Category Archives: label laws

“Overwhelming support” for Vermont chemicals law

Posted on April 30, 2014 by tbach

This in from local on-line news source, the Vermont Digger: “In one of the most decisive votes of the session the Vermont House supported the regulation of toxic chemicals found in children’s products.  The vote was 114-27.” As blogged a … Continue reading →

Posted in BPA, chemical safety regulation, children's products, flame retardants, label laws, synthetic chemicals | Comments Off on “Overwhelming support” for Vermont chemicals law

Vermont strives for comprehensive chemical regulation

Posted on March 28, 2014 by tbach

Vermont has enacted a variety of commercial chemicals laws over the last decade in response to specific issues.  For example, 18 V.S.A. § 1511 limits the concentration of  phthalates in products intended for children under 3 years old; 9 V.S.A. … Continue reading →

Posted in chemical safety regulation, children's products, flame retardants, label laws, phthalates, public health, synthetic chemicals | Comments Off on Vermont strives for comprehensive chemical regulation

Inert but potent

Posted on March 6, 2014 by tbach

Three environmental and public health groups represented by Earthjustice filed suit yesterday, asking the U.S. District Court in San Francisco to require the EPA to promulgate final rules requiring public disclosure of specific pesticide ingredients. The Center for Environmental Health, Beyond Pesticides, and Physicians for … Continue reading →

Posted in agriculture and human health, carcinogens, chemical safety regulation, consumer pressure, environmental health, EPA, FIFRA, label laws, pesticides, PSR, public health, risk communication, synthetic chemicals | Comments Off on Inert but potent

Good and Bad News on Phthalates in the U.S.

Posted on January 31, 2014 by tbach

This study recently published in Environmental Health Perspectives, the monthly peer-reviewed journal supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, concluded that phthalate exposure in the … Continue reading →

Posted in carcinogens, CDC, chemical safety regulation, congress, consumer pressure, label laws, NHANES, NIEHS, phthalates, synthetic chemicals | Comments Off on Good and Bad News on Phthalates in the U.S.

No More Tears – and probable carcinogens

Posted on January 23, 2014 by tbach

Johnson & Johnson has just quietly reformulated its baby shampoo as a result of consumer pressure.  It no longer contains formaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane.  In 2011, J&J promised to remove both chemicals from all of its baby care products by the … Continue reading →

Posted in carcinogens, chemical safety regulation, environmental health law, EWG, label laws, precautionary principle, public health, synthetic chemicals, uncertainty | Comments Off on No More Tears – and probable carcinogens

General Mills learns about the shelf life of failed GMO ballot initiatives

Posted on January 4, 2014 by tbach

“No more GMOs in your Cheerios,” shouts this L.A. Times article today. General Mills has announced that it will stop using bioengineered corn  starch and sugar cane in its core cereal brand after a year-long campaign by Green America, a nonprofit  organization that “mobilizes people in … Continue reading →

Posted in food labeling, Food processing industry, GMO, label laws | Comments Off on General Mills learns about the shelf life of failed GMO ballot initiatives

Scrutinizing food labels – less is more?

Posted on December 18, 2013 by tbach

As enviro health activists seek improved or additional labels on everything from food to baby toys, we’ve witnessed pushback by manufacturers and retailers in state legislatures, as well as at the polls.  The recent successful attempts at GMO labeling via … Continue reading →

Posted in environmental health law, food contamination, food labeling, Food processing industry, GMO, label laws, precautionary principle, risk management, uncertainty | Comments Off on Scrutinizing food labels – less is more?