How wet must a wetland be to have federal protections in post-Sackett US?

In 2023, the US Supreme Court's majority ruled in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency that only wetlands that are "indistinguishable" from federally protected waters "due to a continuous surface connection" are federally protected. This study estimates the potential impact of interpretations of the ruling on federal wetlands protections, using a qualitative measure of wetland "wetness" as a proxy for the new requirement. An estimated area ranging from ~17 million acres (19%) to nearly all 90 million acres of nontidal wetlands in the conterminous United States could be without federal protections, and variability in state protections creates hotspots of risk. The high-level estimates provided here represent a first step toward understanding the long-term impacts of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency on federal wetlands protections and highlight the uncertainty introduced by the ruling.

The EPA's Commitment to Children's Environmental Health: History and Current Challenges.

Children's environmental health (CEH) has a 25-year history at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), during which the agency has advanced CEH through research, policy, and programs that address children's special vulnerability to environmental harm. However, the Trump administration took many actions that weakened efforts to improve CEH. The actions included downgrading or ignoring CEH concerns in decision-making, defunding research, sidelining the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, and rescinding regulations that were written in part to protect children. To improve CEH, federal environmental statutes should be reviewed to ensure they are sufficiently protective. The administrator should ensure the EPA's children's health agenda encompasses the most important current challenges and that there is accountability for improvement. Guidance documents should be reviewed and updated to be protective of CEH and the federal lead strategy refocused on primary prevention. The Office of Children's Health Protection's historically low funding and staffing should be remedied. Finally, the EPA should update CEH data systems, reinvigorate the role of the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, and restore funding for CEH research that is aligned with environmental justice and regulatory decision-making needs. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):124-134. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306537).

A regulatory relic: After 60 years of research on cancer risk, the Delaney Clause continues to keep us in the past.

The Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act became law in 1958 because of concerns that potentially harmful chemicals were finding their way into foods and causing cancer. It states, "[n]o additive shall be deemed to be safe if it is found to induce cancer when ingested by man or animal, or if it is found, after tests which are appropriate for the evaluation of the safety of food additives, to induce cancer in man or animal." The United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA, prior to implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act) were charged with implementing this clause. Over 60 years, advances in cancer research have elucidated how chemicals induce cancer. Significant advancements in analytical methodologies have allowed for accurate and progressively lower detection limits, resulting in detection of trace amounts. Based on current scientific knowledge, there is a need to revisit the Delaney Clause's utility. The lack of scientific merit to the Delaney Clause was very apparent when recently the US FDA had to revoke the food additive approvals of 6 synthetic flavoring substances because high dose testing in animals demonstrated a carcinogenic response. However, US FDA determined that these 6 synthetic flavoring substances do not pose a risk to public health under the conditions of intended use. The 7th substance, styrene, was de-listed because it is no longer used by industry. The scientific community is committed to improving public health by promoting relevant science in risk assessment and regulatory decision making, and this was discussed in scientific sessions at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) 2020 Annual Meeting and the Society of Toxicology (SOT) 2019 Annual Meeting. Expert presentations included advances in cancer research since the 1950s; the role of the Delaney Clause in the current regulatory paradigm with a focus on synthetic food additives; and the impact of the clause on scientific advances and regulatory decision making. The sessions concluded with panel discussions on making the clause more relevant based on 21st-century science.

US EPA's regulatory pesticide evaluations need clearer guidelines for considering mammary gland tumors and other mammary gland effects.

Breast cancer risk from pesticides may be missed if effects on mammary gland are not assessed in toxicology studies required for registration. Using US EPA's registration documents, we identified pesticides that cause mammary tumors or alter development, and evaluated how those findings were considered in risk assessment. Of 28 pesticides that produced mammary tumors, EPA's risk assessment acknowledges those tumors for nine and dismisses the remaining cases. For five pesticides that alter mammary gland development, the implications for lactation and cancer risk are not assessed. Many of the mammary-active pesticides activate pathways related to endocrine disruption: altering steroid synthesis in H295R cells, activating nuclear receptors, or affecting xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes. Clearer guidelines based on breast cancer biology would strengthen assessment of mammary gland effects, including sensitive histology and hormone measures. Potential cancer risks from several common pesticides should be re-evaluated, including: malathion, triclopyr, atrazine, propylene oxide, and 3-iodo-2-propynyl butylcarbamate (IPBC).