Lead The Way

 

Back in the 1940s, toxic lead was infused in many products, and many companies today still include harmful toxins in their consumables, including health and beauty products!

Knock, knock! Who’s there? GM:

Thomas Midgley was an engineer-turned-scientists in the Roaring 20’s who worked for General Motors. GM’s motors were expressing a flaw known as Engine knock, where the motor would jitter uncontrollably. Midgley discovered that applying the compound tetraethyl lead was a good solution to this problem. While a lethal neurotoxin, lead was easy to work with, and was found in most consumer products at the time.

Clair Patterson was a contemporary, though opposing force. He left the University of Chicago a graduate student in the 1940’s. His primary dedication was trying to determine the earth’s age through a process called carbon dating. However, no matter how sterile the lab he was working in, there was always some level of contamination that threw off his numbers when measuring the radioactivity of his samples. This led to his investigation of what the source of all that lead contamination was.

Midgley’s Muddle and Patterson’s Plight:

Midgley was, I suspect, motivated by money, as well as his job. GM put a lot of pressure on him and other scientists to vouch for the integrity and safety of tetraethyl lead in consumer products. When GM merged with 2 other of the largest corporations in America at the time, they even rebranded “lead” to “ethyl” to make it sound less threatening. Midgley himself even held a performance for reporters where he poured ethyl lead all over his hands and inhaled the fumes from a beaker for a minute to prove that it was safe, and even claimed that he could do it everyday and be safe! Although he knew the dangers of lead and avoided the substance as much as he could.

Patterson was driven by a passionate desire to determine the age of the earth, but his side-quest, busting GM (and other corporations) for their dangerous love affair with lead was probably fueled by a sense of morality and responsibility, as well as a healthy dose of concern for the overall safety of the general public and earth. Patterson collaborated with several other scientists to fine-tune the carbon-dating formula, including Harrison Brown (of his same alma mater) who figured a way to quantify lead isotopes from igneous rock instead of sediment. This was the last rocket booster that Patterson needed to complete his calculations and in 1953, he finally determined the Earth was 4,550 million (4.5 billion) years old, give or take a few 70 million years as part of the 3% error ratio inherent in the carbon-dating process.

His primary purpose now accomplished, Patterson turned his thoughts to the ever-looming complication of lead in the atmosphere. As part of his studies, he discovered that much of what the public understood about lead and its effects on humans, were published by the lead additive manufacturers, who deliberately misrepresented their data to advocate its safety. In one study, a doctor (though not one qualified in the area of chemistry) presented various quantities of lead for test subjects to either inhale or swallow for five years. After the years were up, he tested their fecal and urine samples for traces of lead- and found none. This, of course, is because lead does not leave the body as waste but builds up around the bones and in the blood, which is what makes it so toxic.

Ending Ethyl’s Legacy:

In order to prove that this build-up of lead had occurred recently, Patterson measured the amount of lead from ice core samples and determined that prior to 1923 (when GM and the other 2 companies merged to start producing as much tetraethyl lead as possible) there was relatively little to no lead in the atmosphere, but after that year, a very significant increase in lead was found.

As is to be expected, GM and Co did not appreciate Patterson’s newfound soapbox campaign against leaded products and additives. He lost several research contracts, including one from the US government public health service, and it was difficult for him to fund his project; Tetraethyl had deep pockets. Eventually, however, his struggle was rewarded when in 1970, the Clean Air Act was passed, and in 1986, when the US finally ceased the production and sale of leaded gasoline.

Toxic Cosmetics:

Similar to the tetraethyl episode, many consumable products today still contain spurious chemicals. In 2020, California passed the Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act, the first state in the nation to do so. This legislature bans 24 different chemicals from being used in beauty and hygiene products. (California First State To Ban 24 Toxic Chemicals in Personal Care Products and Cosmetics | Environmental Working Group n.d.) Such chemicals include several forms of Formaldehyde (like what they use to preserve brains in jars) Mercury, and some other 12-letter chemicals proven to lead to cancer or promote hormone imbalance. (The Toxic Twelve Chemicals and Contaminants in Cosmetics | Environmental Working Group n.d.)

Several other states have banned unsafe chemicals from self-care products in years previously, but not to such a scale. In 2008, Washington State enacted the Children’s Safe Product Act, which requires that companies selling hygiene and personal care items marketed to children to publish if that product contains high levels of toxic substance that would be harmful to children. In 2013, Minnesota took it a step further and banned formaldehyde and formaldehyde-producing chemicals from children’s bath products design for 8 years or younger. In 2018, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP) funded the Professional Cosmetics Labeling Requirement Act in California, which, as the name suggests, requires companies selling these products to include all ingredients used, on the bottle. (State Laws n.d.)

This newest legislation, Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act, takes commercial chemical accountability to a new level. However, no literature has been cited that quotes any other state leaders planning to follow California’s lead on banning these toxic chemicals from manufacturing and sale. As good as a step as this is for California, it is very telling that other states haven’t made any moves to enact similar legislation; corporations’ pockets still run deep, and their motivations are not benevolent towards the well-being of the general public.

What do you think of California’s Toxic-Free Cosmetics Act? Would you support your state passing a similar act? Comment your reactions below!

 

Sources Cited:

“California First State To Ban 24 Toxic Chemicals in Personal Care Products and Cosmetics | Environmental Working Group.” https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/california-first-state-ban-24-toxic-chemicals-personal-care-products-and (April 22, 2021).

 

“State Laws.” Safe Cosmetics. https://www.safecosmetics.org/get-the-facts/regulations/state-laws/ (April 22, 2021).

 

“The Toxic Twelve Chemicals and Contaminants in Cosmetics | Environmental Working Group.” https://www.ewg.org/the-toxic-twelve-chemicals-and-contaminants-in-cosmetics (April 22, 2021).

Bryson, B. (2003). A short history of nearly everything. New York: Broadway Books.