By Marla Cone
Editor in Chief
Environmental Health News
February 17, 2012 - After 21 years of wrangling
over health threats, uncertain science and industry pressure, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Friday released its health
assessment of dioxins defining how toxic
they are.
A group of about 30 toxic compounds, including the infamous
chemical in Agent Orange, dioxins are byproducts of combustion
emitted by waste incinerators, chemical manufacturing plants, paper
and pulp mills and other facilities. They persist in the
environment and build up in the food supply and in human
bodies.
Lauded by environmental activists and criticized by industry,
the report concluded after reviewing mounds of evidence
that there are potentially serious effects at ultra-low levels of
exposure. Studies have linked dioxins to cancer, disrupted
hormones, reproductive damage such as reduced sperm counts,
neurological effects in children and adults, immune system changes
and skin disorders.
Most people on Earth have traces of
dioxins in their bodies, and they are exposed mostly through eating
fish, meat and other animal products.
Dioxins have been called the most toxic of all man-made
chemicals, based on animal studies that show effects at extremely
low doses - in the parts per trillion.Nevertheless, the
EPA said that people's exposures have declined so much in
the past two decades that most people are safe. "Today's
findings show that generally, over a person's lifetime, current
exposure to dioxins does not pose a significant health risk,"
EPA officials said.
One scientist who studies dioxins, Arnold Schecter of
University of Texas School of Public Health, questioned that
statement, calling it "very odd," because some people are more
highly exposed than average and some groups, such as fetuses and
nursing babies, are more sensitive to the effects.
The EPA broke the risk assessment into two parts; today's
release includes only the non-cancer effects.
The EPA said in its report that its
"safe" level was based on two studies: One that found reduced
sperm counts in men exposed in childhood and another that found
infants with increased thyroid hormones if their mothers were
exposed during pregnancy. Thyroid hormones are critical to normal
growth and development.
The EPA left a key number the same as when a draft was unveiled
in 2010. The daily level of exposure considered safe is set at 0.7
picograms of dioxins per kilogram of body weight.
Back in 2010, industry groups criticized the EPA for setting
this so-called "reference dose" too low, saying it would alarm
consumers and drive costly regulations. The level set by the World
Health Organization/United Nations in 2001 is about three times
higher.
The health assessment does not set enforceable standards.
But it is critical to guiding many actions, such as cleanup
of Superfund and other hazardous waste sites, industrial emission
controls, drinking water standards and dietary guidelines for
fish.
The first assessment was completed in 1985, and since then the
scientific evidence linking dioxins to a variety of human health
threats has grown. But at the same time, many scientific
uncertainties have remained, fueling the debate over what levels of
dioxins are safe. One perpetual issue is how to estimate potential
human effects when harm is found in tests on lab animals.
EPA launched this reassessment in
1991. An initial version was criticized by a panel of the National
Academy of Sciences in 2006 for failing to justify its low-dose
findings and not detailing the uncertainties.
Environmentalists, who have been pressuring the Obama
Administration's EPA to finally finish the report, applauded its
release.
"After 27 years of delays, I quite honestly never thought this
report would ever see the light of day," Lois Marie Gibbs,
executive director of the Center for Health, Environment &
Justice, said in a statement Friday. "Today the American
people won a major victory against the chemical industry, who has
been working behind closed doors for decades to hide and distort
the truth about the dangers of dioxin. The science is clear: dioxin
is toxic to our children's health and development."
The health assessment does not set enforceable
standards, but will guide actions such as cleanup of Superfund and
other hazardous waste sites, industrial emission controls, drinking
water standards and dietary guidelines for fish.U.S. Rep.
Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), top Democrat on the Natural Resources
Committee, said the EPA "has taken a major step toward protecting
the public from dioxin by shining light on some of the health
impacts this dangerous chemical has on the public."
He asked chemical industries to "stop their efforts
to block completion" of the report.
Environmental activists are now urging the EPA to complete the
cancer part of the assessment and develop a national plan for
reducing emissions and exposures, including efforts to address the
food supply and new standards for what level is acceptable in soil
after hazardous waste cleanups.
When the draft report came out, the main trade group for the
chemical industry, the American Chemistry Council, called it
"scientifically flawed."

EPA officials said that since 1987, dioxin emissions from
industry have declined more than 90 percent. But traces of
the substances still remain in the food supply years, even decades,
after they are emitted.
"It is clear that the EPA is overstating the risks from what are
now exceptionally low exposures to dioxin, driving ever more
stringent and costly regulations without any clear benefit to
public health," David Fischer, the group's assistant general
counsel, said at the time. He said the assessment "offers little,
if any, public health benefit" because emissions have declined
substantially.
"Today, most Americans have only low-level exposure to dioxins,"
EPA officials said.
However, Stephen Lester, science director of the advocacy group
Center for Health, Environment & Justice, said data in the
new report show "that the average background exposure of the
American public to dioxin in food is very close to or above the EPA
new reference dose."
Schecter, an environmental health professor at University
of Texas, said the agency's statement in the press release about
people in general not being at risk could be misleading.
"I am puzzled regarding the statement about the health risk over
a lifetime. As phrased it seems correct, for the average
person, but we vary in sensitivity and time of exposure and there
are some instances of higher exposure. Why not mention these as
well?" he said.
In addition to babies and fetuses, AIDS patients and transplant
patients may be at more risk from dioxins because of
immune-suppressing effects, he said.
Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences, said Friday that she hadn't yet read
the report.
"It's about time," she said in an email after learning of
its release, adding that "levels in food are much lower than they
were in the past." Birnbaum, formerly with the EPA, is a
leading expert on dioxins.
Because the
compounds accumulate in fatty tissues, meat, dairy and some
fish are primary sources of exposure for many
people.
Sources of dioxins include Dow Chemical, municipal waste
incinerators and back yard rubbish burning. Dioxins are released
during the manufacture of chemicals used to make polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) plastic for piping and other materials.
Dioxins have been called the most toxic of all man-made
chemicals, based on animal studies that show effects at extremely
low doses - in the parts per trillion. One dioxin compound, known
as TCDD, was used in Agent Orange, the herbicide sprayed by the
U.S. military throughout much of Southeast Asia during the Vietnam
War.
EPA said Friday that it would release the
other half of the dioxins report, which analyzes the evidence of
their carcinogenicity, "as expeditiously as possible."