different compounds. In other words, mixed with other chemicals, phthalates could be even more damaging.

Phthalate compounds with different chemical structures can interfere with androgen activity in ways that are different, yet lead to the same health outcome. The report stresses that particularly for hormone-mediated effects, risk assessments should group chemicals by common outcome, regardless of the chemical structure or mechanism involved. That will mean assessing products that may contain multiple phthalates or multiple products that may be used together or frequently in ways that could compound an individual’s total phthalate intake. Surprisingly, one such product may be certain types of medications.

In addition, scientists at Harvard, Boston University, and the CDC have identified phthalates in 47 different pharmaceuticals. Versions of the chemical are used in the coating surrounding some medications. Samples of urine were tested, and depending on dosage, some individuals were found with concentrations higher that allowed by the EPA.

Obviously, this has raised concern in over the counter medication, especially those used on pregnant women and children.

The article came via Consumer Reports, HERE.

Found mostly in children’s toys, phthalates is a colorless, oily chemical used in thousands of products to impart flexibility and durability. Due to leaching, children come in contact with the chemical with hand-to-mouth contact or by chewing on the toy. Most scientists believe, from verifiable data, that phthalates are hormone altering chemicals, that affect the reproductive systems of developing children. There is a greater impact on young boys where genital deformities and sterility are increasing problems.

With the ban in place, consumers can feel more confident that the products their children are exposed to are safe. The ban also applies to online retailers that sell to California consumers.

Specifically, the law bans the use of six types of phthalates found in some children’s toys containing plastic and in “child-care articles” intended “to facilitate sleep, relaxation, or the feeding of children, or to help children with sucking or teething.”

The law also requires that phthalate substitutes be less toxic. The San Francisco Department of the Environment throughout 2008 tested toys made with polyvinyl chloride — which often contains high phthalate levels — bought in city stores.

California is the first state to implement such a ban and it came after a long and arduous fight from chemical and plastic manufacturers. Many states are expected to not place similar bans due to the cost of battling these companies in court and in the law books.

However, this may be one case in which the science will create a natural progression of elimination of this product. You can go HERE for more information.

I don’t know about you but the overabundance of fragrance jammed into every item on the market (candles, laundry detergent, dish soap) are annoying, at best. But now, we all have something else to worry about, it seems thatthe odors are produced by a soup of chemicals, and some of these compounds may not be very good for you. Manufacturers of detergents, laundry sheets and air fresheners are not required to list all ingredients on their labels. The laws protecting people from indoor air pollution from consumer products are very limited.

In tests, these chemicals are shown at levels that can inflict damage to our health. One such ingredient that the NRDC found is phthalates. Consider this a cousin to BPA, which I write about all the time.

Exposure to phthalates can affect testosterone levels and lead to reproductive abnormalities, including abnormal genitalia and reduced sperm production. … California notes that five types of phthalates — including one that we found in air freshener products — are ‘known to cause birth defects or reproductive harm.’ Young children and pregnant women should be especially careful to avoid contact with these chemicals.”

Because phthalates are hormone disrupters, doctors are most concerned about exposures to pregnant women between their eighth and 15th weeks of pregnancy. It is during that period that a delicate balance of hormones directs the development of sex organs in the fetus.

The sad thing is that manufacturers advertise the use of this products everywhere, including nurseries or other areas that children play and sleep.

The next time you smell your neighbors laundry wafting into your home… I give you permission to make a stink about it!

You can find the whole article HERE.