U.S. Lobbies EU on Toy Restrictions

The Clinton administration, acting at the behest of Mattel Inc. and other toy companies, is lobbying against European efforts to ban controversial chemical compounds from teething rings and other toys for young children.

With the European Union nearing a decision on whether to prohibit the sale of toys made with polyvinyl chloride, or PVC, the Commerce Department has instructed U.S. diplomats to try to turn around several such bans already in effect.

The toy companies are concerned about the potential ban because of the eventual negative impact it could have on their sales in the United States--as well as the immediate impact it could have on their sales in Europe.

At issue are compounds known as phthalates (pronounced tha’lates). They are softening components that provide a spongy, chewy feel when added to plastics. They also help plastics absorb the reds and yellows and other bright colors that children find appealing.

Among the compounds that would be banned is one that has been voluntarily left out of U.S. products for 13 years. But other compounds targeted by the European Union are key components of toys and other plastic products made and sold in this country.

At least one Danish study has suggested that some phthalates, which are used not only in toys but in the strong plastic bags that contain intravenously-delivered medications and blood, may cause cancer, disrupt endocrine function or weaken immune systems. Other studies have raised similar concerns and suggested they may also cause liver and kidney damage and disruptions in reproduction, including lowered sperm counts.

But the studies were conducted only on animals, and it is unclear what impact, if any, the chemicals have on people.

No study has replicated the initial Danish study, said David Miller, president of the Toy Manufacturers of America. “The science is not in that direction,” he said in an interview. “The science is on our side.”

Miller’s group represents the makers and importers of 85% of the toys sold in the United States, 20% of which are made of vinyl.

Enough questions have been raised about one chemical, diethylhexylphthalate, or DEHP, that manufacturers voluntarily took it out of the formula for the plastics used in children’s toys in 1985, substituting another phthalate.

“There’s not the definitive study that says we’ve got to stop manufacturing these things, but there’s growing evidence and growing concern that we’re doing a global experiment on children by dramatically altering the chemical environment,” said Michael McCally, a public health physician and a professor in the department of public health and preventive medicine at the Mt. Sinai Medical School in New York.

Charles Ludolph, a deputy assistant secretary of Commerce responsible for European affairs, said the U.S. position is that “decisions on a threat to health should be based on objective scientific evidence.” He said the administration wants the Europeans to delay any decision until they can study a report that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is expected to complete next month on phthalates.

But Jeff Wise, policy director of the National Environmental Trust, which describes itself as a national public education group focusing on environmental issues, said: “There’s always more science you can do. There’s enough science to indicate there is concern.”

‘No Apparent Health Hazard,’ U.S. Says

A decision by the 15-nation European Union could come as early as next week.

In December, the Commerce Department sent a cable to embassies throughout western Europe, saying it had been contacted by “representatives of one of the leading U.S. toy manufacturers . . . in an effort to rectify a problem regarding the marketing of certain PVC toys placed on the market in the EU.”

“The U.S. remains concerned that the EU countries’ actions are having a negative effect on the marketing of these products absent of any scientific-based information. The U.S. has found no apparent health hazard related to plasticisers used in toys, and, in fact, information received from other countries completely contradicts the need for these actions,” the department said in the cable.

Sean Fitzgerald, Mattel’s vice president for corporate communications, said Wednesday the El Segundo-based company had contacted the Commerce Department, along with representatives of the chemical and plastics industries and the toy manufacturers’ association, seeking support in their opposition to a European ban.

In March, Mattel hired a leading Washington lobbying firm to fight legislation that would require disclosure of chemicals used in children’s products, according to a newsletter on lobbying. Federal election reports show that Mattel contributed $65,000 to various Democratic Party committees in 1997 and $25,000 to Republican Party committees.

European Efforts Gather Steam

In addition to the proposed restrictions throughout the European Union, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands and Denmark have taken steps to remove these products from the marketplace, and others might follow, said the Commerce Department cable.

A. Vernon Weaver, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, recently wrote to Hans Beseler, the senior EU administrative officer, warning that “the sudden ban on products which have been sold for years and which is based on incomplete and perhaps erroneous information could cause trade misunderstandings between the United States and the European Union.”

“The U.S. government is expending a fairly large amount of energy and time on behalf of the toy industry,” said Rick Hind, legislative director of the toxics campaign run by the environmental group Greenpeace. He said other softening agents can be substituted safely for the phthalates.

Hind complained in a letter to Commerce Secretary Bill Daley that the department’s position is “inconsistent with U.S. regulations” and with a presidential executive order instructing government agencies to make sure their “policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate risks to children that result from environmental health risks or safety risks.”

Researcher Tricia Ford contributed to this story.