EDF Health

New report finds endocrine disrupting chemical in more than one-third of tested Indian clothing products

By Maria Doa, PhD, Senior Director, Chemicals Policy / Published: July 8, 2025

What’s new: A new report has found the cancer-linked endocrine disruptor, nonylphenol (NP), in one-third of tested Indian clothing products at levels exceeding European Union (EU) safety standards.

Scientists also detected NP in major Indian rivers downstream from textile hubs at levels that significantly exceeded international water quality standards. The report, Toxic Threads, was published by the Indian environmental research and advocacy organization Toxics Link in partnership with Environmental Defense Fund.

Common industrial applications of nonylphenol chemical

Common industrial applications of nonylphenol chemical (Toxics Link)

What is NP and where does it come from? NP is a chemical byproduct of degrading nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs), which manufacturers across several sectors use as a base ingredient in detergents, wetting agents, dispersants, defoamers, de-inkers and antistatic agents. Textile producers use NPEs most commonly in cleaning agents.

The Toxic Threads report’s key findings include:

  • NP was detected in 15 of the 40 products examined (about 35%).
  • NP levels in 13 out of the 40 products exceeded the current EU limit (<100 mg/kg).
  • 60% (9 out of 15) of baby and children’s products contained NP.
  • Female innerwear made with hosiery had the highest NP concentration of all garment types.
  • Significant NP contamination was found in several rivers near key Indian textile hubs.
  • NP’s presence in downstream locations and absence upstream strongly suggests point-source pollution from industrial activities, particularly textile manufacturing.

Why it matters: NP is an endocrine disruptor and has been linked to cancer. People, particularly children, can be exposed to it through everyday products they touch or might put in their mouths. NP’s persistence (how long it lasts), toxicity and ability to build up in the body over time makes it a significant threat to human health, the environment, marine ecosystems and the food chain. Because many textiles produced in India are exported, the associated health risks could extend to consumers in importing countries that don’t regulate NP in clothing, such as the United States.

Nonylphenol's path to waterways, marine ecosystems and the human body

Nonylphenol’s path to waterways, marine ecosystems and the human body (Toxics Link)

How can India protect its people and aquatic life from the dangers of NP? While several countries have taken proactive measures, India has yet to fully regulate against the harms of NP and NPE contamination.

The report recommends Indian leaders take decisive action to align with global efforts in restricting NP and NPE use. Strengthening regulations and promoting safer alternatives in textile manufacturing and consumer products are key to safeguarding human and environmental health and ensuring sustainable market practices.

Go deeper: Read the full Toxic Threads report here.

Also posted in Adverse health effects, Carcinogenic, Chemical regulation, Cumulative impact, Endocrine disruptors, Environmental justice, General interest, Health policy, Public health, Worker safety / Authors: / Leave a comment

FDA’s latest study reaffirms short-chain PFAS biopersist. Now it must act.

By EDF Blogs / Published: January 25, 2024

By Maricel Maffini, PhD, Consultant, and Tom Neltner, JD

Female rat nursing multiple pups

FDA study found biopersistent PFAS in female rats and their pups,

What Happened

In December 2023, FDA’s scientists published a new study showing that when pregnant rats ingest a form of per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substance (PFAS) called 6:2 fluorotelomer alcohol (6:2 FTOH) their bodies break it down into other PFAS that reach the fetuses and biopersist in the mother and the pups.

The study also showed that the body of a non-pregnant animal produces different breakdown products that also biopersist. This study is the latest evidence that the assumptions made about the safety of short-chain PFAS (chemicals with fewer than 8 carbons) have been wrong. Read More »

Also posted in Adverse health effects, Chemical regulation, Emerging science, FDA, Industry influence, Public health, Rules/Regulations, Vulnerable populations / Tagged , , , , , , , , | Authors: / Comments are closed

FDA’s approach to systematic review of chemicals got off on the wrong foot

By Maricel Maffini, PhD, Consultant and Tom Neltner, Senior Director, Safer Chemicals Initiative / Published: November 16, 2023

Scientist working on a digital tablet showing data on the chemical element Cadmium

What Happened?

Last month, FDA’s scientists published the toxicological reference value (TRV) for exposure to cadmium in the diet. This value is the amount of a chemical—in this case cadmium—a person can consume in their daily diet that would not be expected to cause adverse health effects and can be used for food safety decision-making. The TRV was based on a systematic review FDA scientists published last year. We will turn to the TRV itself in an upcoming blog but are focusing on the systematic review here.

In a May 2023 publication, experts in systematic reviews from the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) raised concerns about FDA’s “lack of compliance” from established procedures.

We discussed these concerns with FDA. They said:

  • “The systematic review and the TRV” publication “have both undergone external peer review by a third-party and experts in the field.” The agency expects to publish the reviews on its website, and
  • FDA “is working on developing a protocol for a systematic review of cardiovascular effects of cadmium exposure that will be published.”

Why It Matters

Systematic review is a method designed to collect and synthesize scientific evidence on specific questions to increase transparency and objectivity and provide conclusions that are more reliable and of higher confidence than traditional literature reviews. In particular, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have recommended the use of systematic reviews to establish values such as the TRV that may be used to inform regulatory decisions.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) and others have developed specific methodologies to conduct systematic reviews. FDA’s authors said they followed NTP’s Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) handbook.

Unfortunately, FDA’s adherence to the methodology fell short on both transparency and objectivity grounds, undermining the credibility of its conclusions. Credibility is crucial because FDA’s authors stated that “this systematic review ultimately supports regulatory decisions and FDA initiatives, such as Closer to Zero, which identifies actions the agency will take to reduce exposures to contaminants like cadmium through foods.”

Read More »

Also posted in FDA, Public health / Tagged , , , , , | Authors: , / Comments are closed

Now’s the Time—How EPA can use TSCA to turn off the PFAS tap

By Maria Doa, PhD, Senior Director, Chemicals Policy / Published: September 18, 2023

Faucet with the word PFAS flowing out of it

In the face of mounting evidence about the dangers posed by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), one thing is clear: EPA needs to take urgent action to turn off the tap of these “forever chemicals” that have long-term consequences for our health and the environment.

As we discussed in a previous blog, it is imperative that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) use the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to regulate PFAS chemicals comprehensively—both those newly entering the market and those that have been in circulation for decades.

Read More »

Also posted in Chemical exposure, Chemical regulation, Cumulative impact, Cumulative risk assessment, Drinking water, Emerging science, Health policy, Public health, Regulation, Risk assessment, Risk evaluation, TSCA, TSCA reform, Vulnerable populations, Worker safety / Tagged , , , | Authors: / Read 2 Responses

New Approach Methodologies Should Adhere to TSCA Standards

By Susanne Brander, PhD, Senior Contributing Scientist / Published: August 15, 2023

What’s New?

EPA recently asked its Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC), comprised of experts in the fields of toxicology and environmental chemistry, to make recommendations on implementing new approach methods (NAMs) for testing the safety of new chemicals.

NAMs encompass a wide array of new evaluation strategies, including testing cell lines or invertebrates (rather than mammals); using computational approaches; and estimating potential harms of new chemicals by looking at existing toxicity data on similar substances.

Why It Matters

EPA announced in 2019 that it would be redirecting resources towards developing NAMs to replace those studies. The looming concern is the possibility that NAMs may miss effects that whole animal mammalian testing accounts for and generate false negatives — potentially allowing toxic chemicals to appear in consumer products or end up in our environment.

This could happen because relying only on NAMs or using data from one chemical to predict how a new one might behave opens the door to missing negative effects. NAMs could also cause evaluators to miss opportunities to use the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the nation’s primary chemical safety law, to limit toxic chemical exposures. Read More »

Also posted in Chemical regulation, Cumulative risk assessment, Emerging science, Emerging testing methods, Frontline communities, New approach methods (NAMs), Risk assessment, Risk evaluation, TSCA / Tagged , , | Authors: / Comments are closed

Petrochemical pollution doesn’t affect communities equally. Better regulations can help.

By Michelle Allen / Published: July 3, 2023

By Michelle Allen, Manager, Community Engagement

Recent high-profile chemical disasters in East Palestine, Ohio, and Deer Park, Texas, have highlighted the risks facing communities where the petrochemical industry operates, but not every spill or toxic pollution release makes headlines. By some counts, there is a chemical fire, explosion or release every other day in this country.

As countries around the world invest in strategies to reduce carbon pollution and rely less on fossil fuels, the oil and gas industry has turned to petrochemicals as an opportunity for growth. Petrochemicals are chemical derivatives refined from petroleum, and they’re found in products we use every day: from water bottles and plastic cases on our phones to paints, fertilizers and carpets.

But images of billowing black clouds of smoke hanging over homes, schools and parks in communities from Appalachia to the Gulf Coast are a reminder that our everyday products—many of which are for the sole purpose of convenience—are not without cost. And too often, these costs are borne by someone else.

Communities are exposed to health risks from petrochemical pollution

Exposure to petrochemical pollution—from acute events like these environmental disasters, but also from prolonged exposure to these air toxics, day in and day out—puts communities at risk. But communities don’t experience these risks equally. Black and brown communities and low-income areas bear the brunt of this unequal and unjust pollution. Children, pregnant people, seniors and people with existing medical conditions are especially at risk of developing a host of health issues from exposure to this toxic pollution, including cancer, respiratory illness, asthma and more.

Communities on the frontlines of petrochemical pollution have long expressed that they have the right to know what’s in the air they’re breathing so they can take action to protect themselves and demand accountability from decisionmakers and industry. A newly proposed update to regulations in the Clean Air Act is a significant step in the right direction.

New EPA proposal would help hold polluters accountable

The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed stronger regulations for some 200 petrochemical facilities throughout the country, more than half of which are concentrated in Texas and Louisiana. These proposed rules include safeguards against petrochemical pollution that advocates have long called for: more air-quality monitoring at the fence line of facilities, stronger protections against flaring, and actions to close loopholes that allow facilities to violate regulations during periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction.

Dedicated community leaders have been leading the fight against this pollution for decades, and it’s great to see the Administration meet these efforts with long overdue protections. We need stronger regulations at the local, state and federal levels to protect the health of residents and require regulators to hold polluters accountable to the communities where they’re operating.

The additional transparency and accountability that will come from these protections are especially critical because many of these facilities have a documented history of breaking the law: our analysis shows that more than half of the facilities expected to be impacted by this proposal are currently violating at least one environmental law, and more than 80 percent have been out of compliance in the last three years.

Strong federal protections are needed to safeguard community health

We urge EPA to adopt a strong final version of this rule that is truly protective of public health. Requiring fence line monitoring to cover a greater number of chemicals and facilities, for example, would help hold polluters accountable and prevent further harm to communities.

EPA’s proposal is a critical step in the right direction—a foundational safeguard that can ground additional layers of protection for communities impacted by petrochemical pollution. Strong federal protections should be part of a comprehensive strategy to help communities achieve a healthy, thriving future for generations to come.

Also posted in Air pollution, Chemical exposure, Deep Dives, Environmental justice, Health policy / Authors: / Comments are closed