If CEPA was indeed protecting public health, we would expect declining diseases from environmental exposures. Canadian examples point to the opposite. Endocrine-related obesity and metabolic syndrome, disorders of early development and sexual differentiation, and cancers in hormone-sensitive tissues have not been prevented. Endocrine disruption does not follow classic dose-response, so these substances must be regulated based on their innate hazard. With many thousands of EDCs, classes of similar chemicals require group actions.
A regulatory conclusion that an environmental exposure poses an “acceptable risk” is initially based on little data. Ethically, regulators should follow up to detect harms at the earliest possible opportunity. Relying on epidemiology can result in harms to generations.
Fourteen Canadian environmental and health groups are concerned about industry interference after learning that many of Canada’s biggest polluters sent a letter to the Senate Speaker to “urge the full Senate to reverse the amendments introduced by the Committee and pass Bill S-5 as it was originally introduced.”
It's time to update and strengthen Canada’s two major laws addressing chemicals. The Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 and the Pest Control Products Act, 2002 were last amended about 20 years ago!