An interview with Kathryn Rodgers, Staff Scientist

RP

What is your organization’s most notable accomplishment to date in the field of toxics reduction?

SSI

There are a few notable accomplishments we’d like to highlight in the 24 years that Silent Spring Institute (SSI) has been doing research.

One of our earliest accomplishments was identifying the indoor environment as an important source of air pollution from chemicals that leach out of consumer products. The first findings came from our Household Exposure Study, and the results sparked a new field of research on indoor air pollution and its effects on human health. Because people spend 90% of their time indoors, chemicals inside homes and buildings are a significant source of exposure. Prior to our work, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was primarily focused on regulating outdoor air pollutants. Our findings really encouraged the agency to look at the indoor environment as well as an important source of exposure to hazardous chemicals.

Building on our knowledge of indoor exposures to flame retardant chemicals, another accomplishment was translating and sharing that research with advocates and decision makers to change California’s furniture flammability standard to no longer necessitate the use of flame retardant chemicals. We shared our research locally, which also led to the switch in standards in the state of Massachusetts and the City of Boston.

In 2007, SSI scientists published a list of 216 chemicals that cause mammary tumors, known as the mammary carcinogens list. About half of these chemicals are ones that women are commonly exposed to in their everyday lives. The publication represented a major contribution to the field of research on environmental factors and breast cancer. SSI also published a comprehensive review of human studies on environmental chemicals and breast cancer in 2007, followed by a recent update in 2017, which showed significant evidence linking chemicals and breast cancer.

Just like indoor air and dust, consumers can also be exposed to consumer product chemicals through their drinking water. SSI’s water quality research on Cape Cod, MA has shown that pharmaceuticals and consumer product chemicals found in household wastewater can leach into groundwater from septic systems, and ultimately end up in drinking water. In 2010, we detected non-stick chemicals called PFASs in drinking water supplies on Cape Cod. Since then, we and our collaborators have identified PFAS-contaminated drinking water as a problem nationwide and a national public health crisis.

Finally, over the last 24 years of environmental research, we have developed best practices for sharing study results with participants in environmental exposure studies. When we started our work, it wasn’t common practice to report back participants’ results because of the difficulty in communicating the known and unknown health risks associated with exposure to different environmental chemicals. We have done research to understand the best way to present data so that people can easily interpret their results, understand the risks, and make meaningful changes to limit their exposures. Through our research, we de-bunked the myth that people would be scared to get their results. Instead, people find the information empowering.

RP

What was the plan you followed to achieve this accomplishment?

SSI

The model we use in our research is to work with affected communities to identify a specific research question. For example, a community might ask, “Is my water contaminated?” or “Why are breast cancer rates high in my community?”

Then we do the research to address the question. Finally, we share the findings with our partners—advocacy groups, lawyers, or legislators—to help inform policies that protect public health. We are strategic in our collaborations in that we try to address research questions that have real personal and policy implications.

RP

What would you like your organization to be known for?

SSI

We’d like to be known for drawing attention to the role of environmental chemicals in disease, specifically breast cancer. Our work  underscores not only the pervasiveness of mammary carcinogens and other hazardous substances and products in our everyday environment, but also the inadequate safety regulations that are needed to protect consumers from toxic chemicals in products.

More broadly, we’d like to be known for our scientific leadership in helping to make prevention a national research priority. We operate under a prevention science framework. By reducing exposure to toxic chemicals, we can reduce the incidence of breast cancer and other diseases. Our science has informed numerous policy changes, including the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) vote in 2017 to ban a class of toxic flame retardants from consumer products. And through our engagement with the public, whether it’s sharing our healthy living app called Detox Me, working with the media, or partnering with advocacy groups, we have encouraged millions of  people across the country to make changes in their daily lives to reduce their exposures.

RP

What outlets are you using to communicate your mission to the public?

SSI

We work with the media a fair bit.  When a new study comes out, we reach out to reporters, explain in simple language the study’s key findings, the implications, and why people should care. We also use social media to share messaging around environmental chemicals and cancer, support our partners and engage our supporters. Our scientists routinely publish op-eds in major national news outlets, whether it’s in response to a particular policy affecting public health or to educate readers about the science.

We are often invited to provide testimony before legislators or federal panels such as the CPSC. For instance, in our testimony before the CPSC, we outlined the dangers of organohalogen flame retardants, which contributed to the federal panel’s landmark decision on these chemicals. We also sit on various government committees where we provide independent scientific advice and guidance, and we present our research at scientific conferences. In other words, communications is part of everyone’s job at SSI!

RP

What are the most important actions you’ve taken within your organization to support your mission? Within your portfolio of strategic actions, which ones are getting the most traction?

SSI

Our first major action was the Cape Cod Breast Cancer and Environment Study, which we started in 1994 in response to residents’ concerns about elevated breast cancer rates on the Cape. Since no one had ever done anything like this before—investigate environmental factors linked with increased breast cancer risk—the study became a national model for conducting environmental health studies. We developed scientific methods for testing air, dust, and other environmental samples for chemicals that mimic estrogen and other compounds linked with breast cancer.

Recently, we launched a project called Detox Me Action Kit. It’s a crowdsourced biomonitoring study in which we test people for the presence of 10 common household chemicals. Over the years, people have called us asking to know what chemicals are in their bodies. Until now, there hasn’t been an easy or affordable way for them to get tested. So we decided to set up a study and crowdsource it. We now have almost 800 people signed up. Participants submit their urines samples through the mail, we analyze their samples, and then provide them with a personalized digital report that compares their chemical levels with those of the other participants in the study. The report also includes information on each chemical, where it’s found, the associated health effects, and tips for reducing exposures.

The beauty of this project is that it connects the individual—one’s personal exposures—with the larger picture, that of our collective exposures to hazardous chemicals and their impact on public health. It’s a very powerful tool for communicating this concept. Ultimately, it spurs people to take action and create change not just in their own lives, but also in their communities. For instance, through their purchasing actions, consumers can put pressure on manufacturers to create healthier products, and that benefits everyone.

I would say a third example of a strategic action would be our involvement in the Women Firefighters Biomonitoring Collaborative Study. Several years ago, women firefighters in San Francisco raised concerns about multiple cases of premenopausal breast cancer among their ranks. To understand why, we partnered with firefighter groups and environmental health advocates to create a new study. In the study, led by Silent Spring and our colleagues at UC Berkeley, we’re collecting blood and urine samples from women firefighters and analyzing the samples for chemicals linked with breast cancer. These are chemicals that likely come from exposures on the job, such as diesel exhaust, flame retardants, and highly fluorinated chemicals or PFASs. This is the first study of its kind and the findings will hopefully lead to better protections for women firefighters, and ultimately less breast cancer in general.

RP

How has the Non-Toxic Fire Safety initiative influenced other organizational initiatives or goals?

SSI

The Non-Toxic Fire Safety initiative is nice because it fits neatly within our model of conducting research alongside impacted communities and then sharing the results with them. For instance, through our work with different colleges, we have engaged sustainability programs and students in reducing exposures to hazardous chemicals at their institutions. Based on findings from our collaborative research, we found ways to reduce exposures on campus through policy, specifically by changing the Boston fire code to allow colleges and other major institutions to purchase furnishings free of toxic flame retardants. It was a great exercise in community building and engaging the right stakeholders—students, faculty, facilities managers, firefighters, etc.

The great part about working with students is that we can talk about chemistry and science with them and then make real-world connections between the work scientists do in the lab and how this can drive changes in public health policy.

RP

What advice would you give other nonprofit organizations based on the lessons you’ve learned through your work?

SSI

The first thing is to take the time to listen to the community you are working with, and to understand their concerns. That means meeting people where they are and understanding their constraints whether it’s budgets, infrastructure, or their own policies.

Always, make sure you have good strong science to make your case.

Identify the right leverage points for making change. In the case of flame retardants, we asked ourselves, “Given the widespread us of these flame retardants in products, what’s the most effective way to make change?” That’s what led us to identify the specific policies and fire codes that were driving these high exposures in the general population.