Our kids deserve to be free of toxics.
Maine has one of the highest rates of asthma and autism. When it comes to cancer, Maine has a high rate of deaths compared to the national average.
What do these diseases have in common? All have links to toxic chemicals in products.
While genetics play an important role, we now know that toxic chemicals are a contributor to these diseases. One researcher put it this way, “Genetics may load the gun, but toxic chemicals can pull the trigger.”
The good news is that exposure to toxic chemicals is often preventable. That is one of the reasons we joined a group of eight Maine women who flew to Washington, D.C., last month: to fight for safer products for all families.
We are concerned about the lack of safety protections from the toxic chemicals in consumer products.
We assume that if a product is on the shelf, it is safe. The truth is, most chemicals have never been tested for health and safety.
The fact that some disabilities are caused by toxic chemicals, which is preventable, is unacceptable.
As moms, we do all we can to protect our children from harm. We are tired of being in the dark about which products are safe and which are not. We cannot shop our way out of this problem.
The products that we use to bathe, clean, launder and disinfect a hospital or our homes are not regulated for safety.
Of the over 80,000 chemicals on the market today, the Environmental Protection Agency has only evaluated 200 for health and safety — less than 1 percent. In addition, only five chemicals have ever been banned or restricted under our current law, the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Contrary to popular belief, manufacturers do not need to disclose ingredients or test them for safety before they are sold. Humans are a giant test tube for the chemical industry.
The good news is that there is a bipartisan bill before the Senate: the Chemical Safety Improvement Act. But, as written, it does not truly protect us from toxic chemicals.
We need to strengthen the bill in these areas:
— The CSIA must preserve state authority.
In Maine, we have made great progress in protecting families from toxic chemicals like BPA, lead, arsenic and flame-retardants. The pre-emption provisions in the current version of the CSIA would largely prevent states from taking stronger action to address chemicals.
We cannot let a federal bill roll back Maine’s protection against some of the worst toxic chemicals.
— The CSIA must protect pregnant women and children who are more susceptible to harm from toxic chemicals.
— The CSIA must expedite action on the worst chemicals. The act should include deadlines and timetables to ensure implementation of the law in a timely fashion.
Our delegation is all in agreement that the 37 year-old Toxic Substances Control Act needs to be changed. We shared our concerns with U.S. Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King and Reps. Mike Michaud and Chellie Pingree, and presented them with petitions signed by more than 2,100 Mainers who share our concerns. These signatures were gathered in just one week’s time. Our ask to our Maine members of Congress: Please stand with Maine families and not the chemical industry, and fix the problems with the CSIA so we can pass meaningful chemical policy reform.
Our fight for safer chemicals and safer products is personal and professional.
Bettie became a nurse to help patients heal.
Tracy has been working for many years to educate families about the links between toxic chemicals and learning and development disabilities.
And as moms, we both do our best to keep our families safe.
It is time to prevent disease, not cause it. It’s that simple.
Congress, we need you to stepup and finally fix this broken system and finally ensure all products on store shelves are safe for families across this nation.
BETTIE KETTELL is a retired nurse, cancer survivor, mother and grandmother.
TRACY GREGOIRE is the Health Children’s project coordinator for the Learning Disabilities Association of Maine and the mother of a 4-year-old with special needs.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less