Let's End the Double Standard for Natural versus Manufactured Chemicals

Received Nov 9, 1995; Accepted Dec 6, 1995 Correspondence to: J. L. Mattsson, The Dow Chemical Company, Health and Environmental Sciences, 1803 Building, Washington Street, Midland, MI 48674, USA *Presented as Con argument in a debate , "Exposure To Synthetic Chemicals Is More Hazardous Than Exposure To Natural Chemi cals." International Congress of Toxicology VII, July 2-6, 1995, Seattle, Washington, USA Bias begets error in public policy There are no pre-determined differences between natural and manufactured ('synthetic') chemicals. Culturally, however, we have a bias that natural is good, and this bias can lead to errors in public policy and health protection. We know that natural chemicals are mutagenic, estrogenic, hepatotoxic, carcinogenic, neurotoxic, developmentally toxic, and so onl 2, 6, 7, 12, 14, 18) Obviously, chemicals are active due to their structure and dose, and not be cause they are synthesized by plants or insects, or synthesized by humans in laboratories and factories. Although toxicologists and other health profession als know that both natural and manufactured chem icals can be toxic, we behave as if a fundamental toxicologic difference exists. We have a bias against manufactured chemicals that is reflected in differ ences in educational content at universities, the con tent of toxicology text books, a bias in government funding of research, and a very different approach to regulation of exposure depending on source.