Recently, I found myself diving into a pressing question: Who regulates chemicals and toxins? Shockingly, until not so long ago, the answer was: no one. While regulatory bodies have since been established, the alarming truth is that many chemicals on the market today have never undergone thorough testing.

We tend to believe that if a product is available for purchase, it must be safe. Unfortunately, that’s far from reality. We live in a world where chemicals are often considered “innocent until proven guilty,” and the burden of proof doesn’t lie with the industries responsible for producing them—though it should.

This is especially concerning given that chemicals and toxins (for example, those found in pesticides, personal care and cleaning products) are well-known to cause cellular damage and inflammation, leading to adrenal dysfunction, thyroid issues, hormonal imbalances, infertility, cognitive decline, metabolic disorders (like obesity and Type 2 diabetes), and more.

In this blog, I’ll offer a brief history of chemical regulation in the U.S. (where much of this began), while next week, I’ll dive into practical strategies to reduce your body’s toxic burden.

🇺🇸 Why focus on the U.S.?

Though I’m based in New Zealand, I chose to focus on the United States because its regulatory framework has a significant influence on global trade. Many countries, including NZ, mirror aspects of the U.S. approach.

As a smaller nation, New Zealand often relies on international data—especially from larger markets like the U.S.—to assess chemical safety. Unfortunately, this means that many of the same gaps in regulation also affect us.

🧪 The lack of early regulation

Not too long ago, chemical use was completely unregulated, and there was little awareness of its negative effects on human and environmental health. It was quite literally the Wild West of chemicals in commerce.

The shift towards regulation began in the 1960s and early 70s when the consequences of unregulated chemical use became undeniable [Source].

📰 Adverse effects make headlines

News headlines told stories of lung cancer induced by asbestos, holes in the Earth’s protective ozone layer due to chlorofluorocarbons (refrigerants, propellants, solvents), poisoned cattle (and people) due to feed contaminated with polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs ) – used as flame retardants, and of neurological symptoms and birth defects due to mercury-contaminated fish [Source].

The world had essentially become a giant science experiment, with human and environmental health at risk.

🖋️ 1976: The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)

These events led to public outrage, prompting the U.S. Congress to pass the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in 1976, the first law aimed specifically at regulating chemicals found in consumer products.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was tasked with overseeing chemical safety and creating a national inventory of chemicals in commerce. At the time, there were 62,000 existing chemicals, all of which were “grandfathered in” and considered safe unless the EPA could prove otherwise (!).

New chemicals, on the other hand, were subjected to an “unreasonable risk” test, but the process was flawed. Chemical producers weren’t required to provide safety data (this was voluntary), and the EPA had only 90 days to assess each chemical. Without adequate information, the EPA struggled to evaluate potential risks.

This allowed hundreds of new chemicals to slip through to market without any demonstration that they were safe [Source].

🔬 Limited progress

By the early 1980s, reports revealed that 78% of commonly used chemicals hadn’t even undergone basic toxicity testing. By 2013, the EPA had only managed to restrict or ban 13 chemicals. The system was clearly failing to protect public health.

⚖️ 2016: The Lautenberg Act

In 2016, the Lautenberg Act reformed the TSCA, mandating more thorough safety testing for both old and new chemicals. However, progress remains frustratingly slow, and the challenge of assessing tens of thousands of chemicals means it could take decades to catch up.

🦺 Chemical safety today

Today, the EPA’s registry includes over 86,000 substances, yet only a fraction of them have undergone comprehensive toxicity testing, particularly for long-term effects like cancer or hormonal disruption.

Chemicals in consumer products and their adverse effects are still making headlines.

🇳🇿 What about New Zealand?

New Zealand’s chemical regulation follows a similar story. The Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO Act) of 1996 is administered by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) [Source].

Like the U.S., chemicals introduced before the 1996 act were grandfathered in, and many have not been thoroughly reviewed for safety.

Meanwhile, new chemicals and synthetic substances continue to be introduced faster than they can be tested, leaving us with a growing number of chemicals in the market with incomplete safety data.

🌿 Conclusion

This short dive into the history of chemical regulation paints a disturbing picture: government regulations alone aren’t enough to protect us from harmful substances.

While progress has been made, the pace is slow, and the gaps in chemical safety testing are significant. As individuals, we need to take proactive steps to reduce our exposure to potentially dangerous chemicals—because relying solely on the system to ensure our safety is a risk we can’t afford to take.

If you need assistance to address environmental toxins, please book a consult with me here.

Till next time,
Lauren.