A recent report from ProPublica irresponsibly seeks to mislead and scare the public about formaldehyde in the air around us.
Formaldehyde is a natural compound made of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen. It is found in every living system – from plants to animals to humans. In fact, humans produce about 1.5 ounces of formaldehyde every day as part of our normal metabolic process. Formaldehyde is extensively regulated to protect human health and the environment, and decades of scientific evidence support safe levels of formaldehyde exposure at current regulatory standards.
However, ProPublica misleads its readers into thinking this ubiquitous, natural chemical is a health threat to Americans. ProPublica’s irresponsible reporting ignores a number of critical factors, including:
- That EPA’s approach to formaldehyde is out of step with the rest of the world, ignoring the state of the science on certain cancers and suggesting health effects at levels below natural concentrations in the environment, or background levels. This ignores recent conclusions by the World Health Organization and European Chemicals agency. In fact, EPA’s suggested workplace limits for formaldehyde are 30 times below the recently updated European Union occupational levels.
- Multiple EPA peer review bodies, including the National Academy of Sciences, EPA Human Studies Review Board, and EPA TSCA Scientific Advisory Committee on Chemicals, have strongly criticized EPA’s approach to formaldehyde toxicity as well as EPA conclusions on certain types of cancer.
- EPA’s approach to formaldehyde has been strongly criticized by other federal agencies, including Department of Defense, USDA, CDC, NASA, and the White House Office of Management and Budget.
- ProPublica ignores numerous EPA data limitations for AirToxScreen, including why people should not use this data to consider individual or local risks.
- Comments on EPA’s proposed Air Emissions Reporting Requirements rule outline how EPA’s National Emissions Inventory, AirToxScreen, and past determinations, as well as state environmental comments, support the overwhelming influence of biogenic, fire, and secondary sources (and the insignificance of industrial sources) for ambient formaldehyde concentrations. These comments also note studies that find disagreement between ambient formaldehyde concentrations through ground-based observations, satellite measurements, and modeled results. 1
- Nearly all parts of the U.S. are far below EPA’s long-standing approach to unacceptable risks that need to be addressed under the Clean Air Act.
- Formaldehyde dissipates quickly in sunlight and EPA data fully acknowledges that nearly all formaldehyde in the outdoor air come from natural/biogenic sources and fires (primarily wildfires). For example, EPA’s most recent National Emissions Inventory shows that sources other than industry represent over 90 percent of emissions and natural/biogenic emissions contribute roughly 2,500 times more formaldehyde than industrial processes associated with chemical manufacturing. EPA data also shows that other sources like residential wood burning (more than 20 times more formaldehyde than chemical manufacturing) and commercial cooking (more than 7 times more than chemical manufacturing) are more significant sources.
- EPA’s AirToxScreen makes clear that virtually all formaldehyde modeled in this program comes from background and secondary formation.
- EPA’s draft TSCA risk evaluation acknowledges that ambient air monitoring data shows formaldehyde concentrations are below levels of concern (and frequently below detection limits).
- Even in EPA’s most precautionary approach to formaldehyde under the Integrated Risk Information (IRIS) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) programs, the numbers suggested by ProPublica do not add up. EPA only has sufficient data to quantify an association with very rare types of cancer.
Formaldehyde is one of the most studied and regulated chemical substances in commerce today. Federal standards and regulations are in place to limit formaldehyde emissions and minimize any potential human health risks. For example, the EPA’s regulations under TSCA Title VI, Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products, are the most stringent formaldehyde product emissions standards in the world today. Since the early 1980s, formaldehyde has been continuously studied and results show that current regulated safe exposure levels are protective. Given formaldehyde’s wide use, extensive product stewardship efforts have been implemented by industry, including state-of-the-art peer-reviewed and published scientific research, to improve understanding and characterization of potential human health risks associated with formaldehyde.
Even though formaldehyde is already highly regulated by numerous agencies and exposures are low, well-managed, and controlled, it is understandable that the public may still have questions about its safety. That is why formaldehyde manufacturers and users continue to take their responsibility seriously, work with regulatory authorities, and provide information on the safe use of formaldehyde and the products made from it.
Learn more about formaldehyde.
1 See additional state and EPA documents on key caveats/limitations and background contributions:
https://epd.georgia.gov/document/document/georgia-epd-comments-2017-airtoxscreen-pdf/download;
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0489-0263 (pg. 24-25);
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/AirToxScreen_2018%20TSD.pdf (pg. 25, a-2); https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?dirEntryId=88282&Lab=NERL;
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/documents/nata_2014_summary_of_results.pdf;
https://www.epa.gov/AirToxScreen/airtoxscreen-assessment-methods.
