Formaldehyde, a chemical substance ideal for businesses and disclaimers, is also used in products such as furniture and clothing. However, it can also cause cancer and severe respiratory problems. Therefore, in 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency began a new effort to regulate it.
The chemical industry fought back with strength that surprised even veteran agency officials. The campaign was led by Lynn Dekleva, a lobbyist at the American Chemistry Council, an industry group that spends millions of dollars on government lobbying.
Dr. Dekleva is currently at the EPA for important work. She runs an office with authority to approve new chemicals for use. Previously, she joined the EPA in her first Trump administration after spending 32 years with chemical maker DuPont.
Her recent employer, Chemical Lobbying Group, has made the Environmental Protection Agency course on formaldehyde a priority and pushes agencies to eliminate programs that assess chemical risks in human health . Over the past few weeks, they have urged agencies to completely discard work on formaldehyde and start from scratch when assessing risk.
The American Chemistry Council is also looking to change the agency's approval process for new chemicals and speed up EPA safety reviews. That review process is an important part of Dr. Dekerba's scope at the agency.
Another former Chemical Council lobbyist Nancy Beck has returned with Dr. Decleva at the EPA in his role in regulating existing chemicals. Council President Chris Yarn told a Senate hearing shortly after Trump's inauguration that his group intends to tackle “unnecessary regulation” of US chemicals. “Healthy, safe, economically vibrant countries rely on chemistry,” he said.
It is not uncommon, but it is not illegal for industry groups to try to influence public policy for the benefit of their member companies. The ACC estimates that formaldehyde-based products support more than 1.5 million jobs in the United States.
What extraordinary, health and legal experts said is the extent of the industry's efforts to block EPA's scientific research on chemicals that have long been recognized as carcinogens, and chemical regulators As an effort, how did the architects put their efforts into it? . At the same time, the Trump administration moved to significantly reduce the federal scientific workforce.
“They already have a track record of ignoring science,” said Tracy Woodruff, director of the Reproductive Health and Environmental Program at the University of California, San Francisco. “Now they're in charge of government agencies that determine the rules.”
While leading the Chemistry Council's fight to limit formaldehyde regulations, Dr. Dekleva called for federal officials to investigate potential biases. Industry groups used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain emails from federal employees and criticised them in official statements about what they wrote. Dozens of industry-funded research papers have been submitted to institutions that minimize the risk of formaldehyde.
The ACC also sued both the EPA and the National Academy. This advises the public that it condemns researchers of a lack of scientific integrity on scientific issues.
Chemistry Council spokeswoman Allison Edwards said group staff met regularly with EPA staff. Human exposure. “We want to be one of the many stakeholders at the table.”
Molly Vaseliou, a spokesman for the EPA, said the agency will continue to confirm that “chemicals do not pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment.” At the same time, agents will also work to approve “the chemicals needed to promote America's innovation and competitiveness,” she said.
Formaldehyde cancer risk
Formaldehyde smoke can cause wheezing and burning eyes, especially when it accumulates indoors. The danger was evident when plywood formaldehyde was being used as temporary trailer homes were being built for dozens of people for the victims of Hurricane Katrina.
And there are long-term risks, that is, several types of cancer. The World Health Organization's Cancer Research Institute concluded in 2004 that chemicals are human carcinogens, and in 2011 the US Department of Health listed them as human carcinogens.
Chemicals are limited in workplaces, certain composite wood products, and pesticides. But efforts to tighten US regulations have stagnated in the face of industry opposition.
With the “Cancer Moonshot” program making cancer deaths a priority, President Biden revived the EPA assessment of the health effects of chemicals in 2021 and released a draft the following year. That effort was the first step towards regulating formaldehyde under the agency's integrated risk information system.
The Chemical Council has led a coalition of industry groups, including the Composite Panel Association and Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers, claiming that formaldehyde is already rigorously studied and has strict industry controls in place.
In a half-dozen letters to the EPA, Dr. Dekleva raised a list of complaints regarding the way agencies are conducting assessments on behalf of the industry group's formaldehyde committee.
She questioned research linking formaldehyde with leukemia or blood cancers, and accused the agency of not relying on the best available science. There were doses that formaldehyde did not pose a risk, she said. Some studies have shown that inhaled formaldehyde does not easily move past the nose to cause harm to the body.
In light of these issues, Dr. Dekleva writes that the agency's draft evaluation is “flawed and unreliable without major revisions.”
To strengthen its litigation, the industry group enlisted consulting company experts and submitted opinions and research to the EPA, which minimizes the risk of formaldehyde. The companies helped protect cigarettes, including those previously commissioned by tobacco companies.
The ACC also submitted 41 peer review studies, saying it rebutted the link between formaldehyde and leukemia. A review from the New York Times found that the majority of the research was funded by industry groups. This includes at least 11 from the Health and Environmental Effects Research Foundation, an organization established by the American Council on Chemicals.
David Michaels, an epidemiologist and professor and professor at George Washington University's School of Public Health, is the deputy secretary of labor aides under President Barack Obama, and industry strategy is to create the emergence of disagreements among scientists. He said that.
He said it was true, but that contradictions could always be present in human research. “There is little disagreement among independent scientists that formaldehyde causes cancer.”
Targeted Scientists
For more than 150 years, the National Academy has advised the US government on science. In 2021, we were asked to consider EPA research on formaldehyde.
It became a target of the American Council of Chemicals.
The industry group has used the Free Information Act to obtain internal emails and support staff of the panel members assessing the EPA's formaldehyde reviews, and “in favorable to contested research claiming that formaldehyde causes leukemia.” He accused him of showing bias.
A former Environmental Protection Agency scientist said, “great” news that Congress might try to replicate an influential Chinese study that showed formaldehyde could cause leukemia, for example. He explained that.
Wendy E. Wagner, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law and an expert on the use of science by environmental policymakers, said he has not seen how the comments reflect bias. “In the end, do they not know what the outcome will be?” she said. “We hope that all scientists will be enthusiastic about potential future research.”
Dr. Dekleva called for investigations at both the EPA and the National Academy and the removal of potentially biased panel members and staff. That included scientists who had previously accepted federal research grants.
In July 2023, industry groups sued the EPA and the National Academy, accusing the researchers of lack of scientific integrity. The Chemical Council said that the study of the National Academy Research in the regulation of formaldehyde was “arbitrary, whimsical and illegal.”
“It was merciless and pale,” said Maria Door, a scientist at the EPA, has been the senior director of chemical policy at the Environmental Defense Fund for 30 years. “They really ratcheted off attacks on federal workers.”
National Academies was in its position and the following month published a report reviewing the findings of EPA's integrated risk information system that shows that formaldehyde is carcinogenic and increases the risk of leukemia.
These conclusions are shared by other global health authorities.
Mary Schbauer Berrigan, director of evidence synthesis at the World Health Organization's Cancer Research Institute, said there is “sufficient human evidence” that formaldehyde causes leukemia AS and nasopharyngeal cancer. Mikko Vananen, a spokesman for the European Chemical Agency, said that while some questions about the specific link to leukemia remain unanswered, it is sufficient evidence to classify formaldehyde as a carcinogen. . Formaldehyde “in principle we cannot place it in the EU market,” he said.
In March 2024, a federal judge dismissed the Chemistry Council's case. And earlier this year, near the end of the Biden administration, the EPA issued a final risk decision under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Mary A. Fox, a chemical risk assessment expert at Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health and a member of the committee that reviewed the EPA's research on formaldehyde, said the link between formaldehyde and leukemia. He said it accurately reflects uncertainty regarding the . But they had documented the flow of many other evidence that provided the link, Dr. Fox said.
“It's an inevitable advancement in science. As you learn more over time, you learn that health effects will manifest at lower concentrations than you thought,” she said.
Following Trump's reelection, the American Council of Chemicals has signed letters from various industry groups calling for widespread changes to policy, citing formaldehyde in particular. According to a letter from December 5th, the EPA's findings on formaldehyde “urge your administration to suspend and reconsider.”
The EPA “should return to scientific drawings,” the Chemistry Council said in January. The group was particularly concerned about the agency's proposed workplace restrictions. This states that companies are already taking to protect workers, such as the use of personal protective equipment.
The ACC also supports a bill from Congressional Republicans that will end the integrated risk information system.
Shortly afterwards, Trump transition officials said Dr. Decleva will return to the EPA and implement a program to evaluate chemicals for approval. The Chemical Council, which has long been suing the backlog, is pushing agents to speed up approvals.
During the first Trump administration, whistleblowers at the agency were explained in inspectors' investigations how they faced “severe” pressures to eliminate the backlog, sometimes at the expense of safety. Shortly after taking office, the Trump administration fired the inspector who conducted the investigation.
On January 20th, the ACC welcomed President Trump. “Americans want a stronger and more affordable country,” said Yahn, the group's president. “American chemical manufacturers can help.”
