The U.S. Vinyl Market and The Impact of Political Toxicology on Plastics Producers

Gregory J. BocchiPresident, The Vinyl Institute, USAFourth Andean Conference – PVC and Sustainability Bogota, September 28, 2010

The U.S. PVC Market at a Glance

•Economy improving slowly

•Unemployment remains high▫GDP negative in 2009, recovering in 2010

•New home construction way down

•Strong exports helped U.S. PVC producers in 2009, 2010

Activist Political Environment

•Federal economic, healthcare policies dramatically increased spending, debt▫Fall election campaigns, “Tea Party” candidates

reveal deeply divided public, parties

•Federal legislation on climate change, toxic chemicals delayed until 2011

•No PVC restrictions enacted by states ▫But safer/greener chemical policies are on the

rise

Major Issues

•Re-regulation of PVC industry air emissions by EPA to comply with a court ruling (PVC MACT)

•Green building▫Anti-PVC policies at US Green Building Council

and elsewhere

•Codes & Standards▫PVC attacked through credits to avoid using a

material with reportable dioxin releases

Our Major Promotional Efforts

• Vinyl News Service: www.vinylnewsservice.net Highlights innovative uses for PVC

• Vinyl in Design: www.vinylindesign.com Educational outreach for architects and interior

designers

• Achieve Green: www.achievegreen.net New web site to promote how PVC products help in green

building • Resources for the vinyl value chain: www.vinylinfo.org New “tool kit”

Political Toxicology: Twisting Data to Fit Your Political/Social Agenda

What is Political Toxicology?

The selective reliance and reporting of results

of scientific studies to achieve a predetermined

politically or emotionally driven result.

What is Political Toxicology?

• Not a new concept

• We have seen examples of regulatory decisions made in spite of opposing scientific evidence

• Has become more of a problem, with greater impacts on regulation, product deselection and public confusion

Example: BPA

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a recent and striking example of how inter-related participants (activists, media, and some scientists) campaigned to selectively emphasize and report certain scientific evidence, leading to potential legislative and regulatory restrictions and the loss of markets through customer deselection.

BPA – The Science•Thousands of studies were conducted

•Regulatory agencies considered some studies the ‘gold standard’ of toxicology data

•Many government agencies worldwide reviewed potential exposures to BPA and determined them to be safe ▫US Food & Drug Administration, European

Food Safety Authority, agencies in Japan and other nations

BPA – The Science•Some studies reported adverse findings, but these

studies had important deficiencies

▫Exposure not through the mouth▫Results not reproducible▫Results not scientifically robust (e.g., small

number of animals, single dose studies, etc.)

•“Just because a study is intellectually interesting, does not mean it is regulatorily relevant.” Dr. Frank Torti, Chief Scientist, US Food & Drug Administration

What the News Media Reported•The news media consistently reported the

“dangers” of BPA without qualification

▫Very little balanced reporting of safety studies

▫Almost no reporting of deficiencies or irrelevance of studies showing adverse reactions

▫Emphasis was on conclusions of activists and anti-industry scientists

Actions and Reactions

•Consumer product manufacturers pressured to remove BPA from products

•Some retailers, brand 0wners pushed for removal of BPA▫Some used the situation to market BPA-free

products

•Product liability lawsuits were brought against some manufacturers

Actions and Reactions

•Canada banned BPA in baby bottles as precautionary measure

•Activists fought for legislative restrictions in US

•Legislators (federal & state) introduced more than 50 bills to limit or ban use of BPA

Actions and Reactions•In US, another government review (National Tox.

Program) raised concerns about BPA

▫FDA safety assessment was called into question▫Conflict of interest alleged -- FDA advisors

characterized as paid industry representatives▫Congressional pressure

•New FDA risk assessment due end of November

•Recent events are likely to have impact on FDA’s review of other food-contact substances

Actions and Reactions

•Polycarbonate now gone from certain markets (baby bottles and cups)

•Because of the success with BPA, other chemicals will be subjected to the same treatment

The Lessons - Consumers•Consumers do not understand risk analysis and

are now sensitized to claims of harm

▫All chemicals are a potential concern, especially when exposure involves infants, children, pets, reproduction

▫Activists know and exploit these concerns

•Government bodies like FDA may be mistrusted▫Activists attack credibility of agencies with

which they disagree

The Lessons - Consumers• The 24-hour news cycle (TV, Internet, blogs)

encourages reporting of myths, half-truths

• Consumers have perception all chemicals are bad

• More chemicals are in the news

▫Phthalates, PVC, organochlorines, halogens, brominated flame retardants, fluoropolymers

Lessons: Legislators

•Legislators need constituents to see that they are protecting consumers

▫They are not in a position to evaluate science

▫They have difficulty voting against legislation to “protect children” even if not based on good science

The Lessons - Activists

•The activist strategy is to recast environmental issues as public health issues

•They network and coordinate▫They hold telephone conference calls to share

ideas▫The funding organizations they rely on send

resources to the most successful campaigns▫Success in one campaign is quickly translated

to a new campaign

What Toxicologists ThinkGeorge Mason University (US) Study

•Toxicologists have a high level of confidence in policies for regulating chemicals▫Fewer than 1 in 4 believe regulators should be

guided by the “precautionary principle”

•Toxicologists concerned over the politicization of science▫They fault the news media, regulators for not

doing a balanced job of explaining chemical risks to the public

What Toxicologists ThinkGeorge Mason University (US) Study

•They see the news media as: ▫overstating risks even more than

environmental activists Internet sites (e.g., Wikipedia, WebMD) often

seen as more balanced▫not seeking out diverse scientific views to

balance stories ▫not distinguishing good from bad studies ▫not explaining the trade-off between risk and

benefits or relative risks (everything has some risk)

What Can Be Done?

•BPA represents a failure to communicate risk-benefit information and the consequences of precautionary policies to non-experts▫Better communication is needed

•The news media needs to be held accountable to high journalistic standards

•Coordination with brand owners and retailers is essential

What Can You Do?

•Monitor news articles and address concerns as soon as they arrive▫When adverse reports are published, obtain

copies, seek opinions and reviews from scientific experts Use independent scientists whenever

possible Make responses timely and straightforward Provide information to journalists and

demand accountability Work through your trade associations

What Can You Do?

•Be aware of new laws, proposed laws, and trends

•Watch for developments in other countries and continents, especially the European Union▫Even if your products are not global, activities

in these countries are an indicator of trends

What Can You Do?

•Understand that certain types of chemicals will continue to be targeted by activists, legislators

▫Carcinogens, mutagens, reproductive toxicants▫Bioaccumulative, persistent▫Endocrine disruptors▫Those demonstrating developmental,

reproductive, or neurological effects at any level of exposure

▫Cancer still the most sensitive endpoint

Thank youThank you