Environmental Working Group-Supreme Scaremongers

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is in the middle of a 14-year losing streak when it comes to getting anything scientifically correct. The science losing streak continued last week when they fired up another, idiotic scare about a 'new ' chemical—their words, not mine—called triphenyl phosphate (TPHP), an almost supernaturally-safe component of nail polish, reports Josh Bloom. (1) And, who can blame them. After generating phony chemical scares about chemicals such as BPA and phthalates and miniscule amounts of pesticides on produce, it was past time to toss out something new to scare people, who will then donate generously to EWG to protect them from this hideous toxin. The chemical in question may be new, but the game is the same, as is the group's strategy:

• Report that there is new evidence that we are being poisoned by the chemical, since it can be detected in the urine.
• Never mention how much is in the urine.
• Or that thousands of chemicals, natural or otherwise, can also be detected in urine.
• Use the word 'children' since it never fails.
• Make sure to mention the words 'endocrine disruptors.'

How deadly is TPHP? Here are data from CDC:

• It takes 1.4 grams orally to kill a rat. That's a whole lot. Extrapolating this amount to humans, a lethal dose would be 245 grams (9 ounces), which is about the weight of 80 packets of sugar.
• Workers exposed to an average air concentration of 3.5 mg/m3 for as long as ten years showed no evidence of adverse clinical effects. This amount is equivalent to 0.26 ppm, a concentration that even industrial workers will never experience.
• And even if you could blow the stuff into the air so that it looked like Beijing in the room concentrations of TPHP aerosol high enough to produce acute toxic effects in man have not been achieved.

---

Summary: It is impossible to eat or breathe enough of TPHP to harm yourself, but EWG still wants you to be scared because a tiny amount of it is found in nail polish. (1) Let's take a look at the data. (2) The total amount measured during a 24-hour period in the urine was:

• 1/10,000th of a milligram in the women who did not get their nails done.
• 11/10,000ths of a ,milligram in women who did.

To put this into perspective, the estimated lethal dose of TPHP is 245 grams, which comes out to 223 million-times more than what is found in a woman's urine after having her nails done. Here's another scare example: In 2011 and 2013 EWG perpetuated the myth of apples as a dangerous fruit. Since apples are one of their favorite 'dirty dozen', it is also on their 2015 list. (3) Why Dangerous? Because of trace amount of pesticides. How high the amount? For the 2011 scare, the amount of pesticide detected was 2.5 percent of the EPA tolerance dose. Yes—it is worth repeating, 2.5 percent of the EPA tolerance dose. Is this reason to alarm folks? Well, one thought was that it might be the tipping point to convince folks to buy organic. How worrisome is 2.5 percent of EPA's tolerance dose? Angela Logomasini reports, “A research paper by University of Texas Professor Frank Cross highlights findings from a number of studies showing that the EPA's risk estimates overstate pesticide exposure by as much as 99,000 to 463,000 times actual exposure. As a result, standards are actually tens of thousands—maybe hundreds of thousands—times more stringent than necessary to protect public health.” (4) Dr. Marion Nestle, author and professor of nutrition, says a person would need to eat so much of the produce on the dirty dozen you can't even imagine. (5) Yet, here's the response form EWG; “When given a choice, more consumers are choosing organic fruits and vegetables or using EWG's shopper's guide to find an easy affordable way to avoid toxic chemicals,” said Sonya Lunder, an EWG senior analyst. (6) The move to organic is echoed in their 2015 guide noting that people who want to reduce their exposure to pesticides in produce look for an all-organic diet. Most of the media pick up on this 'organic' sales pitch without doing any checking on their own. Importantly, regarding so-called pesticide-free organic food, folks should be aware that just because it is organic doesn't mean it is without pesticide. Steve Savage points out, “Many consumers believe that by buying organic they are eliminating exposure to pesticide residues. This erroneous concept is often encouraged by some of those who market organic products or those who advocate for organic. There is a long list (1700 products) of the materials allowed on organic products published by OMRI (Organic Material Review Institute). The pesticides on this list are definitely real pesticides (they kill pests) and so they have to be registered for use by the EPA like any other pesticide.” (7)

One-fourth of all fruits and vegetables marketed as organic had significant residues of synthetic pesticides on them

So with all the suggestion about buying organic, folks should be aware that just because its organic, it doesn't mean food is pesticide free. One-fourth of all fruits and vegetables marketed as organic had significant residues of synthetic pesticides on them. Further, nearly a third of the time when the synthetic residues were found on organic produce, they were present at a concentration even higher than the average levels found on conventional fruits and vegetables. (8) Don't expect to hear this statistic from EWG. Lastly, there's the topic of endocrine disruptors, a favorite scare tactic of EWG. In the haste to blame man-made chemicals, EWG ignores that many foods we routinely eat exhibit the same characteristics. Chocolate, garlic, celery, coffee, grapefruit, tea and cocoa have been shown to have this activity. (9) Also, Gordon Edwards discloses that more than 300 plants, in 156 common families, contain estrogens that may bind with receptors of human or wildlife. Naturally occurring estrogens abound in many cereals, legumes, fruits and tubers. (10) EWG specializes in efforts to scare people about the mere presence of chemicals and metals in food and drinking water. The group is impervious to Paracelsus' 450-year old basic technology principle that the dose makes the poison. Cleverly, they avoid telling consumers how miniscule the concentrations are that are detected. References

1. Josh Bloom, “Killer nail polish, Meadowlark Lemon, and Bocce balls,” science2.0.com, October 25, 2015
2. E. Mendelsohn et al., “Nail polish as a source of exposure to triphenyl phosphate,” Environ. Int., October 17, 2015
3. “EWG's shopper's guide to pesticides in produce,” ewg.org/foodnews, accessed November 10, 2015
4. Angela Logomasini, “The dangerous demonization of our food,” Competitive Enterprise Institute, August 4, 2012
5. Kelly April, “Dirty dozen debate,” Los Angeles Times, July 22, 2011
6. Sara Sciammacco, “Apples top EWG's dirty dozen,” ewg.org, April 22, 2013
7. Steve Savage, “An unlikely pair: heavy metals and organic produce,” redgreenandblue.org, September 27, 2010
8. Alex Avery, “Natural mistake,” Hudson Institute, May 29, 2002
9. Bruce Ames, “Dietary carcinogens and anticarcinogens,” Science, 221, 1256, 1983
10. J. G. Edwards, 21st Century, 52, Fall 1996