In my daily reading and searches for information related to toys and toy safety I came across an Associated Press article about the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The organization is increasing the number of inspectors at United States ports. As I have been following the details of the CPSC and the recent recalls I was pleased to see steps towards a solution.
Then I read some statements from acting CPSC chief Nancy Nord, specifically:
“Despite all the hoopla, we do not have a single reported death, injury or illness caused by lead from any of the recalled toys,” Nord added, citing choking on small toy parts as a greater risk to children.
This simply sent my head spinning. One wonders whether Nord actually understands the risk at all. I do not believe there ever was danger of a child instantly dying from consuming lead but there is no question that lead poisoning causes long lasting, and severely detrimental, health problems. Are we, the public, to be pleased with the fact that the only risk associated with the lead paint problems may be permanent brain damage? The effects of lead poisoning may not be immediate apparent. Only after physician testing will a parent truly know the extent of the problem. And while the lead paint in toys did not result in the deaths of any children, several furniture items did cause deaths.
Further I cannot help but be irritated by another of Nord’s comments highlighted in the article:
Nord’s announcement comes after a year of harsh criticism, from Congress and consumer groups, of CPSC enforcement following a record number of recalls. The agency’s staff has dropped from almost 800 employees in 1974 to an all-time low of about 400 employees now. Nord also has come under fire for accepting at least three free trips, worth thousands of dollars, from industry, purportedly to share information about CPSC priorities and discuss toy safety.
On Monday, Nord, who has defended the trips as legal, bemoaned the overall criticism as unfair, contending it was motivated more by politics than a desire for meaningful reform.
Regardless of the legality of the trips, might we not consider them at the very least “inappropriate.” And with a severe staff shortage, couldn’t Nord’s own statement regarding political motivations rather than “a desire for meaningful reform,” be seen as simply playing politics.
One can only hope the year ahead shows more progress with regard to the CPSC and fewer hazards for consumers.
January 15, 2008
(0) Comments •