Take our 2023 year-in-review quiz

Take our year-in-review quiz!

Tracey J. Woodruff, PhD, was asked to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials in October. The focus of the hearing was EPA’s attempts to regulate which chemical?

1. PFAS
2. Leaded gasoline in small planes
3. 1,4 Dioxane
4. Ethylene Oxide (EtO)

The correct answer is Ethylene Oxide.
Ethylene Oxide is a toxic chemical used to sterilize medical equipment that has been harmful to both workers and people who live in communities where the chemical is produced or used. As Tracey said: 

I know you have witnesses here today representing industries concerned about the regulation of EtO and other chemicals. It is important to hear from all affected stakeholders, however it is also critical we prioritize health in environmental regulations and use science free of financial conflicts of interest (COI), or bias toward the industries that may have a vested financial interest in minimizing EPA’s regulation.” 

Read Tracey’s full testimony here.

What health impacts of ethylene oxide did EPA take into consideration in its proposed regulatory update for the chemical?

1. Neurological impacts
2. Reproductive health impacts
3. Increased risk of cancer
4. Respiratory impacts
5. All of the above

The correct answer is c.
In 2016, after careful analysis, extensive external peer review, and public comment, EPA concluded that inhalation of ethylene oxide is “carcinogenic to humans.” Studies have also linked ethylene oxide to neurological, reproductive, and respiratory impacts.

PRHE and the EaRTH Center supported a study that showed PFAS exposure was linked to prior cancer diagnoses. EaRTH also provided promotional support for the study. How many news articles and views did the study generate?

1. 20 news articles and 1,000 views
2. 142 news articles and 10,000 views
3. 400 news articles and one billion views

Four hundred news articles and one billion views is correct!
Check out some of the coverage on the study led by former PRHE scientist (and now USC Assistant Professor) Max Aung, PhD, by clicking below.

Using the UCSF Industry Documents Library, PRHE researchers analyzed internal industry documents from which chemical industry?

1. BPA
2. Melamine
3. PFAS
4. Phthalates

The correct answer is PFAS.
The study, The Devil They Knew, published June 1 in Annals of Global Health, explored internal industry documents that attorney Rob Billot gathered as part of his litigation against DuPont and 3M, the largest manufacturers of PFAS. PRHE researchers examined the tactics industry used to delay public awareness of PFAS toxicity and, in turn, delay regulations governing their use. You can read some of the press coverage on the paper from Time, CBS News and EcoWatch.

EPA proposed regulations on which chemicals in 2023?

1. Ethylene Oxide (EtO)
2. Methylene Chloride
3. Trichloroethylene (TCE)
4. Six PFAS (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFBS, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA)
5. All of the above

The correct answer is All of the above.
PRHE has repeatedly called on EPA to use the best available science to evaluate chemical risks and protect health. Our Science & Policy Team drafted public comments about the scientific evidence for all the chemicals listed above (and more) and has, along with PRHE’s Science Action Network for Health and the Environment, called
on EPA to adopt a more efficient and effective class-based approach to chemical regulation. Subscribe to our blog to follow our efforts to hold
EPA accountable. 

How many scientists does it take to make systemic changes to U.S. chemical regulatory policy?

1. 1
2. 14
3. 45
4. Where can I sign up to help?

We’ve given you a 50/50 chance of getting this one right because both “c” and “d”
are correct.
Forty-five scientists affiliated with PRHE’s Science Action Network on Health and the Environment (SANHE) were involved in developing the recommendations in the Roadmap to Strengthen U.S. Chemical Policy and many of those helped to draft the 5 papers that were published in Environmental Health. Click here to apply to join the SANHE. 

In March 2023, PRHE led a Hill briefing to share the Roadmap recommendations as well as the results of our public opinion survey conducted by Lake Research Partners. Who spoke at the briefing?

1. Celinda Lake, Lake Research Partners
2. Eve Gartner, JD, Toxic Exposure and Health Program, Earthjustice
3. Micaela Martinez, PhD, WE ACT for Environmental Justice
4. Tracey J. Woodruff, PhD, MPH, UCSF PRHE and EaRTH Center
5. Wendy Heiger-Bernays, PhD, Boston University School of Public Health
6. All of the above

If you guessed All of the above, you are correct.
Read PRHE’s blog for a summary of what our fantastic speakers said.

Also in March, PRHE briefed California State legislators about the health harms our team identified from microplastics. Why did the legislators want this information?

1. They wanted to learn about the health impacts of eating a credit card worth of plastic each week.
2. They were concerned microplastics are used in botox.
3. They wanted insight to guide policy proposals for solutions to microplastic proliferation.
4. They wanted some light reading for their commutes to work.

If you guessed “c” you are correct.
Our rapid systematic review on the health effects of microplastics, done in partnership with the California State Policy Evidence Consortium (CalSPEC), was designed to inform state legislators as they grapple with solutions to the proliferation of microplastics.

Another study PRHE published this year was on how PFAS and chemicals in plastics affect health. What was the main health impact our study revealed?

1. Double vision
2. Loss in concentration among teens
3. Increase in anxiety
4. Poor pregnancy outcomes

Poor pregnancy outcomes is correct.
Led by PRHE’s Science & Policy Science Research Associate Jessica Trowbridge, PhD, MPH, the study showed how certain PFAS and chemicals used in plastics increased the risk of poor pregnancy outcomes. Read more about the study here.

How many research papers has PRHE published since the ECHO (Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes) study began in 2016?

1. None
2. 6
3. 14
4. 30

The correct answer is 30.
It’s hard to believe it’s that many, but PRHE scientists, postdocs, and partners have mined ECHO’s data to reveal a host of health impacts of chemical exposures on pregnancy, fetal development, children, and women’s health. Read more here. 

Under the amended TSCA, EPA is scheduled to evaluate the next 20 high priority chemicals in 2024. Which chemicals are on that list?

1. 7 chlorinated solvents
2. 6 phthalates
3. 4 flame retardants
4. Formaldehyde
5. 1 fragrance additive
6. 1 polymer precursor
7. All of the above

All of the above are correct.
PRHE will continue to hold EPA accountable by monitoring the Agency’s process, analyzing its evaluation methods and drafting public comments. To be involved or updated in this work, apply to join the SANHE and subscribe to our blog.

In May 2023, the EaRTH Center held its second in-person research showcase. The meeting included media training to help scientists promote their work. What were the top tips shared to interest reporters in new studies? (You can pick more than one.)

1. Identify what’s new and find a news hook.
2. Draft a clear, concise, and compelling summary of the study.
3. Reach out to reporters BEFORE the study is published.
4. Make time for media interviews.
5. I’m a scientist. Why do I need to talk to reporters?

If you answered “e,” you need to come to a future media training.
PRHE has had tremendous success promoting our work and we are always happy to share communications strategies and expertise with our colleagues and partners. And the EaRTH Center provides communications support for select work by EaRTH members. Inquire today!

PRHE was thrilled to launch a new initiative to advance strategies to identify and evaluate chemicals risks. Led by Dr. Joshua Robinson, PhD, the new center is called what?

1. Catch Me If You Can (CMIYC)
2. Center to Capture Chemical Risks (CCCR)
3. Center to Advance Toxicology and Chemical Hazard Assessment (CATCHA)
4. Center to Figure Out What the Heck is in Our Bodies (CFOWHOB)

The correct answer is the Center to Advance Toxicology and Chemical Hazard Assessment (CATCHA)!
The new center will unite scientists from multiple disciplines to establish systems that help researchers identify hazardous chemicals faster and inform regulatory bodies more effectively about their potential risks.

Which set of chemical industry documents did the UCSF Industry Documents Library add in 2023, thanks in large part to PRHE?

1. Dow and 3M papers on PFAS
2. Ethylene oxide papers from the Ohio train crash
3. Johnson & Johnson papers on talc and asbestos
4. Collection of papers on pesticide spraying called the Poison Papers

The correct answer is “c” the Johnson & Johnson papers on talc.
The documents were made public through litigation against Johnson & Johnson for failing to warn consumers that its talc products, particularly its widely used baby powder, were tainted with asbestos, a known toxin linked to ovarian cancer and other health problems. If you guessed the PFAS papers, those were acquired by the Library previously and an announcement will be made in 2024 regarding the Poison Papers.

What are the best ways to support PRHE’s work?

1. Sign our public comments calling on EPA to do a better job protecting people from harmful chemicals.
2. Send us an email telling us how much you love hearing about our accomplishments.
3. Connect us with foundations that support systemic change to protect health and the environment.
4. Donate today.
5. All of the above!

You can’t get this one wrong and we appreciate any and all support of our work.

Last question! Did you have fun taking this survey?

1. How exactly do you define fun?
2. Yes, I loved this update about PRHE’s work.
3. Uhm, seems like the comms team needs to get some sleep.

Only you know the correct answer to this one, but we hope you had as much fun taking this quiz as we had preparing it.

Finally, we are thankful and grateful to our staff, collaborators, partners, and funders who make PRHE’s work possible. We hope this final newsletter of the year finds you and your loved ones healthy and safe, and we wish you peace, happiness, health equity, and environmental justice in the New Year.