The Natural Resources Defense Council just filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for failing to issue a final rule regulating the chemicals triclosan and triclocarban, which are commonly found in antibacterial soaps. These chemicals are suspected endocrine disruptors linked to reproductive and developmental harm in laboratory studies. NRDC filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

“Washing your hands with so-called antibacterial soap containing triclosan or triclocarban actually does nothing different than using regular soap and water. Using soap containing these chemicals does not provide an additional benefit as consumers might think, but instead actually comes with potential health risks,” said Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist in the Health and Environment Program at NRDC. “The FDA needs to prohibit these harmful chemicals from being put into products in the first place.” More Group Sues Over Antimicrobial Soaps

Scientists have raised yet another alarm about the dispersants BP has used in unprecedented amounts to break up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. According to GulfLive.com, researchers have found an oil and dispersant mix beneath the shells of post-larval blue crabs. The discovery is one of the first signs that the BP disaster is impacting the Gulf of Mexico food chain.

More than 1.8 million gallons of dispersant chemicals have been dumped into the Gulf of Mexico in attempts to break up the oil moving in from the Deepwater Horizon’s broken well. Concerns about the dispersant being used, Corexit 9500, prompted the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to mandate that BP switch to a less-toxic alternative, but BP never complied. More Oil, Dispersants from BP Spill May Have Entered Gulf Food Chain

Last week we wrote that, according to the National Resources Defense Council, various components of crude oil, such as benzene, toluene, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, present risks and are all known carcinogens. Other components of oil—mercury and lead—are also toxic and there are concerns that the dispersants BP is using in unprecedented amounts to break-up the spill are also toxic. Now, CNN is reporting that in excess of 1.8 million gallons of dispersant chemicals have been dumped into the Gulf of Mexico in attempts to separate the oil moving in from the Deepwater Horizon’s broken well.

Although not much is known about the potential effects of these dispersants, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Coast Guard mandated that BP use a less toxic dispersant than what it had been using in the Gulf: Corexit 9500, said CNN. Experts are concerned about the effect of these chemicals, specifically the more discreet outcomes. More Dispersants Used on BP Oil Spill Still Cause for Concern

The U.S. Senate energy bill, proposed by Senate Democrats, might mandate that those companies currently using the hydraulic fracturing technique to tap shale gas be required to disclose the chemicals used when drilling. According to Reuters, the bill can become effective as soon as 2012.

Hydraulic fracturing is now used in about 90 percent of U.S. gas and oil wells and involves injecting water, sand, and a cocktail of chemicals at high pressure into rock formations thousands of feet below the surface. More Bill Would Require Fracking Fluid Disclosure

It seems Dow Chemical is in some trouble for the way it has marketed its pesticide, Dursban, in India. According to a report in the Hindustan Times, a Dow subsidiary could be blacklisted for allegedly bribing Indian officials to allow sales of Dursban there.

Dursban has already been banned in the US, although Dow still markets an agricultural version of the pesticide called Lorsban. The active ingredient in Dursban, chlorpyrifos is known to be toxic to humans and can cause muscle spasms, dizziness, seizures, vomiting, diarrhea and paralysis. More Dow Faces Dursban Probe in India

The oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico spawned by the BP oil spill is rapidly disappearing. But according to government scientists, that doesn’t mean the threat to the environment is disappearing with it.

It is estimated that between 107 million gallons and 184 million gallons of crude spewed into the Gulf before a containment cap stopped the flow July 15. More than 600 miles of Gulf Coast beaches have been oiled. But as the slick – which once covered several thousands of square miles – shrinks, scientists are wondering were all that oil has gone. More Slick From BP Oil Spill Shrinking, But Danger to Environment Hasn’t Passed

The BP oil spill continues to make people sick. And now, evidence of the mental toll the oil spill is taking on people living in affected communities is starting to become apparent.

According to the Alabama Department of Public Health, since mid-May, 110 people have gone to local emergency rooms, clinics and urgent care centers in that state with complaints thought to be related to the oil spill. Fifty of the patients complaining of oil-caused symptoms were exposed via inhalation, 26 by contact, three through ingestion, nine patients reported multiple exposures, and 22 were exposed indirectly, the Department said. More BP Oil Spill Continues to Take Physical, Mental Toll on Those Impacted

Late last year we wrote that the BPA (bisphenol-A), which has been found in many consumer products, was found to be present in common paper receipts. Now, laboratory tests commissioned by Environmental Working Group (EWG) have found high levels of the endocrine-disrupting chemical bisphenol A (BPA) on 40 percent of receipts sampled from major U.S. businesses and services.

Firms included McDonald’s, Chevron, CVS, KFC, Whole Foods, WalMart, Safeway, the U.S. Postal Service, and the U.S. House of Representatives cafeteria. Receipts from Target, Starbucks, Bank of America ATMs and other important enterprises were BPA-free or contained only trace amounts. More BPA Found on Store Receipts

Congress will finally be taking a look at fractures in an old law that has enabled toxic chemicals known to be associated with cancer, birth defects, and learning disabilities—among other adverse health events—in common consumer products, wrote Safe Cosmetics. The move is the first of its kind in seven decades.

Three Democratic—Representatives, Jan Schakowsky (Illinois), Ed Markey (Massachusetts), and Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin), introduced the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010, (HR 5786), said Safe Cosmetics. The Act provides the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight over personal care products to ensure they are free of dangerous ingredients, explained Safe Cosmetics. More Lawmakers Introduce Safe Cosmetics Act

Two groups have gone to court seeking a total ban on the pesticide chlorpyrifos. Residential use of the pesticide, under the brand name Dursban, was banned in 2001. However, it is widely used in agriculture under the name Lorsban. Chlorpyrifos is toxic to humans and can cause muscle spasms, dizziness, seizures, vomiting, diarrhea and paralysis, according to the lawsuit.

The complaint was filed in New York state by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Pesticide Action Network North America. The two groups are seeking to force the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to act on a three-year-old petition to remove the product from the market. EarthJustice filed the lawsuit on behalf of the two groups. More Lawsuit Seeks Ban on Common Pesticide