This has been written in the interests of providing information for the health-conscious consumer - information that will serve as a guide through the maze of chemicals in the foods, in the form of food additives and ingredients in cosmetics and personal care. We will look at some of the reasons why the average consumer finds this maze so convoluted and difficult to negotiate, and provide information to help you make informed choices and therefore protect your health and the health of your loved ones.

According to some official sources there are more than seven million recognised chemicals in existence. At least 75,000 synthetic chemicals are used in commerce today with about 2000 new chemicals being put into use each year. In Australia, more than 38,000 industrial chemicals are listed in AICS, the Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances. The National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assesment Scheme (NICNAS) assesses these chemicals by priority in response to concerns about their health and environmental effects, and refers to them as 'priority existing chemicals' (PECs) This list does not include thousands of chemicals, mostly synthetic, that are added to food as colourings, flavours, preserving, processing aids etc.

A study carried out by researchers and the Environmental Working Group, a not-for-profit research organisation in the USA, found that the Food and Drug Administration has never assessed, for safety, 80 per cent of the more than 10,000 ingredients used in cosmetics and personal care. When safety testing is done, it is carried out by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review panel, an industry-run committee without any regulatory power. But while cosmetics are largely self regulated, new pharmaceutical drugs have to undergo years of expensive clinical trials, and even then there can be unforseen problems. Consider for example thalidomide and, more recently, Vioxx. Various pharmaceuticals and certain cosmetic ingredients alike can enter body organs and cause unintended harmful effects.

Many of the chemicals used in cosmetics were originally developed for use in industry and have not been tested for long-term human health effects like birth defects, reproductive toxicity, genetic toxicity, immune system toxicity, nervous system toxicity, endocrine toxicity and other health problems. Although legislation stipulates products must be 'safe', it is largely up to the manufacturers themselves to determine what is safe. Regulators rely mostly on the information supplied to them by the manufacturers. While it would seem logical for manufacturers to provide products with health safety as a top priority, for financial reasons this is seldom the case.

Another recent study conducted by the Environmental Working Group, researchers wanted to determine how early in a child's development toxic chemicals began to accumulate. Scientists found that hundreds of industrial chemicals, pollutants and pesticides are pumped back and forth from mother to foetus through umbilical cord blood. In total, the baby's blood had 287 chemicals including 209 never detected before in cord blood. Critics may argue that the concentrations of these chemicals are too low to cause any significant concern, however some chemicals can be harmul even at extremely low levels. For examples, only five parts per billion of PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) in maternal blood during foetal development can cause adverse brain development and attention and IQ deficits that appear to be permanent. Five parts per billion is equivalent to one drop of water in 118 bathtubs. Another example is mercury. Exposure in the womb at 100 parts per billion will significantly increase the likelihood of learning deficits in childhood, while the same dose in adulthood has no measurable effect. Mercury, along with aluminium and formaldehyde, is a component of many vaccines. And, prolonged exposure to tap water with twenty parts per million can kill an infant, but will not have any observable effect on an adult.

Another critical point is timing. Low doses of certain chemicals on specific days of foetal development  can cause permanent problems that often only manifest later in life. The same dose at a different time may have no measurable effect at all. Researchers at a 1997 EPA-sponsored national conference on children's environmental health summarised children's vulnerability in the context of chemical exposures:

Many organ systems in young children - the nervous system in particular, but also the lungs, the immune system, and the reproductive organs - undergo extensive growth and development throughout pregnancy and in the first months and years after birth. During this period, structures are developed and vital connections established. These systems are not well adapted to repair any damage that may be caused by environmental toxicants. Thus, if cells in the developing brain, immune system, or reproductive organs are destroyed by neurotoxicants, or if development is diverted by endocrine disruptors, there is a high risk that the resulting dysfunction will be permanent and irreversible. Depending on the organ damaged, the consequences can include loss of intelligence, immune dysfunction, or reproductive impairment.

How many children today are being diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, learning difficulties, poor concentration and behavioural problems? Could synthetic chemical involement during the critical stages of development be a possible cause?

When it comes to food additives, many of those permitted in foods today have not undergone safey testing for decades. Some have been on a top priority list for re-evaluation for more than twenty years. Tests are rarely done to determine the effects of substances on behaviour and learning ability, whether they cause intolerances or allergies. Despite the volumes of anecdotal evidence from parents who witness the detrimental effects certain food additives have on their children, regulating authorities fail to act because the same results are rarely duplicated in a sterile controlled scientific environment. Perhaps this says more about the testing methods used than the credibility of frustrated parents.

Even more alarming is the fact that some additives are permitted in foods in spite of the fact that they have been shown to cause cancer and other health defects in humans and animal studies. A petroleum derived preservative, butylated hydroxianisole (INS 320), cause tumours in animals and is listed on the 'reasonably anticipated'  to be a human carcinogen in the National Toxicology report on Carcinogens. This additive may also effect kidney and liver function. Studies show that the preservative sodium nitrite, under favourable conditions, can form carcinogenic nitrosamines in the stomach.

Of the 269 with an INS (International Numbering System) code number and currently approved for use in Australia, at least 25 are banned in some other countries; approximately  50 have been linked to cancer; 55 or so trigger asthma; more than 30 are thought to cause hyperactivity and/or learning difficulties in children and over 80 may contribue to kidney or liver problems. And this does not include the additives, such as flavourings, which do not have a number.

In the USA, the National Research Council has stated that toxicity data for 80 per cent of the more than 8600 food additives available for use there was either inadequate or nonexistent. Many nation and international organisations, including the World Health Organisation, have called for neuro-developmental and euro behavioural testing for pesticides, food additives, drugs, and priority chemicals.

Complicating this maze even more is the fact that for many reports that show, by valid scientific means, the detrimental effects of certain food additives and cosmetic ingredients, there are others that claim that the substances in question are safe and beyond scrutiny. Review of the literature leads many to believe that the regulatory authorities tend to favour the latter, which are in all probability carried out and funded by the manufacturers themselves.

As said at the beginning, the intention of this information is not to scaremonger, condemn or vilify. Many people are simply not aware that the foods they eat and the cosmetics and personal care they use every day often contain chemicals that are causing or contributing to their ill health. While it may be argued that exposure to a handful of 'harmless' chemicals will have little effect on health, few people are fortunate enough to have this luxury. The fact is that we nare constantly bombarded with ever-increasing numbers and quantities of toxic synthetic chemicals in our homes, our workplaces, our schools and our cars. The water we drink is often polluted to some degree and we may have little choice about this. However when it comes to shopping, most of us have a choice between products that contain harmful products and products that don't.

This article comes in most part from the fantastic book "The Chemical Maze".