Formaldehyde, while serving as the preferred chemical for undertakers and embalmers, is also found in common products like furniture and clothing. However, it has been linked to cancer and severe respiratory issues, leading the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to initiate a regulation effort in 2021. This move was met with fierce resistance from the chemicals industry, led by Lynn Dekleva, who was once a lobbyist at the American Chemistry Council, an industry organization known for its significant government lobbying expenditures. Following a 32-year career at chemical producer DuPont, Dekleva joined the EPA during the first Trump administration. Her former employer, the chemicals lobbying group, prioritizes reversing the EPA’s stance on formaldehyde and seeks to dismantle a program that evaluates the health risks of chemicals.
Additionally, another prior lobbyist for the chemistry council, Nancy Beck, is now at the EPA, overseeing the regulation of existing chemicals. The council’s president, Chris Jahn, emphasized the importance of chemistry to a nation’s health and economic vibrancy. Although it is not unheard of for industry groups to influence policy in the interest of their members, health and legal experts find the extent of the industry’s blocking of the EPA’s scientific research on formaldehyde, a known carcinogen, and the fact that the architect of the effort is now involved in chemical regulation at the agency, to be remarkable. This situation coincides with the Trump administration’s drive to reduce the federal scientific workforce.
Leadership of the industry’s campaign against formaldehyde regulation, Dr. Dekleva called for investigations into federal officials for potential conflict of interest and criticized the EPA’s assessment methods through publicly available emails and by submitting industry-funded research that downplayed the risks. The American Chemistry Council also sued the EPA and the National Academies, accusing them of a lack of scientific integrity. The council argues for changing the EPA’s approval process for new chemicals and speeding up safety reviews, areas within Dr. Dekleva’s range of authority at the agency.
The EPA’s assessment on formaldehyde marked the first step toward regulating the chemical under the Integrated Risk Information System. The industry group, with support from various business associations, claimed that formaldehyde had been studied sufficiently and that industry controls were stringent. Dr. Dekleva, representing a formaldehyde panel at the industry group, raised multiple criticisms about the EPA’s methodology, arguing for a revision of the draft assessment. The group collaborated with consultants, including those who had previously supported the tobacco industry, to provide opinions and studies minimizing formaldehyde’s risks.
Experts like David Michaels argue that the industry strategy aims to create the illusion of scientific disagreement on the carcinogenic effects of formaldehyde. The National Academies, a science advisory body to the U.S. government, also faced scrutiny and legal action from the American Chemistry Council over its involvement in the EPA’s formaldehyde review. Despite these challenges, the National Academies supported the EPA’s finding that formaldehyde is carcinogenic and increases leukemia risk. The EPA’s final risk determination aligned with global health authorities, concluding that formaldehyde poses an unreasonable risk to human health. Nevertheless, the American Chemistry Council continues to advocate for changes in policy, expressing concerns regarding workforce safety standards and the Integrated Risk Information System.
Upon Trump’s reelection, the council joined other industry groups in urging the administration to reconsider the EPA’s findings on formaldehyde. The EPA and the chemicals industry are now poised to revisit and potentially alter the regulatory framework for chemicals, with implications for public health and industry operations.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/26/climate/epa-lynn-dekleva-formaldehyde.html
