A/HRC/33/41 products, cosmetics, furniture, clothing, electronics, recycling, waste disposal, the automotive sector, and others — has a responsibility, as do the financiers and investors and the lawyers who advise these industries, to prevent childhood exposure to toxics. Businesses have a responsibility to prevent children from being exposed to toxics from their activities, both directly and indirectly. A. A framework for solutions 65. While the impacts are grave and widespread, solutions are possible and the benefits of past efforts are measurable. 66. The health and economic benefits of such a framework are documented. For example, the phaseout of lead in gasoline translated into annual cost savings of $2.4 trillion (4 per cent of global GDP) by preventing childhood exposure to lead and its impacts on cognition.96 Following the phaseout of lead from gasoline in the 1970s in the United States, the average IQ increased nationally by 2.2-4.7 points.97 Economically, this is estimated at between $153 billion and $443 billion (at present-day value) in benefits for each birth cohort in the country.98 67. Requiring chemical manufacturers to submit health effects data conforming to current scientific standards has led to the withdrawal of hundreds of toxic substances that were allowed for use. The Birth Defect Prevention Act of the State of California (United States) led to over 400 of 703 previously registered pesticides being withdrawn from the market by manufacturers or being suspended by regulators between 1992 and 2010 — simply by requiring information on associated health risks to children.99 68. National and international efforts to reduce second-hand exposure to tobacco smoke show recognition of both the vulnerability of children to exposure and their right to physical integrity. Smoking has been increasingly restricted from indoor spaces to protect the rights of the child, among others. 69. Other examples of addressing certain sources of exposure to toxics by young children include the European Union directive on the safety of toys, which prohibits the presence of substances in toys that are classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction,100 and United States legislation to protect children working on tobacco farms from toxic pesticides. 101 Globally, a new treaty on mercury pollution holds promise, but only addresses one element of a much larger problem. States and businesses still have a long way to go. 70. States are not adequately protecting children from toxics from business activities, as is clearly indicated by rates of exposure, death, disease and disability. Laws and policies must prioritize the protection of children, women and girls of reproductive age, and other 96 97 98 99 100 101 See www.unep.org/newscentre/default.aspx?DocumentID=2656&ArticleID=8917#sthash.q9BV3Pgv.dpuf. S.D. Grosse and others, “Economic gains resulting from the reduction in children’s exposure to lead in the United States”, Environmental Health Perspectives (2002). WHO, Childhood Lead Poisoning (2010), p. 35 (the original calculation was between $110 billion and $319 billion, at the year 2000 value of the United States dollar). California Environmental Protection Agency, A Guide to Pesticide Regulation in California (2011), p. 22. Submission from Slovenia. Submission from Human Rights Watch. 15