Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Health & Wellness

We Eat, Breathe and Absorb Flame Retardants

By Terry J. Allen, In These Times. Posted October 16, 2007.


The Environmental Protection Agency does almost nothing to regulate these chemicals.
Advertisement

The old joke was: Americans eat so many preservatives, our corpses will never rot. Now, it turns out they won't burn either. Americans' bodies have the world's highest concentration of the flame retardant polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) -- 10 to 40 times higher than Europeans -- and our chemical burden is doubling every three to five years.

PBDEs, which resemble PCBs, are added to upholstery, computer parts, mattresses, fax machines, carpets, car seats and house wiring. We eat, absorb and breathe PBDEs daily, and they end up in everything from baby's brains and mother's milk to polar bears.

"What is in commercial products is getting into the environment," says EPA scientist Linda Birnbaum, "and what's in the environment is getting into wildlife and people."

Because the EPA does not require labeling, you are unlikely to know which, if any, PDBEs are in the mattress your baby sleeps on, the couch you potato on and the electronic equipment you surf the web with.

Nor the risks. Despite the chemical's ubiquity and 30-year history, the EPA says, "Our toxicology database [on PBDEs] is inadequate to truly understand the risk."

That stance serves the $2.9 billion flame retardant industry -- an industry that shreds logic by arguing simultaneously that the effects on humans are unknown and that exposures are too low to cause concern.

But evidence of the danger is piling up. While test animals exposed to high levels of PBDEs developed tumors, even low levels caused deficits in learning and memory that worsened with age. The chemical may also impact behavior, disrupt endocrine function, irreparably damage reproductive systems and cause thyroid disease. A small decrease in thyroid hormone levels can produce cognitive impairment in children, including lowered IQ.

The three main types -- penta-, octa- and deca-BDEs -- are named for the number of bromine atoms. Penta and octa are now widely recognized as dangerous. After the European Union, Canada and a few U.S. states banned them, U.S. manufacturers saw the handwriting on the wall, and perhaps the lawsuits in the wings, and ceased production as of 2005.

Recycled materials, like carpet and drapery backing, as well as items produced before the phase-out, may contain as much as 30 percent penta or octa. According to Pesticide & Toxic Chemical News, since the 2004 E.U. ban, foreign sources are dumping "significant amounts" of octa- and penta-laden products in the United States.

The United States still manufactures deca-BDE and uses it in electronics, upholstery and textiles, despite its status as a likely carcinogen and its ability to break down into dioxin-like molecules.

"Some [Americans] have concentrations [of deca] not dissimilar to amounts in animals that cause cancer of the thyroid and liver," says Birnbaum.

PBDEs, like 62,000 other chemicals grandfathered in by the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, never underwent an approval process. In 2006, the Government Accountability Office found that the EPA "does not routinely assess the human health and environmental risks of existing chemicals and faces challenges in obtaining the information necessary to do so ... Even when EPA has toxicity and exposure information," it has had difficulty demonstrating risks or pursuing limits or bans on production and use. In 31 years, the EPA has required testing for fewer than 200 grandfathered chemicals.

It used to be assumed that most PBDE contamination came through eating dairy, meat and fish. Increasingly, researchers are looking at indoor air where concentrations are 15 to 50 times higher than outside. In addition to sources such as dust from polyurethane foam and fabric, PBDEs can emit gas at 84 degrees -- a temperature common inside computers, cars and houses. The gas then clings to dust particles we breathe.

The link between inhaled PBDE and thyroid disease was strengthened by a recent study on cats. Environmental Science & Technology traced an epidemic of deadly feline hyperthyroid disease back to the '80s when PBDEs first proliferated. Tests on household cats found that PBDE flame retardant had "a clear association" with thyroid problems, said Birnbaum, a co-author of the study. Cats are particularly vulnerable because they live close to treated carpets and furniture, and breathe PBDE, as well as ingest it through grooming and food.

Another household member with similar exposures -- minus the self-grooming, but with an added propensity to put everything into mouths -- is children. A National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences study found that PBDE levels in infants and children were two- to threefold higher than in adults.

The EPA, while calling for more research, relies on industry testing and resists calls to ban or label PBDEs, arguing that until there are safer alternatives, their usefulness in retarding burning outweighs the risk.

Europe, which uses alternative flame retardants, begs to disagree; Americans must beg the EPA to honor its middle name.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: epa, flame retardant, pbdes, pcbs, toxic

Terry J. Allen is a senior editor of In These Times. Her work has appeared in Harper's, The Nation, New Scientist and other publications.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Tom, Nutritionist
Posted by: disc golf on Oct 16, 2007 3:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no question that the E.P.A. should be regulating the dangerous chemicals used in flame-retardant mattresses sold all across America. It is absolutely unbelievable that we--as consumers can't know what chemicals are routinely added to our mattresses. These are the mattresses where we spend almost 1/3 of our lives!

While it would be inappropriate to write all the troubles associated with these poisonous chemicals, it is clear that they're very damaging to the health of most people. One example is the role they have in contributing to an increased risk of S.I.D.S. (For further detail on this subject, go to an article I've written on this subject. If this link is not working, just go to ~tompetrie.net and click on the article on "For Parents of Young Children". (I'm not selling ANYTHING in this article--just prevention of SIDS. It discusses the heavier than air gasses produced in flame-retardant mattresses and the role of a nutritional imbalance in these needless tragedies.)

We should DEMAND that the E.P.A. start labeling mattresses so we can make intelligent choices. Why poison 300 million (of which some 700,000 die of cancer each year--some of which is no doubt due to exposure to environmental carcinogens such as those found in our flame-retardant mattresses)--to save 300 from fires each year in America? I say stop smoking in bed. Of course, babies under 1 year of age don't smoke.

Can't label foods containing genetically modified ingredients, can't label mattresses, the industry fought labeling for trans fats since 1968 (finally to be forced to label in Jan. of 2006). What's going on here? Can't Americans have information so that they can make informed choices? I think they should and I hope you agree!

Tom, Spring Valley, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tom, Nutritionist Posted by: Badrat
» RE: Tom, Nutritionist Posted by: Constitutionalist75