After the Congressional Research Service (CRS) questioned the validity of agency regulations that had not been submitted as required by law to Congress and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness wrote to House and Senate leaders asking Congress to advise the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that its endocrine disruptor screening program “is not in effect” until the required notice is provided. More information about the CRS report appears in issue 332 of this Update. According to a news source, EPA’s program, mandated under the Food Quality Protection Act, was designed to identify pesticides that might cause adverse effects on human health and the environment. The center, a business-backed think tank, cited the CRS report in making its case to nullify the program. An EPA spokesperson reportedly responded that its action describing the agency’s endocrine disruptor policies and procedures and announcing the list of chemicals to receive testing…
Category Archives Issue 334
The U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Health and Human Services have published a notice announcing the fifth meeting of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Scheduled for February 9, 2010, the meeting will be conducted as an online webinar and is expected to consist of discussions about (i) nutrient adequacy, (ii) energy balance and weight management, (iii) carbohydrates and protein, (iv) sodium, potassium and water, (v) fatty acids and cholesterol, (vi) ethanol, and (vii) food safety. Written comments may be submitted and must be received no later than February 3 for the committee’s consideration before the meeting. Comments may also be submitted at any time “throughout the Committee deliberation process.” To participate in the online program, pre-registration is required. Webinar capacity is limited, and a waiting list will be maintained if necessary. See Federal Register, January 22, 2010.
U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-Calif.) has called for an independent review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) meat and poultry inspection system, citing the recent recall of approximately 864,000 pounds of beef possibly contaminated with E. coli. Issued by a Montebello, Calif.-based meat packing company, the recall involved ground beef products identified by USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) during a recent food safety assessment. In addition, FSIS reportedly flagged some 2008 products based on the establishment’s records. According to DeLauro, an independent board would “support and advise USDA, ensure that the inspection process is rigorous and scientifically robust, and recommend changes to any practices that are insufficiently protecting our food supply.” She further opined that this latest incident, which involved products produced almost two years ago, “is a glaring indication that the current inspection system for meat and poultry is inherently flawed and not sufficient to protect the…
Scientists and others objecting to the use of recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) to stimulate milk production in dairy cows have reportedly resubmitted a petition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) challenging the new animal drug application approval for an rBGH drug. FDA apparently failed to respond to the original petition, filed in 2007. The petition also requests that dairy products made from cows treated with rBGH be labeled with a health-hazard warning. The petitioners include Samuel Epstein, chair of the Cancer Prevention Coalition; Ronnie Cummins, national director, Organic Consumers Association; Arpad Pusztai, a consultant biologist from Scotland; and Jeffrey Smith, executive director, Institute for Responsible Technology. They claim that rBGH milk poses major cancer and other risks to the U.S. population and that the drug has toxic effects on cows. See World-Wire.com, January 15, 2010.
The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) has responded to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) recent review of bisphenol A in food contact applications, praising regulators for stopping short of a ban on the ubiquitous chemical but criticizing their concern for “hypothetical and non-existent health risks.” FDA has stated that it now shares the National Toxicology Program’s outlook on “the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and young children,” and is considering a more aggressive oversight approach. To this end, the agency may seek new authority to govern BPA and its different formulations through the Food Contact Notification Program created in 2000. This regulatory framework not only requires manufacturers to provide detailed analysis on substance applications, but allows FDA to “quickly protect the public by revoking the use through a notice in the Federal Register.” Noting that BPA was first…
12
