Testimony of the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association In Support of L.D. 1790
February 17, 2004 Natural Resources Committee

My name is Sharon Tisher. I teach environmental law at the University of Maine, and am speaking on behalf of the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association. MOFGA is an organization of over 4,000 farmers, gardeners, consumers and businesses dedicated to healthy food and a safe environment. Maine organic farmers work very hard to produce food without the use of toxic pesticides and fertilizers. When a toxic chemical invades our food system, and especially, the first food of infants, we feel compelled to join the broad coalition of groups seeking protection in the laws of the State of Maine.

There are two reasons why you should vote "Ought to Pass" on L.D. 1790. One, BFRs are contaminating human tissues and breast milk in exponentially growing concentrations. Two, there is no proof that BFRs are safe for humans, especially, for the infants who are consuming it. There have been no long term, controlled scientific studies vouching for the safety of these chemicals. On the contrary, there are animal studies that raise serious questions about their links to cancer and learning, memory, and behavioral changes. If these chemicals were prescription drugs, they would never see the pharmacy shelves. If they were pesticides, they would not be registered by the EPA or by the Maine Board of Pesticides Control. The federal laws that regulate pharmaceuticals and pesticides place the burden on manufacturers to prove their products' safety. The law that regulates other toxics substances, alas, do not. To quote from the three law professors who co-authored the environmental law textbook I use in my classes, "The Toxic Substances Control Act….is perhaps the most complex, confusing, and ineffective of all our federal environmental protection statutes." (Plater, Abrams, & Goldfarb, Environmental Law and Policy (1998). To quote the Wall Street Journal, "In the absence of mandatory testing and regulation, what chemicals get studied and how debate over potentially hazardous chemicals plays out is often left to chance and the interests of researchers. The story of PBDEs [BFRs] shows this circuitous path." (Herrick, "As Flame Regardant Builds Up In Humans, Debate Over a Ban," WSJ, 10/8/03)

It is often necessary to remind ourselves that despite the panoply of federal environmental statues - some effective, some not - it is the states, not the federal government, that bear primary responsibility for the protection of the public health and safety. To quote Dr. Sandra Steingraber, keynote speaker at last year's Common Ground Country Fair, "We need to remind everyone-friends, neighbors, political leaders-that all toxic chemicals capable of accumulating in the human food chain will, sooner or later, reach their highest concentrations in the milk of human mothers. …We need to insist that breastfeeding is a sacrament of motherhood that cannot be reduced to a risk/benefit equation-even if we have all that data to create one…The presence of toxic chemicals in breast milk compromises its goodness and lowers its capacity to heal, promote brain growth, and orchestrate the development of the immune system." Steingraber, Having Faith: An Ecologist's Journey to Motherhood (2001)