We’ve Been Slimed — and It’s Not Necessarily Pink

slimed 1.jpg


Cross-posted from the Environmental Working Group‘s blog, Enviro-blog.

Last month, the New York Times published a story about my efforts when I was pregnant to rid my home of toxic chemicals. The story featured a photo of my 18-month-old daughter and recounted how I threw out a large pile of cosmetics, cleaners and other products that my research, using the Environmental Working Group’s online Skin Deep Cosmetics Database, found to contain dangerous substances. While at the time I thought I was doing the right thing for my family, when I read readers’ comments, I felt as if I were on Nickelodeon, in one of those scenes when an unsuspecting person has an entire bucket of green slime dumped on her head.

Readers sneered at my decision to purge my home of toxics when I was pregnant, calling me a control freak with mental health issues. More than one actually suggested that I had obsessive compulsive disorder. There was a certain amount of denial in the comments — an attitude that if something hasn’t killed us by now, it’s probably fine.

Given this response, I’ve been fascinated to watch the public outcry following disclosures that sellers of ground beef have been adding so-called “pink slime” to ground meat to save money. This stuff, officially called “lean finely textured beef.” is made by gassing and repackaging “lean trimmings” from the slaughterhouse floor. After a strong show of public outrage, grocery stores and restaurants have been dropping the stuff like a rotten egg.

Meanwhile, the meat industry has gone on the defensive. Even food-safety heroes like Marion Nestle concede that “pink slime” – despite being a low-quality version of “food” that should really only be suitable for pets and is disgusting to contemplate – is, as the Obama administration has said, safe to eat.

But what if I told you that a far more dangerous type of “pink slime” was actually all over your house and is still all over mine? I’m exaggerating, of course (likely due to my OCD). But hear me out.

Petrochemicals, as we all know, are the basis for plastics. The polyurethane foam in furniture and baby products? Courtesy of the oil industry. As Theo Colborn, a pioneer on chemical health issues, writes in the introduction to “Slow Death by Rubber Duck,” “[w]hen one considers that almost all of the common hormone-disrupting chemicals are derived from oil and natural gas, one can begin to understand why the public does not know the nature of these toxic chemicals, their source, and how and where they have entered our lives.”

Preservatives in cosmetics, flame retardants in furniture, even common ingredients in food are derived from – or are – petrochemicals. Just like pink slime, the by-products of oil production are given a home among the multisyllabic lists of chemicals in ordinary household products, both as a way to find a disposal location for them and to sell them for profit.

In my opinion, this is to be expected: companies will sell what they have any way they can. It is even, you might say, “natural” for corporations to try turn a penny off their garbage. If the impacts on human health weren’t so devastating, and if they told us what they were doing and gave us a choice, well, it might be fine. It would at least be better.

Obviously, though, that’s not what happens. Instead, the things we buy are riddled through with oil-knows-what. Attempts to ban harmful chemicals have to move forward one by one with repeated scientific trials, each regulatory judgment fought tooth-and-nail by the industry. And the chemical/oil industry too often prevails, as happened with the federal Food and Drug Administration’s recent absurd failure to ban bisphenol-A, a dangerous chemical in plastic that’s been linked to obesity, endocrine disorders, diabetes, behavioral problems and reproductive health impacts.

We used to think pollution was out there, like the burning Cuyahoga River. It’s profoundly uncomfortable, instead, to acknowledge that it has intruded where we need to feel safe: in our homes and even our bodies.

No one really knows the compounding effects of, for example, the chemicals that act like hormones in our plastics when combined with the traces of birth control pills in our drinking water. As just one example, I am concerned about my daughter’s health in light of the possibility that hormones in products could be factors in the early onset of puberty among American girls, a widespread phenomenon.

Those who criticized me on The New York Times website were right about one thing: knowing about all this stuff does sometimes feel like enough to drive you crazy. That’s why I think that there should be rules that prevent products from entering the stream of commerce until they are proven to be safe, to replace the current standard of, basically, “whatever.”

So, in the face of all the uncertainty about health impacts from toxics, maybe I am a control freak. That is, if being a control freak means that I try to control my family’s exposure to harmful chemicals – or even those that just could be harmful. I don’t want to hand over the responsibility to some oil exec who would like to use our homes and lives as a place to store his leftover gunk.

But the sad truth is that it’s practically impossible to control altogether our exposures to the many chemicals in our cars, in the air and dust and in furniture and household items. I know too much to think I can control it all. And even when I’m making judgment calls, it’s far more difficult than it should be to know whom (and what) to trust.

Like every family, we are doing the best we can, given our limited information, time and budget. I believe this is normally called “parenting.” After all, someone is making all the decisions about what we’re exposed to and what the ingredients in everything are. For my daughter’s sake, I only wish it were me.

Refinery factory small.jpg

6 thoughts on “We’ve Been Slimed — and It’s Not Necessarily Pink

  1. I’ve been labeled as being anal-retentive for my efforts to create a healthier environment for my children. Like you, I am a litte surprised by this reaction. Like the other commenter, I suspect it is defensive in nature. Modern parents are already overwhelmed by the innumerable pressures of balancing parenthood and career in today’s world. Let’s face it, adding an additional layer of priorities is simply more work that many don’t have the time, energy or patience to take on. And who can blame them, really? I think most modern parents deal with some level of perceived inadequacy because we live in a world with almost impossible expectations.

    Unlike the approach of the generation before ours, our own identity is much more closely aligned with how we parent. For our parents, raising children just sort of happened in the background while the rest of life’s challenges had to be dealt with. That isn’t a slur against them. Mothers joining the workforce and the skyrocketing divorce-rate resulted in a whole lot of single mothering and every-other-weekend fathering. At the same time, there was a lot of popular psychology being tossed about that reinforced the notion that a healthy child is one who learns to fend for herself. So we had the latch-key. Our children have smart phones with location tracking. And yet we would have it no other way. We know first hand what it was like to grow up under the hands-off approach. Being a “helicopter” is not an insult to me. That’s because as a child I was alone in the wilderness of life enough that the notion of a hovering search-and-rescue craft still holds a certain comforting appeal to me. And yet the pendulum is beginning to swing the other way. Sensationalist articles about frothing-at-the-mouth helicopter parents and their oh-so-outrageous antics are predictable. So there is a generational tension and now an ongoing debate about just how far the other way this generation has gone. Without attempting to answer which is the better approach, suffice it to say that the default for modern parents is greater emphasis on ensuring the well-being of our children. Almost to a fault, admittedly.

    I think what sets us most apart from the generation immediately preceding ours is how much self-worth we place on our parenting. As a result, it is essentially a given that the decisions modern parents make are going to be centered around what is best for their children, and not what is necessarily convenient for themselves. If you aren’t putting your children ahead of yourself, you haven’t evolved. Or so goes the argument. So if one parent is doing something they think is best for their children, there is an inherent slight against the parent who isn’t doing it (“What, you don’t care about your children enough to [insert apparently-caring activity here]?”). An easy way to reconcile that dissonance is to retort that you are actually doing your child no favors by being overprotective. A funny little circular argument ensues because what is truly the best approach is one of life’s greater mysteries, more likely to be resolved on the individual’s journey than in the comment sections of the internet.

    Regardless of who is ultimately right or wrong, I try not to judge or to give too much credence to those judgments made about my parenting. After all, I know that my heart is in the right place and I’m merely trying to do what I think is best for my children. At the same time, I try not to make others feel as though they are being “preached” to, because I’m reasonably certain that they are, too.

  2. I saw that article, I didn’t realize you were you! I think people recoil because it’s too much to think about and absorb, and they don’t want to feel helpless. Which they are/we are. The one little thing I think we can do is seek out alternatives for ourselves and speak about our concerns to others, so thank you for doing that! I bet for every nutjob commenter there was a silent reader who will check out the EWG website, so that’s a win in my book. 🙂

    • I agree of course! You can’t judge the real reaction by the comments. And a lot of it is defensive — and understandably so. There’s far too much for parents and others to have to think about already!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s