Take care - the future of the industry is at stake
15 Jan 2000
It's June, and across the country, sixth-formers are sitting the 'A'- levels which will decide their entrances into university courses. Out there somewhere are the next generation of process engineers and chemists. Unfortunately, owing to recent environmental campaigns and news stories, many of them may well be worried if their choice of profession might damage their chances of producing a generation of their own.
The problem of endocrine disrupters the 'gender-bending' compounds which mimic the properties of oestrogen and have been implicated in the 'feminisation' of fish, molluscs and reptiles is not simply one of countering adverse publicity, however. As we report on page 12, the Environment Agency has charged the chemical industry with not acting fast enough either to prevent these chemicals entering the environment, or to develop safer alternatives. Meanwhile, it points out, there is a serious dearth of hard information about which chemicals are responsible, which animals might be affected, and whether humans are indeed at risk.
The Chemical Industries Association accepts that endocrine modulators are a potentially serious problem, and agrees that something should be done, but its chosen course of action seems to invite scepticism from the public.
The Environment Agency's view on endocrine disrupters is fully in line with the 'precautionary principle' if a substance is suspected of disrupting hormones, it should be withdrawn until it is proved to be safe. 'One of the most effective controls on endocrine modulators is to prevent them getting into the environment,' is its persuasive argument. Yet the CIAresponds that nothing should be done until a test is developed for endocrine disruption. The CIA's response, although scientifically sound, does nothing to enhance its industry's rapidly-slipping standing in the public's eyes they could be forgiven for thinking that the industry is putting its own profits ahead of safety and environmental protection.
As the CIA's young person of the year pointed out (see page 5), 'in order for the chemical industry to shed its bad boy image, it must start young as today's schoolkids are much more aware of environmental buzz issues.' Schoolchildren, taught to take care with certain chemicals because they are 'suspected cancer-causing agents', are not likely to have a great deal of respect for an industry which proposes to take no action against some compounds because they are 'suspected endocrine modulators'.
The chemical industry repeats time and time again that it is desperate to improve its standing with the public. Its future depends on public acceptance, it says. Perhaps in this case, it might be wise to take the more cautious option and start acting to control suspected endocrine modulators. As every schoolchild knows, it's much better to be safe than sorry. SN
