Debate Over Mandated Flame Retardant Chemicals In Furniture
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-09-20/debate-over-mandated-flame-retardant-chemicals-furniture
More than 80% of furniture sold in the United States contains flame retardants. Found in everything from couches to baby cribs, these chemicals are used to help improve fire safety. But in recent years, a growing number of critics say these chemicals are toxic and pose serious health risks to humans. Some leading scientists and health experts say new studies link flame retardants to neurological, developmental, and fertility problems. But manufacturers maintain their products meet fire prevention standards and save lives. Guest host Steve Roberts talks with guests about the use of flame retardants and human health.
Guests
Dr. Arlene Blum
executive director of the Green Science Policy Institute.
Dr. Linda Birnbaum
director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program.
Dr. Gilbert Ross
executive director and medical director of the American Council on Science and Health.
Dr. Marcelo Hirschler
consultant for GBH International.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Not only was this a particularly obnoxious selection of guests, but there were simply too many of them, given the complexity of the topic and the need to hear from listeners. I felt sorry for the host, who was placed in a bad situation by the producer. At least I hope you blacklist these lobbyists for future shows.
The added chemicals have both PRIMARY toxicity "they stink!" and apparently SECONDARY toxicity (cancer...) as well.
Cheap/child type stuff offers defective product design and indeed "want"/desire in America; it's like the 4th of July and manifest destiny'''s gettin' torched? ER illuminated?.
EINSTEIN = one mineral, Glass! the mall/stores/shops that sell the fluffy flamible stuff, use the great fascade of heavy shop windows that being TEMPERED, are flame and heat resistant.
I PERSONALLY WILL DESIGN and dimensionally quantify the ultimate designs, including CLASSIC SMOKING ROOMS, all glass means ANY filth or residue could be cleaned completely, anything but radiation, but gieger meters and the poly-petroleum industry are as separate/split as university's and unified design. SAD but the whole thing must change, and I hope that doesn't mean economic cliff, because that would be toxic.
Kudos to Steve Roberts!!!
These guests were extra argumentative today, particularly the male guests. I wish people wouldn't be so extreme and consider being a little more open minded. There will never be an agreement or a common ground reached on this subject if all the experts continue to bicker. I enjoy listening to articulately presented, accurate information, not the child-like quarreling.
Even though the show was certainly more argumentative than usual, I want to thank you for doing a show on this subject. It is a subject that I began to research when having our first child four years ago, in considering a mattress for him. And then when it came time to buy a sofa, it wasn't a big leap to realize that most furniture would be filled with these chemicals as well. Most people have no idea about this subject, and I'm glad you broached it. Now if there were only more options than a $5000 "organic" couch! We ended up buying an antique, Victorian sofa, made before these chemicals were used, still in good shape, and recovering it.
I listened to the program today with great interest as my boyfriend, who is an electric utility lineman, is required to wear fr clothing every day all day. One comment suggests we should be able to make our own decisions regarding whether to use fr products or risk fire. That's easy to say if it's not a requirement of employment. My boyfriend's employer chooses to require an elevated calorie level of fr rather than take steps to provide a safer work place. The elevated calorie level translates to a higher level of chemicals. It can be done but it would take some thought and more money than his employer chooses to spend. I might add that his employer is a VERY large company. Soooo where are his choices? He has 21 years as a lineman and the industry was very different when he came aboard. He does take a very serious approach to his own and others safety. He's had no accidents in those 21 yrs.
As one of the panelists today, I’d like to share some information on reducing flame retardant exposure without compromising fire safety:
1. Check out the Green Science Policy Institute website at www.GreenSciencePolicy.org which contains "Consumer Information" and a "Safe Kids Guide"
2. Adult mattresses use a barrier technology rather than chemicals and are not likely to contain flame retardants. Cotton futons, wooden, wicker, polyester or other furniture without foam should be safe.
3. Upholstered furniture and baby products that contain polyurethane foam with a label stating they meet TB117, the California furniture flammability standard, are likely to contain flame retardants. (This can include baby mattresses) There is no data to show TB117 reduces fire deaths.
4. If you have TB117 labeled products, you can vacuum often with a HEPA filter, wet mop and wash hands to reduce exposure to house dust which can contain flame retardants as weel as lead and pesticides
5. There is more about the chemical industry story in the front page Chicago Tribune investigative series "Playing with Fire" at http://media.apps.chicagotribune.com/flames/index.html
In addition to previous listeners comments regarding the disappointment in this morning's "debate" -- not to mention insulted by the direction to "chillax" and "dumbing down" comment on how toxins are not toxic when present in your body -- I was disappointed in not hearing more on the California regulation change as Arlene was trying to explain. Fewer guests might have allowed for her to educate us better as well talk about how Tris can be found in baby products even today. Thanks Dr. Blume for the "post-show" post with the insightful bullet points for those of us that "need to chillax". Steve, you did a great job moderating given what you were dealing with. To echo a previous listener, I also hope the two male panelists are not asked back for future uses as their commentary today was nonconstructive - if not downright rude- and subsequently useless.
Thank you for doing this show on an important environmental health concern! I do wish that you had made clear the extent to which the guest from ACSH represents an industry viewpoint, as the group's name, with it's emphasis on "Science" and "Health" is misleading. In fact, a report I wrote traced back their funding to chemical industry sources, including Dow Chemical and DuPont, as well as others.
I have been researching this issue -- and sources for better, safer furniture -- on my blog at www.laurasrules.org, where over 6 posts contain my search for less toxic furniture. For those seeking to protect their homes, there are a few options, and lots of good ideas and insights from blog readers in the comments there.
Those interested in reading more about the science-based information on flame retardants, should visit the Website of the American Chemistry Council's North American Flame Retardant Alliance: http://flameretardants.americanchemistry.com/
Thanks so much.
Bryan Goodman
Director, Product/Panel Communications
The American Chemistry Council
Thank you for doing a first show on toxic chemicals in the environment. Please do more. Your audience is well-educated. We have done our research. I felt as if I knew a lot more than the two men desperately trying to defend the chemical industry. New science shows that even trace amounts of toxic chemicals are not good for us. (For more info, please Google Body Burden.)
Yesterday's show was about (fire) safety. Now please do a follow-up with Dr. Birnbaum and Dr. Theo Colborn, who wrote Our Stolen Future, a must-read for anyone interested in understanding toxic chemicals in the environment and how they affect us.
I have read that flame retardants, in office and household dust, may be responsible for the increase in the inability of so many to become pregnant, that sperm counts are way down. It is easy to find these studies through the Internet.
Please do not invite guests who base their statements on antiquated science.
Diane, is this the same Dr. Gilbert Ross who was convicted of medicaid fraud and perjury?
He's not trusted by the right:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/04/when-senators-play-doctor/
or the left:
see: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2005/11/paging-dr-ross
or the state of New York:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:q-3aNCTwNPwJ:w3.health.state....
Dr. Hirschler got off to a great start by referring to the Rhode Island night club fire that "killed a thousand people." It was an exaggeration by a factor of ten, the death toll, horrible enough, was exactly 100.
And the American Council on Science and Health has been a paid apologist for toxic chemicals and cigarettes for over 20 years. That should really disqualify them from any serious discussion.