A recent interview published by Harvard University's T.H. Chan School of Public Health contains incorrect and misleading assertions about PVC as well as ortho-phthalates and their use. We informed the editors about the errors and requested a correction so that readers would have all of the facts. Unfortunately, our request was ignored.  

It's regrettable when news organizations betray their readers' trust by refusing to correct factual mistakes that have been brought to the editors' attention. At Vinyl Verified, we are committed to keeping the public informed, which is why we have chosen to make public the correction we submitted to Harvard University's T.H Chan School of Public Health. 

Here is what we sent: 

Karen Feldscher
Senior Writer
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

Dear Ms. Feldscher,,

Your recently published interview with Russ Hauser [“Why phthalates should be restricted or banned from consumer products” 03/10/21] has come to my attention and I was concerned by the misleading points it contained. This article presents only half of the argument – and does so on the basis of often incorrect claims.

Mr. Hauser claims that dietary exposure to phthalates poses a health risk but he fails to note that food safety authorities across the globe have conducted extensive dietary risk assessments of phthalates and found no public health concerns. It is disappointing that Mr. Hauser does not mention that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the EU equivalent of the US Food and Drug Administration, as recently as December 2019, completed a years long evaluation of phthalate exposure in the diet. EFSA’s conclusions are as strong as it gets – “current exposure to these five phthalates from food is not a concern for public health”. Of the more than 5 federal food safety agencies (including the UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, EU, Canada) that have reviewed phthalate risk from dietary exposures since 2011, none have found a health risk. These extensive risk assessments are the reason phthalates continue to be permitted for use in food contact materials in the EU, UK, China, Japan, Australia and other countries. 

He also suggests that phthalates used in flooring and wall coverings pose a health risk via migration into the air. The vast scientific evidence shows that this concern is unwarranted. For example the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) published an extensive risk assessment of exposure to DINP and DIDP from all sources in 2013. With respect to exposures to indoor air, it concluded that “no risk is expected from combined exposure [“combined exposure” includes all routes, pathways, and sources of exposure to multiple chemicals] to DINP and DIDP for children exposed via food and the indoor environment (indoor air and house dust).”

Mr. Hauser goes on to claim: “There have also been studies in humans that have found anti-androgenic effects on development of the male reproductive tract.” No such studies exist demonstrating this causal relationship nor is any evidence presented in this article or in the Project TENDR report which he is discussing. The US Food and Drug Administration noted this in its survey of phthalates in food contact materials in 2018:

“[W]hether these observed health effects are a concern for humans has not yet been shown, and there are questions over how closely the reactions seen in mice and rats would mimic those in humans. There have been no studies to date which show any connection between human dietary exposure to phthalates and adverse health effects. Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institutes for Health believe that there is not enough data on the topic to decide whether low levels of phthalate exposure have any potential to cause problematic health effects in humans.”

Mr. Hauser presents a one-sided view disputed by reliable scientific literature.  I hope that you will be willing to include the below statement as an update to the article so that readers are presented with an balanced perspective, especially in this case when the facts challenge Mr. Hauser’s narrative:

Phthalates have been safely used in consumer and commercial products for more than 50 years to enhance durability, flexibility, and performance. Phthalates are some of the most tested substances in commerce. Phthalate use is regulated, but not all phthalates are regulated in the same manner across the globe. Rigorous risk assessments by multiple government agencies in the United States, Europe, Canada and Australia have concluded that many phthalates present a low-risk for their current intended uses.