| Author |
Message
|
| blackfoxtrade |
 Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:47 am Post subject: Do we need to keep chemical companies on a leash? |
 |
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 09 Sep 2007
Posts: 23
Location: Estonia
|
In the news:Chemical Law Has Global Impact:
| Quote: |
Europe this month rolled out new restrictions on makers of chemicals linked to cancer and other health problems, changes that are forcing U.S. industries to find new ways to produce a wide range of everyday products.
The new laws in the European Union require companies to demonstrate that a chemical is safe before it enters commerce -- the opposite of policies in the United States, where regulators must prove that a chemical is harmful before it can be restricted or removed from the market. Manufacturers say that complying with the European laws will add billions to their costs, possibly driving up prices of some products.
The changes come at a time when consumers are increasingly worried about the long-term consequences of chemical exposure and are agitating for more aggressive regulation. In the United States, these pressures have spurred efforts in Congress and some state legislatures to pass laws that would circumvent the laborious federal regulatory process.... click the link to read the full story. |
-------
I posted this news item into an environmental forum and got quite a lot of responses. Some of them were supportive but some of them didn't like the new laws. I'd like to know what you think about this issue.
My opinion is that we need safer chemicals and if it takes new laws, then bring it on. I don't much about the American system, but in the article it said that a manufacturer doesn't have to prove the chemical is safe. If problems arise further down the line, there is nothing you can actually do about it back in the US. They haven't even banned asbestos. Am I missing something? What are your views on this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Scifor Refugee |
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 1:40 pm Post subject: Re: Do we need to keep chemical companies on a leash? |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 1103
|
| blackfoxtrade wrote: |
They haven't even banned asbestos. Am I missing something? What are your views on this? |
Asbestos was banned in the U.S. in 1989. Where the heck are you getting this stuff from? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Bunbury |
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 742
|
| Quote: |
| Where the heck are you getting this stuff from? |
From the newspapers apparently, such as The Washington Post:
| Quote: |
| The EPA has banned only five chemicals since 1976. The hurdles are so high for the agency that it has been unable to ban asbestos, which is widely acknowledged as a likely carcinogen and is barred in more than 30 countries. Instead, the EPA relies on industry to voluntarily cease production of suspect chemicals. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Harold14370 |
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 13 Apr 2007
Posts: 1578
Location: Pennsylvania
|
It appears that the EPA did ban asbestos but the blanket ban was overturned by a Federal Court in 1991. Many asbestos products remain banned.
Could it be that the court was presented evidence that some forms of asbestos are safe? If so, I wouldn't trust the Washington Post to get the facts straight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| blackfoxtrade |
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 09 Sep 2007
Posts: 23
Location: Estonia
|
| Bunbury wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Where the heck are you getting this stuff from? |
From the newspapers apparently, such as The Washington Post:
| Quote: |
| The EPA has banned only five chemicals since 1976. The hurdles are so high for the agency that it has been unable to ban asbestos, which is widely acknowledged as a likely carcinogen and is barred in more than 30 countries. Instead, the EPA relies on industry to voluntarily cease production of suspect chemicals. |
|
I was surprised of that myself, too. But I believe that most of the people in the US know about its dangers and try to avoid exposure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
