The precautionary principle is an approach sometimes used by policy makers in situations where there is the possibility of harm from making a decision and conclusive evidence is not yet available. It essentially means better safe than sorry. This is the approach that I use in evaluating the toxicity of products. When I research a product or material and there is credible, emerging evidence that it is potentially harmful I will recommend against its use. This doesn’t mean you should never use it or throw it away, but rather it’s an indication that there is a reason to be concerned and safer alternatives should be sought when possible. Think tobacco and asbestos. For years consumers were told that these products were safe, in spite of evidence to the contrary.
The current regulations in our country are not even close to adequate to keep us safe.
- Over 40,000 registered chemicals are in use in the U.S. and only 1% have been rigorously tested for safety.1, 2
- In the U.S., 11 chemicals have been restricted for use in Personal Care products vs. 1373 in the EU.3
- Congress passed a law in 2016 to improve regulation. As of 2020, the EPA is actually requiring less testing than under the old law.4
The belief that the amount of chemicals present in consumer products is so low that it is not concerning doesn’t take into account the cumulative or synergistic effect of the onslaught of chemicals we are exposed to every day. This example from oecotextiles.blog illustrates this risk. “a dose of mercury that would kill 1 out of 100 rats, when combined with a dose of lead that would kill 1 out of 1000 rats – kills every rat exposed!”
We must advocate for dramatic improvements from government and industry in chemical management. In the meantime, let’s choose to be safe rather than sorry.
Here is a question from Audrey:
“I have been looking for a dustbuster with a good brush attachment for about a month. I thought I finally found one (see below). In my searching I discovered that many Dustbusters have the proposition 65 warning. I emailed the below company and finally got a response that yes it also has a prop 65 warning. I wrote them again asking what parts have the warning. I am still waiting for a response. This is very frustrating. Does anyone know of a good dustbuster with a good brush that doesn’t have the prop 65 warning? thank you.
Handheld Vacuum, Meiyou 12000pa Powerful Suction Corded Hand Vacuum, Mini Ultra-Light Handheld Vacuum Cleaner with 20ftt Power Cord for Deep Car Pet Hair Dust Gravel Cleaning Without Interruption. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B088K5QMB1/ref=cm_sw_r_em_tai_IXMAFbF4W31FF
Readers, any suggestions?
Debra,
Good luck with your new endeavor. I always appreciate reading your sage advice on various topics, especially anything to do with living a toxic free lifestyle. I look forward to reading your book. I also enjoy Lisa’s input.
Best wishes to you and your family.
Thank you! This is Lisa. I have been writing all of the new information on the site for the last year and also wrote the new e-book. Debra retired from the site in June of 2019.
Hi Debra! Excited about your new site! I put together a little education video to help make other aware about how toxins enter the body. Take a look.. http://www.notoxinzone.com
It’s Lisa. Debra retired from the site in 2019. The video looks great!