Top EPA Official Says Focus of EPA Endocrine Program Unlikely to Change

[ttweed@wildrockies.org (Tony Tweedale)]

  >Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 14:24:00 -0400 (EDT)
  >From: GROUP LIBRARY-HQ 202-260-0748 <LIBRARY-HQ@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV>
  >To: environb-l@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov
  >Subject: Enviro-Newsbrief 08/15/97
  >Message-ID: <01IMH05Q5HJA8Y8AU0@mr.rtpnc.epa.gov>
  >
  >
  >Enviro-Newsbrief                                  August 15, 1997
  >
  >     The following is a daily update summarizing news of interest
  >to EPA staff. It includes information from current news sources:
  >newspapers, newsletters, and other publications. For more
  >information, contact the EPA Headquarters Information Resources
  >Center at (202) 260-5922, or e-mail LIBRARY-HQ.
  >
  >**Viewpoints expressed in the following summaries do not
  >necessarily reflect EPA policy**
  >
  
  >** ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS **
  >
  >Top EPA Official Says Focus of EPA Endocrine Program Unlikely to
  >Change. Inside E.P.A. Weekly Report, August 15, 1997, pp20-21.
  >
  >               The decision of a leading toxicologist to retract his major
  >study on the cumulative effects of "endocrine disruptors"
  >will not immediately impact EPA or policy on this topic,
  >according to James Aidala, associate administrator for EPA's
  >Office of Pesticides, Pollution and Toxic Substances.
  >               Dr. John McLachan, a former scientific director of the
  >National Institute of Environmental Health Studies, did a study
  >which concluded that mixtures of chemicals thought to disrupt
  >human endocrine systems are more toxic than single chemicals.
  >McLachan withdrew his study, claiming he could not reproduce the
  >results of the original.
  >               Aidala said the premise of the study, that combinations of
  >chemicals have a synergistic effect on reproductive systems, is
  >still a valid theory. "Many people say that if there is all this
  >endocrine disruption going on, then we should see it in
  >individual chemicals. Well we don't see it. We do not see the
  >predicted potencies if you look at these chemicals individually.
  >That is why the synergy theory was and still is a good theory.
  >But there for a bit, you thought that the work made it more than
  >just that, a theory," he said.
  >               Aidala said the retraction will not affect EPA's work on
  >developing screening mechanisms for endocrine disruptors. "The
  >fact that he could not replicate it given the context of the
  >study does not mean there is not synergy going on out there, it
  >just means we have not found it yet."
  
  
  tony tweedale