Alaskan fisherman, Timothy June, 54, used to think that he was safe from industrial pollutants at his home in Haines with its 20 million acres of protected wilderness nearby. But in early 2007, he agreed to take part in a survey of 35 Americans from seven states. It was a biomonitoring project, in which people’s blood and urine were tested for traces of chemicals — in this case, three potentially hazardous classes of compounds found in common household products like shampoo, tin cans, shower curtains and upholstery. The results—released in November in a report called “Is It in Us?” by a coalition of environmental groups—were not reassuring. Every one of the participants tested positive for all three classes of contaminants.

Clearly, there are chemicals in our bodies that don’t belong there. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found 148 chemicals in Americans of all ages, including lead, mercury, dioxins and PCBs. Other scientists have detected antibacterial agents from liquid soaps in breast milk, infants’ cord blood and the urine of young girls. And in 2005, the Environmental Working Group found an average of 200 chemicals in the cord blood of 10 newborns, including known carcinogens and neurotoxins. “Our babies are being born pre-polluted,” says Sharyle Patton of Commonweal, which cosponsored “Is It in Us?” “This is going to be the next big environmental issue after climate change.”

Bisphenol A is a basic constituent of the polycarbonate plastics found in many baby bottles, sippy cups and juice bottles. A highly versatile compound, it is also found in dental sealants, CDs, DVDs and the resin linings of food and beverage containers, including many cans and takeout cartons. But most scientists say small amounts can leach out and find their way into our bodies when the plastics start to break down under high heat or wear and tear. The CDC has found BPA in 92 percent of Americans age 6 and older who were tested. But the chemical industry says it’s safe—and the Food and Drug Administration agrees.

Reproductive biologists aren’t so sure. Patricia Hunt of Washington State University was alerted to possible dangers of BPA in 1999 when her mouse study on an unrelated topic suddenly went haywire, with dozens of female mice unexpectedly developing chromosomal abnormalities in the eggs they carried in their ovaries. As it turned out, a lab worker had used a detergent that caused BPA to leach out of the animals’ plastic cages.

Phthalates have also raised concern. The compounds are used to soften the plastics in products ranging from rubber duckies and vinyl shower curtains to medical tubing and IV bags. They are also found in hundreds of personal-care products, including fragrances, body lotions, nail polishes and shampoos. Again, 30 years of data from institutions like the NIH and EPA point to potential problems in animals stemming from prenatal exposure, including abnormalities in the reproductive tract and a decline of sperm quality. Now there is a smattering of human studies, too. In 2006 Danish researchers found that higher levels of a phthalate in mothers’ breast milk correlated with lower testosterone in male babies at 1 to 3 months of age. Similarly, Dr Russ Hauser at Harvard studied roughly 500 men at a fertility clinic and found that those with higher levels of certain phthalates in their urine had lower sperm counts and sperm motility.

Finally there are the flame retardants, PBDEs. They turn up in fabrics, upholstery, foam mattresses, circuit boards and the casings of computers and televisions—and apparently escape into indoor air and dust. Animal studies show they can have negative impacts on learning and memory, sperm counts and thyroid functioning in rats and mice. PBDEs tend to linger a long time in the body, and one mixture in particular seems “quite biologically active, especially during development, as we’ve seen in studies on rats, mice and fish,” says Linda Birnbaum, director of experimental toxicology at the EPA.

It could take decades to resolve doubts about the safety of all these chemicals, one way or the other. But Timothy June isn’t waiting. He’s stopped buying tomato sauce in tin cans to avoid the BPA, which scientists say tends to leach out of can linings when the contents are particularly acidic. He’s ditched his vinyl shower curtain in favor of a cloth one. And he’s considering getting rid of the foam mattress on his fishing boat. “I guess the survey had a bigger impact on me than I realised,” he says. Let’s all hope the chemicals aren’t having an even bigger impact on us.
—With Anna Kuchment (Newsweek)