Frequently Asked Questions

Q. Aren’t current standards good enough?

A. No. In fact, most government health standards are based on the average 160-pound male. Children drink more water and breathe more air per pound of body weight than adults. Between 1994 and 1995, 45 million Americans drank water from systems that fell short of the Safe Drinking Water Act Standards. We should develop allowable levels of toxic substances in our air and water that are suitable for infants, children, and pregnant women rather than just adult males.

Q. Aren’t adult and child levels fairly comparable?

A. Absolutely not. Think about it – when we give our children an aspirin, we would think twice before ever giving them the “adult dose.” Yet, when most air and water regulations were created, they gave children “adult doses” by setting all standards on the cancer and acute health risks to that of a 160-pound adult.

Because children’s biochemical and physiological functions are not fully developed, they are more vulnerable to the toxins that surround them. And because their brain, immune, and reproductive systems are still developing, exposure to even low levels of toxins can wreak havoc on a developing child – and more so to a developing fetus.

Q. What would setting a higher standard achieve?

A. Setting health standards based on a reasonable margin of safety for children will better protect the health of infants, children, and all others in your state.

Q. What would setting a “precautionary principle” achieve?

A. By employing the precautionary principle – that legislative measures should be taken to protect our children, even if an absolute cause and effect relationship is not established – means we are deciding it is better to be “safe than sorry” when considering the health of our children.