NASHVILLE, Tenn. - The U.S. Senate is considering an update of the nearly 40-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act, which regulates the use of chemicals in consumer products.

Supporters claim Senate Bill 697 would improve regulation, but opponents argue the devil is in the details. Lyn Kaatz Chary, owner of Environmental Strategies and Consulting, says while the bill is an improvement from prior versions, it still doesn't make the grade in terms of health and safety protections.

"Although this particular bill did address many of the issues with earlier legislation, in the end, some of the most crucial issues did not get dealt with, or they actually became worse in this bill," says Kaatz Chary.

As an example, she says, states could lose their ability to take action on a chemical if the Environmental Protection Agency already is taking a look at it. She adds, there are other loopholes, including allowing the EPA to exempt chemicals from regulation based on a cursory review instead of a full safety examination.

Andy Igrejas, director with the group "Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families," says pressure has mounted to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act. He says while it's good the chemical industry came to the table, it looks like it proposed and gathered support for reforms favorable to itself.

"There's something wrong when you have legislation that is being sold as a major public health protection," he says. "The only people supporting it are the very industry that is supposed to be regulated by it, yet that's what we have."

The bill was introduced by Senator Tom Udall of New Mexico. Kaatz Chary believes he's on the wrong track.

"He has the best of intentions, but I think he's unfortunately very mistaken in believing the bill he's currently supporting is going to do the job that he sees needs to get done," she says. "But it's not going to get accomplished by that particular bill."


get more stories like this via email

More than 1 million people in North Carolina are diabetic and they have become increasingly worried about the national shortage of insulin.

The access problems in North Carolina are prompting some individuals to either ration their medication or switch to different brands, which can significantly complicate their diabetes management.

Jessica Lynn-Lato of Charlotte was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes at age 28 during pregnancy. She said she has seen firsthand the challenges the insulin shortage has created.

"We typically are prescribed 10-milliliter vials," Lynn-Lato explained. "Some people were being prescribed three 3-milliliter vials. Other people were being prescribed insulin pens or altogether having the type of insulin they use changed to a different brand."

She emphasized the urgent need for transparency about the causes of the current insulin shortage and for proactive measures to ensure access to the lifesaving medication.

Lynn-Lato explained for decades, people have struggled with insulin access for a variety of reasons, primarily cost. She recounted the tragic loss of her nephew, who was forced to ration insulin when he could not afford it.

"When he was 21 years old, he went to the pharmacy to pick up his insulin and couldn't afford to pay for it," Lynn-Lato noted. "He started using less insulin, which is something many people attempt to do to make it last longer. And sadly, it caught up with him two months later."

She believes if the Affordable Care Act, and more recently, President Joe Biden's cap on insulin costs through the Inflation Reduction Act, had happened sooner, it could have saved her nephew's life.

According to Lynn-Lato, systemic reforms are needed to address the root causes of insulin shortages and improve affordability and accessibility for diabetes patients.

"I think it falls on the FDA to maybe set some standards here, when you're dealing with medications that people literally need to live," Lynn-Lato stressed.

She encouraged people to advocate for themselves by reaching out to their lawmakers and the Food and Drug Administration.

The number of avian flu cases in dairy cows is holding steady in New Mexico but experts say more testing is needed to prevent its spread and protect humans.

Technically known as H5N1, "bird flu" has been detected in eight Curry County herds, although no deaths were reported. In Texas, a man is known to have become ill with bird flu last month after contact with infected dairy cattle.

Andrew Pekosz, professor of molecular microbiology and immunology at Johns Hopkins University, said the transmission to humans is cause for concern.

"Given that dairy farms have a large number of people who come in contact with infected cows, there is an increased chance of the H5N1 virus also directly infecting humans and beginning that process of adapting to replication and spread within humans themselves," Pekosz explained.

He acknowledged the risk to the public is still very low, but argued the U.S. should improve its response to new and emerging infections in order to minimize the chance of another pandemic. The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced this week it will pay dairy farms with confirmed avian flu infections to help contain the virus' spread to people and more cows.

In Texas, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed the virus killed a dozen cats who drank raw cow milk.

Meghan Davis, associate professor of environmental health and engineering at Johns Hopkins University, said due to extensive federal food checks prior to human consumption, she believes it is safe to eat poultry and drink milk, with one exception.

"Raw milk and raw milk products may not undergo the same processes to inactivate the virus," Davis pointed out. "I have very large concerns about the safety of raw milk."

In addition to New Mexico, last month's outbreak affected more than 33 dairy cow herds in seven other states. To date, federal officials only mandate testing for dairy cows moving between states.


get more stories like this via email

Newborns benefit the most from their mother's milk but may not always receive it.

An Indiana nonprofit group works to get breastmilk donations for premature babies. Similar to a blood bank, The Milk Bank accepts breastmilk donations from nursing mothers. Breastmilk is vital to a child's growth and development but what should be a natural occurrence between mother and child has sometimes historically been used as a tool of subordination.

Andrea Freeman, professor at Southwestern Law School, has conducted research on breastfeeding and found it has been a concern among Black families for more than 200 years.

"Black women breastfeed at lower rates than any other women, and always have done," Freeman explained. "This is a story that started during enslavement, and has continued ever since. And there are a lot of health consequences to Black families not having the same choice whether to breastfeed [or] use formula as other families."

Freeman asserted the baby formula industry is powerful in America, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture is its biggest purchaser. She stated the industry's perks and lobbying persuade medical professionals to promote using formula instead of encouraging new moms to breastfeed.

One study found infants who are not breastfed have higher chances of pneumonia, childhood obesity, diabetes, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and more. But medications or a parent's financial need to return to work could mean opting for baby formula instead.

Jenna Streit, advancement director for The Milk Bank, said it sends 80% of breastmilk donations to the most medically fragile infants in neonatal intensive care units. She pointed out potential donors undergo thorough screening.

"They complete a prescreen online on our website and after that, they complete a more detailed health history," Streit outlined. "They get a blood test done at The Milk Bank's expense. And then, we also reach out to their health care provider to get their consent for donation as well."

She said the organization does experience shortages at certain times of the year. Streit acknowledged more donor milk was available during the pandemic because more moms were at home. According to the nonprofit Women4Change, one in four women returns to work within 14 days after childbirth.