Everyone wants to make the world safer for children. Common sense tells us that clean air and pure water are conducive to their good health. But it is important to distinguish between facts driven by science and presumption fueled by ideology.
More health care advocates are suggesting, even charging, that environmental contaminants are responsible for increased incidences of some cancers, birth defects and asthma among children. The result is pressure for more restrictive standards regarding such things as pesticides and urban air quality.
Yet results of a university research project argue that it is far from clear whether such increases are due to environmental factors.
A report released recently by the Center for the Study of American Business at Washington University contends there are too many unanswered questions to justify blaming any particular group or activity.
On the contrary, researchers found that "the largest threats to children's health appear to be preventable, including accidents and behavioral factors. " A full 40 percent of deaths in the 1 to 14 age group are caused by accidents.
The study cited misleading data linking increases in childhood cancers to environmental factors. It noted that the Environmental Protection Agency had warned that kidney and pelvic cancers in children increased 45 percent between 1973 and 1994.
Looking at the increase in the actual numbers of cases, however, puts the risks in perspective. Such cancers are rare, according to the study, and a better way of stating the case is that the incidence rose by one in 1 million during the period.
The study also looks at birth defects, the second leading cause of death for children age 1 to 4. It targets behavior as the key element. Data show that three out of four cases of birth defects could have been prevented if the mother had received proper nutrition and abstained from alcohol.
In examining the increasing incidence of childhood asthma, said to affect 5 million children, researchers noted a marked change in causal blame. Outdoor pollution, once thought a major factor, has been supplanted by indoor agents such as tobacco smoke, molds, mites and cockroach allergen.
The Washington University research also questions the wisdom of drastically reducing the use of pesticides on fruits and vegetables.
It maintains that nutritional benefits outweigh the risks of pesticide residues. Further, eliminating pesticide use would increase natural toxins and carcinogens and make produce more expensive and less affordable for many families.
The study acknowledges that government policies focusing on pollutants can improve public health overall. But it challenges the wisdom of portraying the environment as a detriment to the well-being of children. In doing so, researchers insist, more serious health risks are overlooked and more promising health-related efforts go unfunded.
Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.
Copyright © 1998 Citizens for the Integrity of Science. All rights reserved on original material. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of Steven J. Milloy.