For 25 years, Environmental Working Group EWG has worked to protect people from toxic chemicals — in their homes, food, tap water and everyday household products. We use unique expertise to gather and analyze mountains of data — on personal care products , household cleaners , processed foods, drinking water contaminants, agriculture damage — to expose risky practices, and products, confront manufactures and industries directly, and challenge the chemical status quo.
Our signature shopping guides and databases push companies to make cleaner, greener products and give consumers the information they need to make safer choices today. Our teams in DC, San Francisco, Sacramento and Minneapolis go directly to lawmakers to educate them about these issues and push for the regulatory reforms we need. More than 26 million website sessions; including 4.
Our work last year was mentioned over 23, times by print, online, TV and radio outlets. EWG celebrates diversity and is committed to creating an inclusive environment for all employees. The Alar scare of three years ago shows what can happen when science is taken out of context or the risks of a product are blown out of proportion. Scares about tiny traces of synthetic chemicals, such as pesticides, are a distraction from important risks.
The amounts of pesticide residues ingested are so small, relative to levels that have been shown to have toxicological effects, they are toxicologically implausible as health risks. Finances Related People Donations. Phthalates in Pregnancy Most expecting mothers constantly question whether various things they do or consume during their pregnancy will have a negative effect on their newborns.
Paraben Scare EWG has also launched a fear mongering campaign against parabens- the most widely used preservatives in cosmetics. Organic Agenda The EWG has long argued in favor of organic agriculture, claiming that pesticides are a danger to our health and a horrible threat to humanity. Superbug Scare The Environmental Working Group also has a nasty habit of overstating other risks associated with farming and livestock rearing. Vice President for Public Affairs. Co-founder, Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
Director of Government Relations lobbyist. Form Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Barbra Streisand Foundation. Bauman Family Foundation. Brainerd Foundation. Bullitt Foundation. California Endowment. California Wellness Foundation. Charles Engelhard Foundation. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. Clarence E. Heller Charitable Foundation. David B. Gold Foundation. Educational Foundation of America. Environment Now Foundation.
Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund. The group is deeply involved in the movement to advance organic food. Mainstream scientists have criticized Environmental Working Group for some of its campaigns. A poll of experts in toxicology—the study of the effects of potentially damaging chemicals—found that those familiar with EWG believe it overstates the risks of chemical uses. Environmental Working Group was certainly willing to entertain the widely debunked view, most prominently espoused by disbarred British ex-physician and alleged fraudster Andrew Wakefield, that vaccines produced before caused autism.
Each year, EWG releases a report based on U. Department of Agriculture testing results on the twelve fruits or vegetables with the highest pesticide residues; EWG presents the results as a reason to switch to organic food. Environmental Working Group is one of the leading pressure groups opposing modern agricultural practices including the use of gene technology to improve crop performance.
This makes no sense. Below was taken from the Skin Deep Database. Listed as their reference for strong evidence, the European Commission on Endocrine Disruption. The estrogenic activity of parabens appears to increase with increasing chain length. PHBA, the common metabolite does not seem to exhibit endocrine modifying effects. In , a study in the Journal of Applied Toxicology found parabens in breast tumors. Note, levels were not compared to normal breast tissue, a major limitation… journalists reporting on this study drew their conclusions based on assumptions.
Today, parabens are thought to be weak estrogen mimics and potential endocrine disruptors, implicated in a variety of hormonal related problems and diseases.
In my research through the available literature, most of the conclusions related to adverse health effects were made from anecdotal assumptions or had unrealistic methods. What do I mean? Just because it's seen in tissues doesn't mean it's causing harm.
Correlation does not mean causation. Today, parabens are one of the most rigorously tested ingredients in cosmetics and time and time again are demonstrated to be safe. In fact, in the Cutis Dermatological journal, parabens were nominated the Nonallergen of the Year. Parabens have been seen in our urine From a toxicological standpoint, seeing something in your urine is actually a good thing in many cases - this is an indication that it readily passes through your body.
Parabens have been demonstrated to be non-accumulative in tissues. Did you know parabens are also found in many of our foods naturally?
Carrots and berries, for example, naturally contain parabens. With all the fear, the cosmetic industry has responded, making swift steps away from parabens to other less tested, or sometimes demonstrably less safe preservatives…. Harder to fear monger names less recognizable for consumers. THIS is a concern.
0コメント