"Under normal lifestyle and dietary conditions, the level
of exposure of most women to individual environmental
chemicals will probably pose minimal risk to the developing
fetus/baby. However, women who are pregnant are exposed to
hundreds of chemicals at a low level. Potentially, this exposure
could operate additively or interactively and raises the
possibility of 'mixtures' effects. On present evidence,
it is impossible to assess the risk, if any, of such
exposures. Obtaining more definitive guidance is likely
to take many years; there is considerable uncertainty about
the risks of chemical exposure.
The following steps would however reduce overall chemical
use fresh food rather than processed foods whenever
reduce use of foods/beverages in cans/plastic containers,
including their use for food storage
minimise the use of personal care products such as
moisturisers, cosmetics, shower gels and fragrances
minimise the purchase of newly produced household
furniture, fabrics, non–stick frying pans and cars
avoid the use of garden/household/pet pesticides or
fungicides (such as fly sprays or strips, rose sprays, flea
avoid paint fumes
only take over–the–counter analgesics or
painkillers when necessary
do not assume safety of products based on the absence of
'harmful' chemicals in their ingredients list, or the
tag 'natural' (herbal or otherwise).
It is unlikely that any of these exposures are truly harmful
for most babies, but in view of current
uncertainty about risks, especially those relating to
'mixtures', these steps will reduce environmental
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
In Crombie Property Holdings Limited v McColl-Frontenac Inc. (Texaco Canada Limited), 2017 ONCA 15 (Crombie v McColl ), the Ontario Court of Appeal released an important decision regarding environmental due diligence in a real estate transaction, . . .
Last August, we reported on recent case law dealing with the difficult question of how to determine limitation periods in environmental claims. In the January 2017 Court of Appeal decision of Crombie Property Holdings Limited v. McColl-Frontenac Inc., the court overturned the trial court's decision that the case was started too late on the basis of "palpable and overriding errors".
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).