PRHE’s 2024 year-in-review quiz: Looking back, seeing ahead

~ PRHE

The year ahead will be filled with enormous challenges in our efforts to protect health. As we prepare to tackle those challenges, we look back at our successes in this 3rd annual year-in-review quiz (which for some crazy reason is our most popular blog post of each year).

So, let’s test how well you have been following environmental health and chemical policy issues, what to watch for in 2025, and get up-to-date on PRHE’s and EaRTH’s work. Here we go.

 

Question #1

The Supreme Court decided several major cases this year impacting EPA’s ability to regulate polluters. What was the name of the case that overturned the “Chevron deference” that told courts to defer to federal agency expertise when interpreting laws and regulations?

  1. Koch Brothers vs Clean Air Act
  2. Dark money vs Public health
  3. Loper Bright Enterprises vs Raimondo
  4. Chevron USA vs Natural Resources Defense Council

The correct answer is Loper.
The lawsuit that overturned the Chevron deference, which was established by the Chevron vs NRDC case, was funded by Leonard Leo and Charles Koch, among others who support right-wing and industry interests. PRHE’s Science Action Network sponsored a webinar last month featuring legal experts to discuss how the decision impacts future regulatory decision making. Read more about the decision: How will SCOTUS’ Chevron decision impact environmental health regulations?

 

 

Question #2

EPA took some important steps to improve the health of children in 2024. What were they?

  1. Issued an emergency order to stop use of the pesticide dachtal.
  2. Announced final rule to replace lead pipes within 10 years.
  3. Finalized first drinking water standard on PFAS in drinking water.
  4. All of the above 

The correct answer is all of the above.
EPA has taken important steps this year to protect children from harmful chemicals. We still think they can do better. Learn more about how here: EPA is going down a dangerous path on toxic chemicals

 

Question #3

Scientists affiliated with PRHE and EaRTH developed a new rapid method to test chemical toxicity that revealed a growing list of chemicals that could cause reproductive harm, including infertility. What organisms did they use?

  1. High throughput screening
  2. Worms and yeast
  3. Zebrafish
  4. Cell-based assays

The correct answer is “b,” worms and yeast.
UCSF researchers in the labPublished June 17 in Reproductive Toxicology, the scientists evaluated 199 chemicals including bisphenols, phthalates, pesticides, PFAS (“forever chemicals”), and quaternary ammonium compounds and found 57 strongly negatively impacted the reproductive system. They also found many new BPA substitutes, which are used in plastic water bottles and other plastic products, more toxic than the original and that when certain BPA chemicals were combined, reproductive outcomes worsened. The study was led by EaRTH’s lab director Jennifer Fung. Read more about it here: New test finds more than 50 common chemicals may be linked to infertility

 

Question #4

California passed a new law this year that will help to protect people from DEHP, a harmful plasticizer used in medical settings. What medical equipment did this bill specifically ban DEHP from?

  1. Hospital cafeteria trays
  2. Hospital gowns
  3. IV bags and tubes
  4. Scalpels

The correct answer is “c,” IV bags and tubes.
Earlier this year, Dr. Tracey Woodruff testified before the California Assembly on the importance of removing DEHP chemicals from medical devices and IV tubes:

AB2300’s proposed ban on DEHP – including regrettable substitutes – from medical supplies and devices like intravenous tubes is important for everyone in the hospital, but particularly for newborn babies as phthalates are known to disrupt hormonal activity and newborns are more susceptible to harmful health impacts of chemical exposures.”

Read about the new law here: California’s ban on toxic IV bags marks a shift for health care plastics

 

Question #5

The New England Journal of Medicine published an article by Dr. Tracey Woodruff earlier this year that discussed the growth of fossil fuels, petrochemicals and plastics production and their impact on health. How much has fossil fuel (coal, oil, natural gas) consumption and petrochemical production increased since the 1950’s?

  1. Doubled
  2. Quadrupled
  3. Six-fold
  4. 15-fold

If you guessed 15-fold, you are correct.
A byproduct of fossil fuel production, petrochemicals are proliferating and contributing to rising rates of disease, including cancer, writes Tracey in “Health Impacts of Fossil Fuel Derived Endocrine Disruptors.” Read more about it here:

 

Question #6

In a major move for public health, EPA listened to scientists (including PRHE), OSHA, and community groups and strengthened standards to reduce what? 

  1. Ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions and cancer risk
  2. Methane from landfills
  3. Chemicals linked to ADHD in candy
  4. Lead in clothing

If you guessed “a” you are correct.
EtO is used in medical sterilization and is highly carcinogenic. After reviewing the data, EPA acknowledged that EtO “is more potent than was previously understood.” Dr. Tracey Woodruff testified before Congress last year on the proposed rule. She was the only scientist, only woman, and only person defending EPA’s efforts to limit EtO at the hearing. Read more about EtO here: We applaud EPA for new rule reducing EtO emissions

 

Question #7

What did the science show that led to a historic ban on dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate or DCPA?

  1. Increase in asthma among farmworkers
  2. Loss in concentration among teens
  3. Links to higher cancer risks
  4. Harmed fetal health, including brain development and thyroid function

The correct answer is “d.”
While the ban is good, it took too long and too many children were hurt while EPA delayed with the science. This is why we are focusing on the continued corporate influence industry has on EPA. Read more about it here: EPA Bans Pesticide Linked to Lifelong Harm for Pregnant Farmworkers’ Children

 

 

Question #8

The media turns to PRHE for advice and the latest science on how to avoid harmful chemicals and plastics. This year, many reporters wanted to talk to PRHE about microplastics. Why? 

  1. PRHE led the first rapid systematic review that identified health harms from microplastics, including infertility and cancer.
  2. PRHE updated Toxic Matters to include information about microplastics.
  3. Reporters love to talk to Dr. Tracey J. Woodruff because she knows her stuff.
  4. All of the above.

You can’t get this one wrong, but the correct answer is all of the above. Check out some of our media coverage on microplastics:

 

Question #9

How many chemicals did EPA move to high priority for review under TSCA this year?

  1. None
  2. One
  3. Three
  4. Five
  5. 15

The correct answer is “d” – five chemicals.
One of the chemicals moved to high priority was vinyl chloride, a highly toxic and carcinogenic chemical used in PVC pipes and which was spilled during the East Palestine, OH train derailment leading to a petrochemical disaster and the evacuation of 2,000 area residents. Learn about the new high priority chemicals under review here: Chemical Substances Undergoing Prioritization

 

Question #10

PRHE has been working to launch a new Center to End Corporate Harm. Which industries are the focus of this new center?

  1. Alcohol and Tobacco
  2. Fossil Fuels
  3. Fracking
  4. Plastics
  5. Ultra processed foods
  6. All of the above

All of the above is correct.
As we have pointed out in symposiums, talks, research papers, blogs, and on social media, health harming industries have been driving an increase in non-communicable diseases. Many of these industries have taken a page out of Tobacco’s playbook – deny health harms, manipulate science and regulatory bodies, and lie to the public about the real risks and costs. And these same corporate actors that are harming our health are also jeopardizing our democracy. Stay tuned for the launch of our Center in January!

 

Question #11

PRHE hosted a symposium at UCSF in January to highlight the latest research on industry health harms. Which scientists and their work were featured at the symposium?

  1. Cristin Kearns PhD, on how multiple industries hid their products links to breast cancer
  2. Laura Schmidt PhD, on how the tobacco industry influences the food industry
  3. Pam Ling, PhD, on how the tobacco and alcohol industries collaborate to sell their products
  4. Tracey J. Woodruff, PhD, on how health-harming industries manipulate the regulatory process
  5. All of the above

The correct answer is all of the above – and we promise no more “all of the above” answers!
These and other scientists are collaborating on the aforementioned Center to End Corporate Harm. You can read about and view their talks here: Researching and countering an industrial disease epidemic

 

 

Question #12

One of the goals of the EaRTH Center is to fund groundbreaking environmental health research projects and elevate fresh perspectives from the health care community. Which important issue did one EaRTH physician researcher bring more attention to this year?

  1. How extreme weather disrupts cancer care
  2. How wildfires affect childhood asthma
  3. How climate change-driven storms expose people to contaminated flood waters
  4. How climate change is impacting pregnancy

The correct answer is “a” – how extreme weather disrupts cancer care. Although all of the answers reflect how climate is impacting health and are issues other EaRTH researchers are tackling. Read more about weather and cancer treatment in their blog: How extreme weather is disrupting cancer care

 

Question #13

PRHE’s Science & Policy team drafts and submits public comments to help hold EPA accountable to use the best science to protect health. How many sets of comments did our team submit this year? Extra points if you can guess the number of pages.

  1. 6 sets of comments totaling 85 pages.
  2. 7 sets of comments totaling 190 pages.
  3. 9 sets of comments totaling 345 pages.
  4. Who cares how many pages. What did the comments say?

The correct answer is “c”, but we’ll accept answer “d”.
Our comments were submitted to US EPA, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM), and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) on issues ranging from environmental justice and chemical risk evaluations to committee nominations. Read all our comments on PRHE’s website and read more about our comments on dichloroethane chemicals here: Scientists, Clinicians Charge EPA Underestimates Dichloroethanes’ Risks.

 

Question #14

How many research papers has the EaRTH Center supported since its inception in 2020? 

  1. 21
  2. 36
  3. 89
  4. 112

We can’t believe it either, but the correct answer is 112!
These papers cover a wide range of topics including identifying links between PFAS and cancer, using worms and yeast to identify reproductive toxicants, and how fossil fuels and petrochemicals are contributing to increasing chronic disease.

 

Question #15

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.

You can’t get this one wrong, and we appreciate your support for our work. 

 

 

 

 

Question #16

Did you enjoy taking this quiz? 

  1. There are a lot of other things I can think of to enjoy.
  2. Yes, this is a fun way to learn about PRHE’s work.
  3. Ahem, does your comms team have too much time on their hands?
  4. This was a survey?

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.

Thank you to our staff, collaborators, partners, and funders who make PRHE’s work possible. We wish you and your loved ones peace, happiness, health equity, and environmental justice in the New Year.

Published by PRHE

PRHE’s mission is to create a healthier environment for human reproduction and development through advancing scientific inquiry, clinical care and health policies that prevent exposures to harmful chemicals in our environment.