Not to mention, if the chemical producer doesn't want to be unfairly charged with toxic pollution that came from other sources, they could supply the damned inf

Not to mention, if the chemical producer doesn't want to be unfairly charged with toxic pollution that came from other sources, they could supply the damned info and proof of it's veracity, and/or samples. This ball is entirely in their court and they deserve no benefit of the doubt on something like this. There is clearly something there. It is 100% rational, from this starting point with the info that is available, to proceed on an assumption that the exact numbers are incorrect, and that we still would not like the correct numbers, even after weighing against not using any fire retardant, or using some other less effective or more expensive alternative.