Chemical pollution is “a threat to the thriving of humans and nature of a similar order as climate change” but decades behind global heating in terms of public awareness and action, a report has warned.
The industrial economy has created more than 100 million “novel entities”, or chemicals not found in nature, with somewhere between 40,000 and 350,000 in commercial use and production, the report says. But the environmental and human health effects of this widespread contamination of the biosphere are not widely appreciated, in spite of a growing body of evidence linking chemical toxicity with effects ranging from ADHD to infertility to cancer.
“I suppose that’s the biggest surprise for some people,” Harry Macpherson, senior climate associate at Deep Science Ventures (DSV), which carried out the research, told the Guardian.
“Maybe people think that when you walk down the street breathing the air; you drink your water, you eat your food; you use your personal care products, your shampoo, cleaning products for your house, the furniture in your house; a lot of people assume that there’s really great knowledge and huge due diligence on the chemical safety of these things. But it really isn’t the case.”
Over eight months, as part of a project funded by the Grantham Foundation, Macpherson and colleagues spoke to dozens of researchers, non-profit leaders, entrepreneurs and investors, and analysed hundreds of scientific papers.
According to the DSV report, more than 3,600 synthetic chemicals from food contact materials – the materials that are used in food preparation and packaging – alone are found in human bodies, 80 of which are of significant concern. Pfas “forever chemicals”, for example, have been found in nearly all humans tested, and are now so ubiquitous that in many locations even rainwater contains levels regarded as unsafe to drink. Meanwhile, more than 90% of the global population breathes air that breaches World Health Organization (WHO) pollution guidelines.
When these chemicals contaminate our bodies, the results can be disastrous. The report found there were correlational or causal data linking widely used chemicals with threats to human reproductive, immune, neurological, cardiovascular, respiratory, liver, kidney and metabolic systems.
“One of the main things that came out quite strongly was links between pesticide exposure and reproductive issues,” said Macpherson. “We saw quite strong links – correlation and causation – for miscarriage and people basically struggling to conceive.”
The DSV research adds to previous findings by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research that we have already far exceeded the safe planetary boundary for environmental pollutants, including plastics. On Sunday, another report warned that the world faces a “plastics crisis”, which is causing disease and death from infancy to old age amid a huge acceleration of plastic production.
The report also highlights critical shortcomings in current toxicity assessment, research and testing methods, exposing the ways in which existing checks and balances are failing to protect human and planetary health.
“The way that we’ve generally done the testing has meant that we’ve missed a lot of effects,” Macpherson said. He singled out the assessment of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, which are substances that interfere with hormones, causing problems ranging from infertility to cancer. These have been found to confound the traditional assumption that lower doses will invariably have lesser effects.
“One of the things is that when you have a chemical which is interfering with the endocrine system, it sometimes has a nonlinear response. So you’ll see that there’ll be a response at a very low dose, which you wouldn’t be able to predict from its behaviour at a high dose.”
DSV describes itself as a “venture creator” that spins out companies aimed at tackling big problems in environmental and human health issues. Part of the purpose of the report is to identify problem areas that can be tackled by innovation.
skip past newsletter promotion
The planet’s most important stories. Get all the week’s environment news – the good, the bad and the essential
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
Currently, chemical toxicity as an environmental issue receives just a fraction of the funding that is devoted to climate change, a disproportionality that Macpherson says should change. “We obviously don’t want less funding going into the climate and the atmosphere,” he said. “But this we think – really, proportionally – needs more attention.”
However, there were features of the problem that mean it lends itself more easily to solutions. “The good thing is that this can be potentially quite easily consumer-driven if people start to worry about things they’re personally buying,” Macpherson said.
“There isn’t necessarily the need for a massive collective action; it can just be demand for safer products, because people want safer products.”
For his part, since starting the research, Macpherson is careful about what touches his food. He cooks with a cast-iron skillet. He especially avoids heating food in plastic.
“Unfortunately, it is a recommendation to eat more organic food, but it is more expensive in general. So at least washing fruit and vegetables before eating them, but organic if you can afford it.”
