The Chemieals Within
As an Alaskan fisherman, Timothy June, 54, used to think that he was safe from industrial pollutants at his home in Haines - a town with a population of 2,400 people and 4,000 eagles, with 20 million acres of protected wilderness nearby. But in early 2007, June agreed to take part in a survey of 35 Americans from seven states. It was a biomonitoring project, in which people’ s blood and urine were tested for traces of chemicals - in this case, three potentially hazardous classes of compounds found in common household products like shampoo, tin cans, shower curtains and upholstery (椅子套). The results- released in November in a report called "Is It in Us" by a coalition of environmental groups - were not reassuring. Every one of the participants, ranging from an Illinois state legislator to a Massachusetts minister, tested positive for all three classes of contaminants (污染物). And while the presence of these chemicals doesn’ t necessarily indicate a health risk, the fact that typical Americans carry these chemicals at all shocked June and his fellow participants. As Stephanie Felten, 28, of Aurora, Ill. , put it, "Why should chemical companies be allowed to roll the dice on my health"
Clearly, there are chemicals in our bodies that don’ t belong there. The Centers for Disease Control and Prion conducts a large, ongoing survey that has found 148 chemicals in Americans of all ages, including lead, mercury (汞), dioxins and PCBs. Other scientists have detected antibacterial agents from liquid soaps in breast milk, infants’ cord blood and the urine of young girls. And in 2005, the Environmental Working Group found an average of 200 chemicals in the cord blood of 10 newborns, including known carcinogens and neurotoxins. "Our babies are being born pre - polluted," says Sharyle Patton of Commonweal, which cosponsored "Is It in Us" "This is going to be the next big environmental issue after climate change. \
The Chemieals WithinHow many chemicals did the Environmental Working Group fend in the core blood of 10 newborns in 2005