Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
About Biomonitoring and SB 1379
What is biomonitoring?
Biomonitoring, short for “biological monitoring,” is a type of research that tells us about the chemical pollution
each of us carries as a result of our exposure to environmental toxins. By measuring the levels of chemicals in our
blood, urine, or other body tissue, we learn important information about exposure to environmental chemicals,
helping us to better understand our "body burden" and its possible link to disease.
Why do we need biomonitoring research?
There are over 100,000 man-made chemicals registered for use today, yet less than 10 percent of them have been
tested for their effects on human health. These synthetic chemicals trespass into our bodies without our
knowledge or consent. We need more testing of chemicals before they are introduced into commerce.
Biomonitoring is a scientific tool that provides needed exposure information, which is a key component for
assessing the effects of chemicals on human health.
A growing body of credible, peer-reviewed research shows that our exposure to environmental toxins is
contributing to increasing rates of chronic disease and illness. Biomonitoring allows us to detect and identify the
presence of harmful chemicals that have been linked to adverse health outcomes in people. Health care
providers, communities and the public have a right-to-know what is in our bodies so we can make informed
decisions in health planning and take measures to reduce risks.
What will SB 1379 do?
Senate Bill 1379 is a California bill authored by President pro Tempore Don Perata and Senator Deborah Ortiz.
The bill is co-sponsored by the Breast Cancer Fund and Commonweal.
SB 1379 would establish the nation's first state-wide, community-based biomonitoring program. It would create a
multi-disciplinary, multi-constituency Advisory Panel to oversee the design and implementation of the program,
including the development of its educational and outreach materials as well as laboratory models and protocols.
The educational and outreach materials will explain the basics of body burden analysis, routes of exposure,
possible health effects, and steps being taken – or needed – to minimize or eliminate exposures to environmental
toxins. The training models and protocols for scientists, health professionals, and program staff will ensure the
biomonitoring program is implemented in a community-based and ethical manner.
All participation will be voluntary, and program participants will have the opportunity to learn their personal
results, which will be kept strictly confidential.
1
What will a biomonitoring program accomplish?
The data generated by biomonitoring can support efforts to improve public health by indicating trends in
exposure, identifying highly exposed communities, and setting priorities for legislative and regulatory action.
In order to ensure that research findings help individuals and communities to better understand how
environmental pollution affects public health, resource materials that communicate scientific findings will be
available to participants of the biomonitoring studies and to members of the affected or participating
communities. Aggregate biomonitoring data will be released to the public, but all individual results will be strictly
confidential.
Workers, the general public, communities concerned with particular health outcomes, and health care providers
have a right-to-know what chemical contaminants and pollutants are in their bodies, so that we can make
informed decisions in health planning and take measures to reduce risks to employee, and public, health.
Who will be participating? / Who will be tested and how will they be selected?
All participation in the biomonitoring program will be voluntary. The California Department of Health Services
and other state agencies will partner with community-based organizations to ensure that solicitations for
participants are done in a culturally sensitive and appropriate manner.
An Advisory Panel will recommend communities of interest to participate in biomonitoring studies.
Communities could reflect geographic, occupational, economic, and/or racial characteristics. The Advisory Panel
will include many scientific disciplines as well as non-governmental organizations and a designated industry
representative. The Panel will help ensure the implementation of a community-based and participatory program
in line with environmental justice principles developed within Cal EPA.
Are the results confidential?
An individual’s results will be kept strictly confidential. The aggregate results of the program will be made
available to the community and the general public. Individuals will be informed about their own biomonitoring
data upon request.
How will this bill affect the workplace?
Everyone is exposed to synthetic chemicals through their workplace, consumer products, household chemicals, as
well as via our air, water and food. However, some workers are more highly exposed to environmental pollutants.
Exposures to hazardous chemicals in the workplace results in the premature death of over 60,000 U.S. workers
each year. There are more than 800,000 new cases of occupational disease each year. The annual cost of
occupational disease in the U.S. is $25.5 billion, representing a substantial drain on the U.S. economy and on the
lives of workers and their families.
How will this bill affect businesses?
The information gleaned from the biomonitoring program can potentially save millions of dollars in health care
costs and workers’ compensation. The costs of environmental-associated disease are staggering for businesses:
from disability payments to lower productivity to missed work days. Beyond this, society bears unfair costs for
environmental cleanups and the provision of healthcare. Green business is good business, and there is a growing
demand for non-toxic products, not to mention a moral obligation to distribute safe alternatives to the public.
Is biomonitoring done anywhere else? / Do any other states or countries conduct biomonitoring?
2
Nationally, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) supports state and local public health
information campaigns about blood lead levels in children. The National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey (NHANES), an ongoing population-based survey carried out by the National Center for Health Statistics,
also monitors chemical levels in blood and urine, which are published every two years in the CDC's National
Reports on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. The most recent report, released in 2005, measured
and analyzed 148 chemicals in the blood and urine of almost 8,000 individuals throughout the United States.
Aggregated nationally, the data does not tell states and local communities about their specific chemical body
burdens.
During the 1970s, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducted breastmilk monitoring to evaluate the
extent of human milk contamination with organochlorine pesticides and PCBs. The 1976-1978 survey found high
levels of PCBs. From 1967 to 1990, the National Human Monitoring Program (NHMP) monitored chemical
exposures in the U.S. population.
Biomonitoring has been conducted internationally in (partial list): Austria, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Costa
Rica, Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom,
the former Soviet Union, Ukraine, and Yugoslavia. Sweden, Germany, and the World Health Organization have
permanent biomonitoring programs.
If there is a CDC program, why do we need a state-wide program?
State health departments are frequently called upon to investigate geographic clusters of birth defects, cancers, or
other illnesses to determine whether they can be attributed to exposure to environmental chemicals. They are
also asked to help in investigations of industrial accidents, and to assess whether geographic or non-geographic
communities might be exposed to toxic chemicals at levels considered unsafe. States currently lack the ability to
conduct the biomonitoring testing required for these tasks, and instead must rely on CDC's Environmental
Health Laboratory. The CDC's Lab does outstanding work, but it simply does not have the time and human
resources to respond to each state's unique needs. The states themselves need to build capacity to conduct
biomonitoring.
CDC recognizes this need. In FY 2002 and FY 2003, CDC issued planning grants for states in to develop statespecific biomonitoring plans. Subsequently, however, CDC awarded only three biomonitoring implementation
grants. Unfortunately, California did not receive one. It is telling that not only did most states NOT receive
grants, but the size of the grants was ultimately much smaller than originally anticipated. CDC did not have
anywhere near the resources to respond to the need.
The important point is that CDC itself recognizes that public health and bioterrorism response needs are served
by increasing the states' capability to conduct biomonitoring. SB 1379 will address this need and develop
biomonitoring studies that are of special interest to Californians. The CDC has offered a minimum of $1.7
million dollars in in-kind testing and training services to California to help launch a statewide program.
It is important to realize how cost-effective biomonitoring can be. Here is a real life example from Mississippi.
In 1996, methyl parathion, a pesticide approved for outdoor use only, was illegally sprayed inside some 2,600
homes. Two children died and many people became sick. Residents did not know whether their houses had been
sprayed and whether their families had been exposed.
CDC quickly measured the pesticide levels in people's bodies in the impacted areas and provided the information
to Mississippi's State Health Department. The data enabled authorities to determine the neighborhoods where
methyl parathion was actually sprayed, thus identifying individuals in need of medical treatment and those who
needed to be moved out of their homes so the houses could be decontaminated. The Health Department was
able to take immediate action to protect the public's health based on sound scientific data. An estimated $50
million was saved in this case alone because biomonitoring was available to inform an appropriate response.
3
Will biomonitoring prevent disease?
Biomonitoring is an important tool to better understand the relationship between environmental exposures and
trends in disease. We know that rates of diseases and illnesses such as cancer, asthma, Alzheimer's disease,
autism, birth defects, developmental disabilities, endometriosis, infertility, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson's
Disease are rising, and mounting evidence links both incidence and severity of these diseases to environmental
contaminants. In fact, an estimated 20 million of America’s children suffer from at least one chronic health
problem.
Biomonitoring studies will provide both short term and long term exposure trends data which can be used to
prevent or mitigate disease. In cases like the Mississippi pesticide accident, biomoitoring prevented serious
adverse health outcomes in the short term. In the longer term, medical and health researchers will utilize
exposure data for specific research that can be used to design interventions that emphasize prevention.
What does biomonitoring have to do with breast cancer?
The increasing rates of breast cancer have paralleled the proliferation of synthetic chemicals since World War II.
In the past 50 years, the lifetime risk of breast cancer has nearly tripled in the United States. In the 1940s, a
woman’s lifetime risk of breast cancer was 1 in 22. Today, a woman’s lifetime risk is 1 in 7 and rising. Measuring
potentially harmful environmental chemicals in the body can help us understand what chemicals we are actually
exposed to, and their links to disease like breast cancer.
Breastmilk monitoring? Does this mean I shouldn’t breastfeed?
Breastfeeding is the most nutritious food for infants, and breastfeeding is the best choice for the health of babies
and their mothers. The goal is to make the baby’s first environment – the womb – safe for both mother and child.
Biomonitoring data provide information so we can better protect ourselves from chemical contaminants that are
making their way into our bodies. At the same time, it is important to always emphasize the importance of
breastfeeding.
“The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends breastfeeding as the optimal method for feeding
infants because it promotes the best possible health, developmental, and psychosocial outcomes for children.” –
LA County Department of Health Services
“The existence of chemical residues in breastmilk is not a reason for limiting breastfeeding. In fact, it is a reason
to breastfeed because breastmilk contains substances that help the child develop a stronger immune system and
gives protection against environmental pollutants and pathogens. Breastfeeding can help limit the damage caused
by fetal exposure.”
– World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action
For more information on breastfeeding and biomonitoring please see the following resources:
 The World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action – Frequently Asked Questions About Breastfeeding in a Contaminated
Environment
 Physicians for Social Responsibility – Why Breastfeeding is Still Best for Baby
 Natural Resources Defense Council – Healthy Milk, Healthy Baby
(available at www.calbbc.org and click on resources)
Who supports the Healthy Californians Biomonitoring Program?
4
A large coalition of environmental health, medical, public health, environmental justice, and labor organizations
are in strong support of SB 1379, the Healthy Californians Biomonitoring Program.
5