Media

A new year-long study from the Campaign for Healthier Solutions (CHS) claims that many popular products found at the biggest dollar store chains across the country contain toxic chemicals. The report showed that nearly 50 personal care, baby, beauty, and cleaning products were found to have toxic chemicals. Many of these products were kids’ toys or baby products, which raises concerns for parents – especially parents of young kids, who often put things in their mouths."Busy parents shouldn't have to scan the ingredients list of every product they buy to make sure it's safe for our families,” Yolanda Brown Alston, director of workforce programs at Harambee House, said in a news release. “Dollar stores need to step up on chemical safety and provide quality products that add value to our communities.” 

The Campaign for Healthier Solutions (CHS) today published the results of a year-long effort to collect, test, and screen dollar store products for chemicals of concern. Highlighted products of concern purchased at Dollar Tree/Family Dollar and/or Dollar General include: “Baby Shark” baby lotion containing a formaldehyde-releasing chemical; daily moisturizer containing a chemical banned in European cosmetics; light-up children’s bracelets, plastic roses and mini candy pails containing lead; children’s products made with polyvinyl chloride or PVC, and receipts containing bisphenol-S. Published the week of Mother’s Day, “Product Testing for the People: Pitfalls, Persistence, and Progress in Transforming Dollar Stores” provides safe shopping tips for families and actionable recommendations for Dollar Tree and Dollar General to expand, improve, and enforce their chemical policies. The report also highlights loopholes in federal law that allow companies to sell products containing chemicals of concern, showing the importance of corporate action. Take action! 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced Thursday that it plans to rehash regulations under the Risk Management Program (RMP). The decision comes after lobbyists for the chemical industry sent a letter requesting the agency weaken the rule requiring nearly 12,000 highly hazardous industrial facilities to prevent and plan for chemical disasters.

The EPA is bending to the will of corporate lobbyists who are seeking to eliminate stronger rules finalized in 2024. These more protective rules were the result of years of public debate and incorporated input from industry and the public alike, including advocacy by environmental justice, labor, occupational and public health, and environmental organizations.

“It would mean a real disservice to communities, first responders and workers,” said Adam Kron, an attorney with Earthjustice. “It would put them in greater harm’s way from these chemical disasters.” Earthjustice is part of a coalition of environmental groups that tracks chemical disasters. This coalition has found that since January 2021, there have been more than 1,100 chemical incidents. The news of a potential rewrite comes days after Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress, in which he vowed to take on toxic chemicals, saying, “our goal is to get toxins out of our environment, poisons out of our food supply and keep our children healthy and strong.” Yet that rhetoric also comes as Trump has pledged broad deregulatory action, which could clash with upholding chemical safeguards. 

So-called sustainable and/or green chemistry is being promoted in many circles as a means to both harness chemistry innovation to support more sustainable economies and reduce the environmental and public health impacts of chemical manufacturing.  As we work to build research and policy which deliver health protections and justice to communities most impacted by the toxic harm of the chemical industry, we must critically examine sustainable chemistry initiatives and ask who will benefit from the technologies and practices.  When something is promoted as “sustainable chemistry,” who is it sustainable for?  Read more of this joint blog from Coming Clean and EJHA.