Court rejects carcinogen tag for food packing chemical

Judge Shelleyanne Chang of the Superior Court of California issued a tentative ruling this week preventing the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHA) from adding the substance to the Proposition 65 list of chemicals. Since 1986 the state has compiled this as a list of substances that it says are known to cause cancer.

Devastating effect​

The judge said including it on the register could have a “devastating effect”​ on the multi-billion dollar styrene industry and pointed to the importance it has in the packing and transportation of the state’s lucrative fruit crops.

California’s $1.3bn strawberry yield and its $285m raspberry crop would both be damaged by a negative judgement against “styrenic plastic”,​ she said.

"The court agrees with plaintiff that the designation of a product as a carcinogen, particularly associated with food, could have a devastating effect on that product's use,”​ said Chang in her ruling. “Such a designation would likely have the intended stigmatising effect." ​

The judge added that once styrene was identified as a carcinogen “it would be difficult to undo such a designation in the event that plaintiff were to prevail in this litigation”.​ Chang said there was no known evidence that styrene was cancer-causing.

Deputy Attorney General Edward Weil said the state believed the substance should be added to the list on the grounds it met the ‘hazardous communications standard” as laid down in California’s Labor Code – which included possible as well as known carcinogens.

Industry group hails decision​

The Styrene Information and Research Center welcomed the ruling. The body’s executive director, Jack Snyder, said: “We are gratified that Judge Chang has issued a tentative ruling that will prevent the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment from placing styrene on the Proposition 65 list at least until our legal challenge to the proposed listing ultimately is resolved.” ​

He added that placing the chemical on the list “without justification​” would cause “irreparable harm to the styrene industry”.​

“In the meantime, it is worth noting that no authoritative body anywhere in the world considers styrene to be a known human carcinogen. And the latest scientific evidence, including a comprehensive review of the epidemiology data by a panel of internationally recognized scientists, points away from styrene’s human cancer-causing potential,”​ said Snyder.