9 ms·
Flame retardant may cause hyperthyroidism in cats
- PaywallBuster 6y agoLitigious environment causes companies to "over protect" consumers with such chemicals, causing all kinds of unexpected issues.
- rlt 6y agoWill humans ever learn the law of unintended consequences?
- taneq 6y agoYou mean that there are always unintended consequences of every action and so you just have to do the best you can with what you know?
- calvano915 6y agoIts fine to act with limited information but not acceptable to stop paying attention until a problem becomes orders of magnitude worse than if you'd closely monitored the intended and unintended effects from your actions.
- anigbrowl 6y agoSomehow 'sofas light on fire and burn like a torch' isn't an unintended consequence of using cheap materials?
- ddeck 6y agoThe lobbying efforts of the manufacturers of the chemicals are a major contributor: The legislators wrote that the “worst tactics outlined in the Chicago Tribune series — which we each saw some of firsthand in our states — included: deliberately misrepresenting the science around flame retardant chemicals relating to both their effectiveness and their health risks; employing an expert witness who repeatedly invoked a phony story of a child dying in a fire in order to justify flame retardant mandates; creating a front group called ‘Citizens for Fire Safety’ to counter the opposition to flame retardants among firefighters and health organizations; and using racial profiling to mislead community leaders about the impacts of toxic flame retardant chemicals.” ... These powerful industries distorted science in ways that overstated the benefits of the chemicals, created a phony consumer watchdog group that stoked the public's fear of fire and helped organize and steer an association of top fire officials that spent more than a decade campaigning for their cause. http://media.apps.chicagotribune.com/flames/index.html http://media.apps.chicagotribune.com/flames/index.html
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- cm2012 6y agoSeem alike rooting out actually toxic substances, like leaded gasoline, is so important. Kudos to the experimenter here for the clever experimental design (cat collars that absorb chemicals for later study).
- pwarner 6y agoHow does one avoid this? I need some new furniture in the next year or so.
- ed25519FUUU 6y ago> Many furniture manufacturers are no longer using flame retardants, thanks to an update to California's furniture flammability standard, TB117-2013. Most furniture that meets this standard will also include a label stating whether the product contains flame retardants. Basically look at the tag if it was manufactured recently. https://goop.com/wellness/detox/flame-retardants-furniture/ https://goop.com/wellness/detox/flame-retardants-furniture/
- owlie 6y agoI'm really sorry for this off-topic reply, but... is that a useful article from Goop of all places? ...What? Huh.
- im3w1l 6y agoI'm not surprised, there does seem to be a pretty big overlap between people using healing crystals if you know what I mean, and people avoiding actually harmful chemicals.
- marta_morena_28 6y agoSame principle as "why vegans live healthier". It's not because their diet is actually healthier per-se, same as healing crystals do not work. But a vegan person, same as a person using healing crystals is likely to be a strongly biased sample of the population. They tend to be more aware of their lives, their bodies and the consequences of what they do to their bodies. And that, as a net effect, yields a healthier lifestyle on average. But an unhealthy person will never get healthy by eating vegan, same as they won't get healthy by using healing crystals. It only works if you embrace the lifestyle and accept it mentally and become a "biased sample" yourself.
- 6y ago
- notmadnomad 6y agoOh my. It reminds me that about 2001, I purchased a medium quality Serta bed from Mancini's Sleepworld (in CA) that arrived in a sealed plastic bag. The mattress stunk with a chemical odor (assuming it was FR's) for 2 months. IIRC I returned it because it wasn't going away. The factory workers likely applied far too much FR. A different mattress solved the problem. Also, btw, yellowing plastic: that's often bromine FR compounds leeching out of the plastic. Dilute bleach w/ a surfactant is a good cleaner for that.
- remote_phone 6y agoI’m glad California outlawed these chemicals for foam.
- gnicholas 6y agoI don't think they outlawed them. IIRC, they just changed the law to no longer require them.
- dzhiurgis 6y ago> The cats wore the tags for a week and owners filled out a questionnaire. Once collected, the tags went through a process to extract the chemicals by soaking them in a solvent. Do we use these tags for humans? Would be cool to see what sort of chemical exposure we get.
- cm2012 6y agoI would totally pay for this at 23&me prices
- taneq 6y agoAs long as it didn't come with 23&me privacy implications. I can't believe people sent samples to them.
- dzhiurgis 6y agoIDK it seems it helped catch some criminals, contributed to research and will drive insurance costs down...
- mtsr 6y agoYour last point is particularly nice. If you happen to be blessed with good genes you’ll get cheaper insurance. But what about the people who will be rejected because of their genes?
- DiabloD3 6y agoAaaaaaand that's why we need healthcare reform in the US.
- dzhiurgis 6y agoCan you be rejected instead of higher premium? IMO that's the case where gov should pick up the tab. Also not having insurance doesn't mean instant death sentence. You can still pay yourself, however crazy amounts they are. Disclaimer: I think whole US healthcare system is insane, especially the part where employers negotiate better rates. It's like socialised healthcare where higher earner pay more, but without any benefit to private companies...
- laretluval 6y agoElectronics are full of fire retardants like these.
- anigbrowl 6y agoYeah but you don't lounge around and rub your face on most of your electronic devices. I don't think your cellphone screen counts.
- ab 6y agoIt's more about what happens when you toss your phone into the landfill after two years, and the mountain of dead electronics starts leeching toxins into the groundwater. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3908467/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3908467/
- anigbrowl 6y agoThat's reasonable, I guess I was focusing on the direct contact rather than post-disposal issues.
- centimeter 6y agoI wonder what fraction of modern disease, and what conditions, are due to prolonged low-level exposure to random slightly toxic chemicals. I wouldn’t be surprised if we found out that relatively recently diagnosed conditions like autism are the result of some random seemingly innocuous product like shampoo detergent or sunscreen or something.
- hourislate 6y agoBruce Ames, at the University of California, devised a method of screening for mutagens, using bacteria. One of his graduate students using the technique found that the flame retardants in children's pajamas and bedding were powerful mutagens, and were probably causing cancer. That event made Ames a celebrity, and in the 1980s he went on a lecture tour supported by the American Cancer Society. His lectures reflected the doctrine of the A.C.S., that industrial chemicals aren't responsible for cancer, but that individual actions, such as smoking or dietary choices, are the main causes of cancer. He used a fraudulently "age adjusted" graph of cancer mortality, that falsely showed that mortality from all types of cancer except lung cancer had leveled off after the A.C.S. came into existence. He described tests in which he had compared DDT to extracts of food herbs, and found DDT to be less mutagenic than several of the most commonly used flavoring herbs. His message, which was eagerly received by his audience of chemistry and biology professors, was that we should not worry about environmental pollution, because it's not as harmful as the things that we do to ourselves. -Ray Peat
- savemefromchem 6y agoIt’s a public health menace that has also been implicated with childhood maladies. There’s some weak links to autism and allergies. Of course most people will dismiss this as conspiracy theory, but eventually the science will catch up.
- lobster45 6y agoFire retardants are everywhere! Car seats, even children pijamas. Not sure why people thought it was a good idea to put chemicals on children
- toast0 6y agoI mean --- if you thought it was safe, wouldn't you prefer children's clothing to be less flamible? Children can be very heavy sleepers and not hear smoke alarms, and even if they do wake up, they might have a harder time getting out of a burning building than adults, so having a bit extra time because their clothes didn't catch fire would be helpful. Seems like a good idea, until you consider the negatives of the fire retardants, and then you have a complex decision to make.
- basicplus2 6y agothe answer is safer materials like wool
- ab 6y ago> if you thought it was safe The problem is that companies introducing chemicals into a clothing product aren't required to show that they're safe, at least in the US. So considering the negatives only happens much later, if at all.
- KennethPT 6y agoHow about that red powder that is dropped over everything when there's wildfires? I've always suspected it can't be healthy.
- dnndevem 6y agoIts insane. I always hear that level of chemical is so low it has no negative effect on a person. But you add up all the low levels of toxic chemicals and they add up to something significant! Pesticides, detergents, personal products such as perfumes, hair dye, make-up.. oh gosh. The list goes on. People are drenching themselves in chemicals then take pills to mask the effects. And its expensive to avoid these things, my family of three spend about 2K per month on food alone trying to eat healthy. Nothing extravagant, fruits, vegetables, and organic when it matters. Sure we could live on $400 with highly processed or fast food... but you feel terrible afterword. The longer you stay away from them the more sensitive you are to toxic food.
- waheoo 6y agoThe definition of a fat cat.
- dnndevem 6y agoI should also mention, we dont eat out / order in food. our budget is probably not much higher than most once you factor in the restaurant/takeout/food delivery budget.
- captainredbeard 6y agoNo, it's really not. You just don't realize how "fat" the fat cats are. Go visit Tiburon or Woodside and you'll know what I mean.
- waheoo 6y ago2k/month on food. I spend 400/month and I don't hold back, avoid processed and junk foods. Whatever they're doing is extravagant and not based on real science if what they say is to avoid processed food.
- jrmg 6y agoAnd yet we live longer, healthier lives than humans ever have.
- epmaybe 6y agoWhat in the world? This title is extremely editorialized. I encourage readers to actually assess the evidence in the journal article: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.est.9b02226/suppl_file/es9b02226_si_001.pdf https://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.est.9b02226/suppl... 1) It's important to note that the article title is actually: Flame retardant may cause hyperthyroidism in cats 2) Of note, they determined that a p-value of <0.10 was considered statistically significant, and of the studied compounds TDCIPP was the only one with significant odds ratio of exposure being associated with hyperthyroidism in cats (1.36, p value = 0.059). 3) Look. Organophosphates are probably one of those things that we should continue studying in detail. They seem more trouble than they're worth. But I don't think I'd hang my hat on this study alone.
- sellyme 6y ago> and of the studied compounds TDCIPP was the only one with significant odds ratio of exposure being associated with hyperthyroidism in cats (1.36, p value = 0.059). Am I correct in reading that they tested 24 different compounds (or compound groups)? Not often you see such a faithful recreation of https://xkcd.com/882/ https://xkcd.com/882/
- mr_toad 6y agoTBF they did just report the odds ratios & p values. They didn’t jump to conclusions. I’d put this us the ‘more research is needed’ box.
- bananaface 6y agoI would argue you see that uncomfortably often
- zug_zug 6y agoI can't understand your response at all. The article shows that a flame-retardent increases risk of autoimmune condition with 94% confidence. And you downplay it because... it's less than 95% confident? (by the way, the paper finds its main finding at p < .02) To my mind, a major post-mortem is necessary, government funded. How many other flame-retardents cause health issues? How did they get past approval? In the meantime, an immediate injunction against flame-retardent laws should be passed (numerous tobacco-lobbied laws REQUIRE retardents), and all used retardents should be listed on the labels of all products. I expect the people in charge of public health to be as anal about their job as I am about mine.
- ip26 6y agoWe've been introducing new flame retardants, discovering they are toxic, rinse, repeat on a 10-year cadence since something like the 70's. We're just about coming due for the next wave of discovery.
- DoingIsLearning 6y agoIf I am to err on the side of caution: Can fire retardants be filtered by commercial off-the-shelf Air Filters? If yes what type of tech or air filter type would filter these? For the sake of 'neutrality' would prefer a discussion focused on the working principle of the filter tech instead of just casual 'product naming'.
- DiabloD3 6y agoDepends on how you define air filter. I think you have to have one that can capture VCOs, which puts you into expensive, but still considered normal consumer (as opposed to professional/enterprise/commercial/etc), products. So, I'd suggest offhand to look at IQAir and Austin Air products to see if any of them state they can grab OPFRs. Their bottom level products probably won't.
- ip26 6y agoIf you own your residence, and live somewhere with good air quality most of the year, forget about air filtering and go for air changeovers. Read about ERV/HRV. Activated carbon filters are inexpensive and remove VOCs but in my experience not terribly quickly.
- Gustomaximus 6y agoI assume this would apply to car seats too. Does anyone know if leather avoids/reduces these kind of chemicals?
- mr_toad 6y agoThe title of the article doesn’t says that hyperthyroidism is 20x times higher because of flame retardants. I’m not sure if the article’s title was changed, or edited by the OP. The odds ratios for the levels of thyroid hormone in cats exposed to the compounds detected are no higher than 1.61x times higher. The 20x increase is an increase over time, and isn’t explained by the paper or the article.
- 18af219e 6y agoinvasive species?