Flame Retardants Refuse to Burn Out

Think the flame retardant Tris is a thing of the past? Think again. Last week the Washington Toxics Coalition and Safer States released a study that found 80 percent of new baby and children's products tested positive for chlorinated Tris (TDCPP), a chemical voluntarily removed from children's pajamas in the 1970s because it was found to cause cancer.

The Hidden Hazards In the Nursery study tested 20 products -- including nursing pillows, changing pads, bassinet pads and car seats -- for traces of Tris and other toxic chemical flame retardants called polybrominated diphenyl ether compounds, or PBDEs.

The findings echo those of a 2011 UC Berkeley study authored by Arlene Blum, a Healthy Child Healthy World Advisory Board member, which found that 36 percent of 101 baby products tested positive for Tris.

According to the Berkeley study, Americans have 20 times higher blood levels of PBDEs than in Europe; these chemicals are linked to cancer, thyroid disruption, lower testosterone in men, neurological disorders in children and reduced fertility in women.

What can you do to protect your family? The Washington Toxics Coalition has some great tips:

• Because PBDEs like Tris are transferred from hand to mouth through dust, make sure you use a vacuum with a HEPA filter, as well as a wet mop, to remove dust particles in your home.
• Encourage frequent hand-washing to keep any toxic dust on hands from being ingested.
• Avoid all products containing polyurethane foam with a label reading TB117, which means it has likely been treated with toxic flame retardants.
• Choose a safer mattress, ideally made without polyurethane foam; naturally flame-resistant wool is a great option.

Meanwhile, Washington State is considering the Toxic-Free Kids Act which would ban the use of Tris in children's products beginning in 2014; the act will also circumvent manufacturers simply replacing one toxic flame retardant with another by requiring makers of children's products to conduct thorough health and safety assessment of potential alternatives.

This important legislation is part of a growing movement as states seek to address deficiencies in the 35-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act. Obviously, these are issues that are important to voters. I only hope that lawmakers will take notice as The Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 approaches its Senate hearing this spring.

Flame retardants in baby products? This is a problem that needs to flame out.

For more by Rachel Lincoln Sarnoff, click here.

For more on healthier greener homes, click here.

 

Comments

[Tori206]

08:42 PM on 01/19/2012

Thank you for this valuable study. The more access to information the public has about these chemicals and toxins that are greatly impacting our health, the more empowered we can be to put pressure on lawmakers to regulate it and make safer choices for ourselves and our families.

[Jill Mangaliman]

08:09 PM on 01/19/2012

If you read this study, you will see that companies putting carcinogens and hormone disruptors into our baby's products whether consumers like it or not. Duke University tested 20 popular baby products and found toxic flame retardants in 80% of the products. How are we to know if companies won't disclose what they put in products unless scientists test them? What we do know is that companies have found safer alternatives and that we can protect people from fires without the use of chemicals. There is the barrier method, which contains the foam inside a polymer material, is already commonly used in mattresses. They can also use natural flame-retardant materials that absorb heat and give off water and low melting glasses that create a protective layer when heated. Companies that already use these safer and natural alternatives are competitive and are in demand. Orbit baby, Baby Bjorn, Naturpedic, and Boppy are a few companies that do not use flame retardant chemicals. Other companies need to follow their lead and stop putting toxic carcinogens in products, especially products meant for babies.

[Bryan Goodman]

04:39 PM on 01/19/2012

The report mentioned in this story unscientifically questions the safety of a number of flame retardants, which play an important role in fire safety by providing additional critical escape time that can be life-saving. Research shows that fires are still a major safety concern that disproportionately affect the very young. NAFRA members believe robust scientific analysis is critical to making informed decisions about fire safety and flame retardants. We support production of flame retardants with appropriate environmental profiles that provide needed fire safety performance.

The flame retardant that is the focus of the story, TDCPP, is an effective flame retardant used by manufacturers to meet national fire safety requirements, as well as progressive fire safety laws. Questions about the safe use of TDCPP were answered in 2008 when the EU completed the most recent and comprehensive assessment of the flame retardant using all of the best information available. The assessment looked at risk and specifically at cancer and concluded that there were no concerns for consumers in relation to carcinogenicity from potential inhalation or exposure to children via the oral route. We believe the EU’s comprehensive Risk Assessment addresses the potential concerns raised by this article.

Bryan Goodman
Manager, Communications
North American Flame Retardant Alliance

[AnnainLA]

03:42 PM on 01/25/2012

Why would we believe someone working for the flame retardant industry?
Cancer is not the only risk from the many flame retardants.
Why buy a mattress for a child or an adult that has flame retardants when you can by a naturally flame retardant cotton /wool mattress or a mattress made of natural latex ( rubber) and avoid toxic exposure ?