Derived from flowers, but not benign:
Pyrethroids raise new concerns
Chemicals derived from flowers may sound harmless, but new research raises concerns about compounds synthesized from chrysanthemums that are used in virtually every household pesticide. For at least a decade, pyrethroids have been the insecticide of choice for consumers, replacing organophosphate pesticides, which are far more toxic to people and wildlife. But evidence is mounting that the switch to pyrethroids has brought its own set of new ecological and human health concerns.
By Ferris Jabr
Environmental Health News
February 26, 2010
ShareThis
kaunokainen/flickr.
Pyrethroids are found in more than 3,500 products used inside homes and on crops, yards, and gardens. Although human health risks are unknown, animal studies have found evidence of damage to neurological, immune and reproductive systems.
Chemicals derived from flowers may sound harmless, but new research raises concerns about compounds synthesized from chrysanthemums that are used in virtually every household pesticide.
For at least a decade, pyrethroids have been the insecticide of choice for consumers, replacing organophosphate pesticides, which are far more toxic to people and wildlife. But evidence is mounting that the switch to pyrethroids has brought its own set of new ecological and human health risks.
About 70 percent of people in the United States have been exposed to pyrethroids, with children facing the highest exposure, according to a study published this month. Although the human health threats are unknown, animal studies have found evidence of damage to neurological, immune and reproductive systems.
In addition, pyrethroids are flowing off yards and gardens, contaminating some streams and rivers at concentrations that can kill small creatures vital to the survival of fish and other aquatic life. Both California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are reevaluating the chemicals because of safety concerns.
“Pyrethroids are obviously a safer alternative to organophosphates, but just because they are safer doesn’t mean they are safe,” said Dana Boyd Barr, a research professor of environmental health at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health in Atlanta, Georgia. Barr authored a study that for the first time has measured pyrethroid exposure in the U.S. population.
Pyrethroids are found in more than 3,500 products used inside homes and on crops, yards, and gardens - including lice shampoos, indoor foggers, flea sprays for pets and pesticides to fight ants, wasps, mosquitoes, aphids and spiders. Consumers can identify pyrethroids in products by checking labels for compounds that end in “thrin,” such as bifenthrin, permethrin and cypermethrin.
The compounds are synthetic versions of naturally occurring insecticides called pyrethrins harvested from chrysanthemum flowers. Chemists alter the structure of the pyrethrin molecule to make it more stable in sunlight and to increase its toxicity. The chemicals kill insects by interfering with basic nerve cell functioning. Insects and other invertebrates are highly susceptible to them, while birds and mammals are better able to counteract their effects.
In the new study, 5,046 urine samples collected from U.S. adults and children between 1999 and 2002 were tested for five metabolites of pyrethroid insecticides. Metabolites are the result of the body breaking down a chemical.
Traces of at least one pyrethroid metabolite were found in 75 percent of the people tested in 2001-2002, up from 66 percent in 1999-2000. Children’s concentrations were more than 50 percent higher than the amounts found in adolescents and adults, according to the study by Barr and colleagues published online in Environmental Health Perspectives on Feb. 3.
Children are more highly exposed to pyrethroids because “they spend a lot more time on the floor and have much more hand to mouth activity,” Barr said. “Pyrethroids tend to accumulate in dust or on surface areas in homes because they don’t evaporate easily into the air.” A 2008 study found pyrethroids and their metabolites in vacuum cleaner dust collected from homes and daycare centers in North Carolina and Ohio.
In addition to inhaling or absorbing pyrethroids that linger in households, people ingest traces of pyrethroids in their food, since the chemicals are used on some vegetable, fruit and grain crops.
A 2006 EPA review found that the risk of exposure through diet was at or below the agency’s level of concern for most people. But the study also found that infants and toddlers are highly exposed in some foods, especially bananas, pineapple and dried-oat baby food.
“Pyrethroids are obviously a safer alternative to organophosphates, but just because they are safer doesn’t mean they are safe.” -Dana Boyd Barr, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health“Now that we know people are exposed to pyrethroids widely, we need to determine what the exact health effects are,” said Barr.
So far, there is little scientific data evaluating the potential threat to human health.
Studies with lab animals have linked pyrethroid exposure to damage of the thyroid, liver and nervous system, as well as impairment of behavioral development, changes in the immune system and disruption of reproductive hormones, according to the 2006 EPA review. These animal studies are relevant to human health because pyrethroids act on functions of the nervous system common to all animals, according to the EPA.
Some pyrethroids imitate the hormone estrogen and can increase levels of estrogen in breast cancer cells, and some are suspected carcinogens. Other data suggest that people using the chemicals are at risk of aggravated allergies or asthma, although the EPA concluded last year that there is no clear link.
Pesticide manufacturers say that pyrethroids are safe and that they are vital to agriculture and to combating mosquitoes that carry West Nile Virus and other diseases.
“Pyrethroids are an extremely important class of insecticidal compounds with major public health and agricultural uses,” Rex Runyon, a vice president at CropLife America, a trade group that represents pesticide companies, said in an email. Runyon added that pyrethroids “do not pose unreasonable effects to human health or the environment” when used according to the directions on the label.
Donald Weston/UC Berkeley
Toxic concentrations of pyrethroids from urban runoff were found in the American River in Folsom, Calif.
Although little data exist about human health concerns, evidence is growing that pyrethroids might be harming aquatic ecosystems. Studies of streams and rivers in California, Texas and Illinois suggest that the pesticides might be wiping out small organisms that live in the waterways and form the base of the food chain.
In addition, some studies have shown that pyrethroids can have effects on the growth and reproduction of freshwater fish.
A 2009 study found the pesticides in urban stream sediments in central Texas, where they are widely used to control fire ant and grub worm infestations. The concentrations are lethal to a small, shrimp-like crustacean called Hyalella azteca - a species commonly used in laboratories to investigate the effects of pesticides on invertebrates necessary for healthy rivers.
“All of our sampling sites were very close to neighborhoods with manicured lawns,” said Jason Belden, an Oklahoma State University zoologist and author of the study published in the journal Environmental Pollution. “Some people are not following the best management practices. They’re not being careful enough with pesticides. We all need to make an effort to only use pesticides when we need them.”
Pyrethroids are showing up not only in sediments, but also in the currents of California rivers, at levels toxic to insects and aquatic invertebrates that fish and other animals feed on.
Biologist Donald Weston of the University of California, Berkeley, looked for the insecticides in urban runoff, sewage treatment plant effluent, and agricultural drains in California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. In the laboratory, Weston tested the toxicity of these samples on the shrimp-like Hyalella azteca.
“Virtually every drop of runoff from urban communities was toxic to Hyalella because of pyrethroids,” Weston said.
For the first time ever, Weston and his team documented pyrethroids in the outflow of sewage treatment plants, which was surprising.
“About half of the waste water treatment plants we sampled were toxic,” Weston said. “Most people wouldn’t have expected pyrethroids to get through the system. People figured they would be captured by the slush at the bottom - and probably many of them are - but there is enough getting through the system to make the runoff toxic.”
Agricultural drains, on the other hand, were only an occasional source of pyrethroids, according to the study, published this month in Environmental Science and Technology.
“When you say ‘pesticides,’ I think the average person on the street tends to think of agriculture,” Weston said. “They don’t tend to think of the suburban homes, whereas it turns out the suburban home was a constant source of pyrethroid toxicity.”
“Some people are not following the best management practices. They’re not being careful enough with pesticides. We all need to make an effort to only use pesticides when we need them.” -Jason Belden, Oklahoma State University The study demonstrated toxicity in two urban creeks and in a 30-kilometer stretch of the American River, considered one of the cleanest rivers in the Delta region.
“The water is totally clear - as clear as the water that comes out of your bathroom faucet,” said Weston. “But the last 30 or 40 miles of the river, once you start getting into Sacramento, are very heavily urbanized. All these communities are dumping their storm water into the American River and it’s enough to cause toxicity.”
Weston said that finding the chemical in the water itself - not just in the sediments - is cause for concern.
“Pyrethroids are very sticky and they don’t like to be dissolved in the water, so most of them are in the sediments,” Weston said. “But it takes so little in the water to be toxic - only two parts per trillion. The state of California now knows not only do they have to worry about the sediment particles, they have to worry about the water as well. And the water travels much farther downstream.”
The levels of toxicity Weston recorded were more than enough to kill a whole host of insects and other invertebrates necessary for healthy river ecology. The researchers have not documented that creatures in the streams have died. But if the water and sediment samples are toxic to the crustacean in the lab, it is a sign they will be toxic to similar creatures in the waterways.
“I think it’s a good idea to minimize pesticide exposure of any sort, not only because of what we know, but because of what we don’t know.” -Donald Weston, University of California-Berkeley “Bottom dwelling invertebrates and things like stoneflies and mayflies are basically the bottom of the food chain. The concern is whether these insecticides are cutting out this lower rung that the fish depend upon,” Weston said. “This would have not only ecological consequences, but recreational and commercial consequences.” Weston added that the levels in the streams "are not enough to be toxic to a fish, but the fish obviously have to eat."
In response to the toxicity concerns, California's Department of Pesticide Regulation began reevaluating regulation of pyrethroids in 2006. The state has requested additional data from manufacturers on the safety of pyrethroids and is analyzing at least 700 products used in households and on farms.
When mounting the review, Mary-Ann Warmerdam, director of the state’s pesticide agency, told the Los Angeles Times that the state’s evaluation “is a shot across the bow to the manufacturers that we found a reason for concern and you need to provide us with data to either eliminate the concern, reformulate your products or consider taking them off the market.”
California, Weston said, doesn’t want to return to using organophosphates such as chlorpyrifos, which was banned from household use because of human health concerns, “but they want to control the use of pyrethroids to minimize the environmental effects we document.”
“The state of California has the power to ban a product based on the outcome of the reevaluation,” Weston said, “but I don’t think anyone is expecting that to occur. More likely there will be further regulations pertaining to the use of pyrethroids.”
Also, the EPA this year is reevaluating pyrethroids as part of its 2010 pesticide review. The EPA systematically evaluates all registered pesticides every 15 years. Potential outcomes include banning pyrethroids in certain areas, tightening policies or no change to the regulations. However, the EPA process will take another six to eight years.
Mr.Mac2009/flickr
Consumers have alternatives to synthetic pyrethroids -- such as planting chrysanthemums, which contain natural pyrethroids.
Also, an insecticide called fipronil has partially replaced pyrethroids for controlling termite and ant infestations in some areas. Like pyrethroids, fipronil is far less toxic to birds and mammals than other insecticides, but can still kill small aquatic life.In the meantime, there are some alternatives for consumers. Barr suggests products extracted from vegetables and herbs or planting chrysanthemums around the garden. Natural pyrethrins found in chrysanthemum plants do not persist in the environment like the synthetic versions do. Another option for killing some pests is boric acid.
Weston says switching to another chemical is not the solution: he believes people need to fundamentally change how they use pesticides. Many people apply so much to their yards and gardens that the chemicals flow into waterways.
“I think it’s a good idea to minimize pesticide exposure of any sort, not only because of what we know, but because of what we don’t know,” Weston said. “I don’t think a lot of those products are needed. The less you can use them, the better.”
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Scented Products...Intoxicating and Toxic
Scented Products
Intoxicating and toxic
Walking into my teenage son's room the other day, I nearly gagged. No, it wasn't the smell of unwashed clothes or half-eaten food that got me. It was the opposite problem—air freshener. His own personal can.
I know what you're thinking. He's up to something. Well, maybe...but if he is, this isn't the sign.
("It's good you put that in," he says on reading the preceding paragraph. "Otherwise, people might think you were gullible.")
Like many young people, my son has been conditioned to expect everything to have a good smell—not the genuine good smell of things themselves nor of fresh air wafting in from an open window, but an aggressively pleasant, artificial smell.
(He nods in agreement.)
It's a mark of the times. From fabric softener to garbage bags, and moisturizer to lip gloss, today's household and personal care products are perfumed. Cleanser companies encourage us to choose their products based on scent rather than cleaning properties. Personal care items are advertised as fashion statements. The deodorant made by Secret is promoted, literally, as a form of self-expression.
(I lose him here, but not before getting his consent to publish the above.)
To me, it's absurd, but I'd say "to each his own" if it were just a question of fashion. Unfortunately, it's also a matter of health. An individual fragrance may be made with dozens if not hundreds of synthetic chemicals and need not be cleared for safety before going to market. As a result, dangerous substances may be—and are—routinely added to the cosmetics, cleansers and laundry products that end up in our homes.
Not only doesn't government require safety testing. It doesn't require that the ingredients in fragrances be identified on product labels. The ingredients are protected as trade secrets. And our right to know what chemicals we're exposed to? Trumped, for now, by the fragrance industry.
However, we are not totally in the dark, thanks to independent testing done by academics and public interest groups such as NRDC. What these tests show is not reassuring.
A 2007 study of air fresheners by NRDC found phthalates (pronounced tha-lates) in 12 of 14 brand-name products tested, including some marketed as "all-natural" or "unscented." Phthalates are endocrine disruptors that can cause hormonal abnormalities, birth defects and reproductive problems. None of the air fresheners tested listed phthalates on its label.
Similar results were found in a 2002 study of cosmetics by a coalition of environmental and public health organizations. In this case, phthalates were identified in 52 of 72 products tested. While a follow-up study conducted in 2008 found some reduction in their use, many personal care products for men and women still carry these dangerous chemicals.
Other hazardous chemicals in fragrances include volatile organic compounds, some of which are carcinogenic and cause neurotoxic and respiratory effects. Another class of chemicals of concern is synthetic musks, which, according to preliminary research, may be endocrine disruptors, like phthalates.
For reasons that are not yet well understood, fragrances also seem to trigger allergic-like reactions in certain people. The phenomenon—called multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) or sometimes sick building syndrome—can be terribly disruptive to sufferers' lives. People with MCS may experience headaches, nausea, confusion, abdominal pain and a host of other symptoms when exposed to common chemicals at levels others find tolerable.
So should you buck the trend and eliminate or cut back your use of scented products? Yes, it's the safe thing to do. These chemicals may have long-term effects not just on you and your family, but if you are of reproductive age, children to come.
How should you go about it?
Do not rely on product claims of being "unscented" or "fragrance-free." A product labeled as such may still be made with fragrances. It's just that the purpose of the fragrance is to mask the natural odor of other ingredients, instead of giving off a detectable scent. From a health and safety standpoint, it's all the same.
Nor should you rely on the words "natural," "organic" or "hypoallergenic." They do not guarantee the absence of fragrance.
Instead, avoid air fresheners, use fewer cosmetics and little or no perfume, consult online resources to find safe products, and try truly natural cleaning agents: water, white vinegar and baking soda. See the sidebar for more specific tips, including product look-up information.
As to my own efforts to protect my son—I've thrown out his air freshener and forbade him to get more. Our next battlefront: deodorant.
—Sheryl Eisenberg
Related TGLs
Pollution in People
Keeping chemicals out of your body
Clean Enough
If the bottle says "danger" or "poison," switch!
The Cost of Shampoo
Is animal testing on cosmetics necessary?
HOW TO AVOID TOXIC FRAGRANCES
•Avoid air fresheners. Open the windows instead.
•Use water, white vinegar and baking soda for routine cleaning jobs. If soap is needed, try castile soap.
•Look up fragrance-free products and homemade alternatives in the Guide to Less Toxic Products.
•Check Skin Deep, the Environmental Working Group's cosmetic safety database, to see if your favorite personal care products are safe and to find safer alternatives.
•Make sure the words "fragrance" or "parfum" do not appear in the ingredient list of cosmetics.
•Use fewer cosmetics and reduce or eliminate your use of perfume.
NATURAL AIR FRESHENERS
2)A simmering pot of spices, such as cinnamon and cloves, in water. Turn the burner off after the scent spreads through the rooms so as not to waste energy.
3)Baking soda. Put an open box in small, enclosed spaces such as the refrigerator to deodorize the air.
Resources
NRDC
Clearing the Air: Hidden Hazards of Air Fresheners
Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
Not Too Pretty: Phthalates, Beauty Products & the FDA and A Little Prettier
Rodale
VOCs and Laundry
Environmental Working Group
Skin Deep: Cosmetic Safety Database
Environmental Health Assoc. of Nova Scotia
Guide to Less Toxic Products
Intoxicating and toxic
Walking into my teenage son's room the other day, I nearly gagged. No, it wasn't the smell of unwashed clothes or half-eaten food that got me. It was the opposite problem—air freshener. His own personal can.
I know what you're thinking. He's up to something. Well, maybe...but if he is, this isn't the sign.
("It's good you put that in," he says on reading the preceding paragraph. "Otherwise, people might think you were gullible.")
Like many young people, my son has been conditioned to expect everything to have a good smell—not the genuine good smell of things themselves nor of fresh air wafting in from an open window, but an aggressively pleasant, artificial smell.
(He nods in agreement.)
It's a mark of the times. From fabric softener to garbage bags, and moisturizer to lip gloss, today's household and personal care products are perfumed. Cleanser companies encourage us to choose their products based on scent rather than cleaning properties. Personal care items are advertised as fashion statements. The deodorant made by Secret is promoted, literally, as a form of self-expression.
(I lose him here, but not before getting his consent to publish the above.)
To me, it's absurd, but I'd say "to each his own" if it were just a question of fashion. Unfortunately, it's also a matter of health. An individual fragrance may be made with dozens if not hundreds of synthetic chemicals and need not be cleared for safety before going to market. As a result, dangerous substances may be—and are—routinely added to the cosmetics, cleansers and laundry products that end up in our homes.
Not only doesn't government require safety testing. It doesn't require that the ingredients in fragrances be identified on product labels. The ingredients are protected as trade secrets. And our right to know what chemicals we're exposed to? Trumped, for now, by the fragrance industry.
However, we are not totally in the dark, thanks to independent testing done by academics and public interest groups such as NRDC. What these tests show is not reassuring.
A 2007 study of air fresheners by NRDC found phthalates (pronounced tha-lates) in 12 of 14 brand-name products tested, including some marketed as "all-natural" or "unscented." Phthalates are endocrine disruptors that can cause hormonal abnormalities, birth defects and reproductive problems. None of the air fresheners tested listed phthalates on its label.
Similar results were found in a 2002 study of cosmetics by a coalition of environmental and public health organizations. In this case, phthalates were identified in 52 of 72 products tested. While a follow-up study conducted in 2008 found some reduction in their use, many personal care products for men and women still carry these dangerous chemicals.
Other hazardous chemicals in fragrances include volatile organic compounds, some of which are carcinogenic and cause neurotoxic and respiratory effects. Another class of chemicals of concern is synthetic musks, which, according to preliminary research, may be endocrine disruptors, like phthalates.
For reasons that are not yet well understood, fragrances also seem to trigger allergic-like reactions in certain people. The phenomenon—called multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) or sometimes sick building syndrome—can be terribly disruptive to sufferers' lives. People with MCS may experience headaches, nausea, confusion, abdominal pain and a host of other symptoms when exposed to common chemicals at levels others find tolerable.
So should you buck the trend and eliminate or cut back your use of scented products? Yes, it's the safe thing to do. These chemicals may have long-term effects not just on you and your family, but if you are of reproductive age, children to come.
How should you go about it?
Do not rely on product claims of being "unscented" or "fragrance-free." A product labeled as such may still be made with fragrances. It's just that the purpose of the fragrance is to mask the natural odor of other ingredients, instead of giving off a detectable scent. From a health and safety standpoint, it's all the same.
Nor should you rely on the words "natural," "organic" or "hypoallergenic." They do not guarantee the absence of fragrance.
Instead, avoid air fresheners, use fewer cosmetics and little or no perfume, consult online resources to find safe products, and try truly natural cleaning agents: water, white vinegar and baking soda. See the sidebar for more specific tips, including product look-up information.
As to my own efforts to protect my son—I've thrown out his air freshener and forbade him to get more. Our next battlefront: deodorant.
—Sheryl Eisenberg
Related TGLs
Pollution in People
Keeping chemicals out of your body
Clean Enough
If the bottle says "danger" or "poison," switch!
The Cost of Shampoo
Is animal testing on cosmetics necessary?
HOW TO AVOID TOXIC FRAGRANCES
•Avoid air fresheners. Open the windows instead.
•Use water, white vinegar and baking soda for routine cleaning jobs. If soap is needed, try castile soap.
•Look up fragrance-free products and homemade alternatives in the Guide to Less Toxic Products.
•Check Skin Deep, the Environmental Working Group's cosmetic safety database, to see if your favorite personal care products are safe and to find safer alternatives.
•Make sure the words "fragrance" or "parfum" do not appear in the ingredient list of cosmetics.
•Use fewer cosmetics and reduce or eliminate your use of perfume.
NATURAL AIR FRESHENERS
2)A simmering pot of spices, such as cinnamon and cloves, in water. Turn the burner off after the scent spreads through the rooms so as not to waste energy.
3)Baking soda. Put an open box in small, enclosed spaces such as the refrigerator to deodorize the air.
Resources
NRDC
Clearing the Air: Hidden Hazards of Air Fresheners
Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
Not Too Pretty: Phthalates, Beauty Products & the FDA and A Little Prettier
Rodale
VOCs and Laundry
Environmental Working Group
Skin Deep: Cosmetic Safety Database
Environmental Health Assoc. of Nova Scotia
Guide to Less Toxic Products
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Professor Urges Us toTake People with Chemical Sensibility into Account
Yesterday (Feb 2, 2010), in an independent student newspaper from the University of New Hampshire, a professor of chemical engineering appealed to the community to take “Canaries” into account regarding the use of chemicals and especially scents. He spoke of those persons who suffer from Chemical Sensitivity and who have to be seen – like those former canaries in mines – as indicators for toxic chemicals.
Some American and Canadian Universities have a “Scent Free Policy” which means that the use of perfumes and products containing scents is prohibited within these Universities. All visitors have to meet this policy. It allows students with allergy and chemical sensitivity to work and study.
Professor Ihab Farag, Chemical Engineering Department:
Many of us are familiar with canaries, the beautiful, colorful birds that tend to sing most of the time. Canaries also saved many human lives in coalmines. This is because canaries are much more sensitive to toxic gases than humans. Miners would take canaries with them in the coalmine. If the canary stopped singing and fell (or died), the miners knew to leave the coal mine quickly to safety.
There are individuals who have developed a very strong sensitivity to many common chemicals. These people can be very negatively affected and irritated by fumes, chemical cleaners, disinfectants, cigarette/cigar smoke, engine exhaust, solvents, etc. These people are often called “Human Canaries” of the modern world, because of the chemical sensitivity similarity to that of Canaries. Human Canaries of the 21st century tend to be very strongly irritated by everyday chemicals like perfumes, hair products, shampoos, shower gels, after shave lotions, antiperspirants, deodorants, hand sanitizers, chap sticks, finger nail polish, etc. Human canaries look the same as other people, and when you see one you probably will not recognize he or she is a human canary until an offensive toxic chemical triggers his or her sensitivity.
Please be considerate to human canaries and help them to enjoy life to the fullest. One way you can help the human canary and at the same time lower your exposure to undesirable chemicals, is to go fragrance-free: avoiding perfumes, and fragranced personal care products.
Author: Silvia K. Müller, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, February 2, 2009
Reference:
Chemical consideration to the Human Canaries, Ihab Farag, Professor, Chemical Engineering Department, Letter to the editor 02-02-10, The New Hampshire, Independent Student Newspaper at the University of New Hampshire since 1911, Februar 2, 2010
Some American and Canadian Universities have a “Scent Free Policy” which means that the use of perfumes and products containing scents is prohibited within these Universities. All visitors have to meet this policy. It allows students with allergy and chemical sensitivity to work and study.
Professor Ihab Farag, Chemical Engineering Department:
Many of us are familiar with canaries, the beautiful, colorful birds that tend to sing most of the time. Canaries also saved many human lives in coalmines. This is because canaries are much more sensitive to toxic gases than humans. Miners would take canaries with them in the coalmine. If the canary stopped singing and fell (or died), the miners knew to leave the coal mine quickly to safety.
There are individuals who have developed a very strong sensitivity to many common chemicals. These people can be very negatively affected and irritated by fumes, chemical cleaners, disinfectants, cigarette/cigar smoke, engine exhaust, solvents, etc. These people are often called “Human Canaries” of the modern world, because of the chemical sensitivity similarity to that of Canaries. Human Canaries of the 21st century tend to be very strongly irritated by everyday chemicals like perfumes, hair products, shampoos, shower gels, after shave lotions, antiperspirants, deodorants, hand sanitizers, chap sticks, finger nail polish, etc. Human canaries look the same as other people, and when you see one you probably will not recognize he or she is a human canary until an offensive toxic chemical triggers his or her sensitivity.
Please be considerate to human canaries and help them to enjoy life to the fullest. One way you can help the human canary and at the same time lower your exposure to undesirable chemicals, is to go fragrance-free: avoiding perfumes, and fragranced personal care products.
Author: Silvia K. Müller, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, February 2, 2009
Reference:
Chemical consideration to the Human Canaries, Ihab Farag, Professor, Chemical Engineering Department, Letter to the editor 02-02-10, The New Hampshire, Independent Student Newspaper at the University of New Hampshire since 1911, Februar 2, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Chemical Sensitivities and Perfume
Chemical Sensitivities and Perfume
Fragrances are now used in almost every cleaning, laundry, and personal-care product on the market. Since people have been using perfumes for hundreds of years. It’s reasonable to wonder why the problem of using scents has surfaced only recently. Until the 20th century, perfumes were made from natural ingredients derived directly from plants and animals, and as fragrances became cheaper and more widespread, they also became more synthetic. The National Academy of Sciences reports that 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances today are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum, including known toxins capable of causing cancer, birth defects, central nervous system disorders and allergic reactions. We have been brainwashed by the industry to feel we must cover up our natural scents with toxic chemicals. Many of the same chemicals in perfumes are the same chemicals that are in cigarette smoke.
You would think the government would protect people by attempting to regulate the industries that are causing harm; however, the cosmetic industry is self regulated and isn’t required to give formulations, test results, safety data or consumer complaints to the FDA. When you use perfume or cologne, remember you are using powerful chemicals regulated solely by the industry that sells them. Just because they don’t affect you now doesn’t mean they won’t affect someone in line next to you (giving them a migraine or sinus problems), or that you will always be immune to their effects. These chemicals go directly into the blood stream when applied to our skin, and are also absorbed into the skin from our clothing. We also inhale these chemical fumes that go straight to our brains where they can do major harm, and many of these chemical fumes have a “narcotic” effect.
(“Smelling Good But Feeling Bad, Synthetic Perfumes, Colognes and Scents Are Turning Up Noses,” Green Living Your Health, and “The Health Risks of Perfume and Other Scented Products,” emagazine.com - March 2002} Author's comment: These effects from scents can surface days after the exposure, and many people do not connect the strong perfume/cologne smell on the lady or gentleman next to them at the opera to their headache or upset stomach days later.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the big toxic offenders is perfume and other scented products. Did you know that many of the ingredients in your perfume are the exact same ingredients found in gasoline???!! The scary thing is that the perfume industry is not regulated at all, and they can put any number of chemicals in fragrance without revealing what those chemicals are, and how they affect humans. We humans are all participating in a giant “lab” experiment against our knowledge and against our will, and it is making some of us very sick.
{“Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - Environmental Illness,” www.ourlittleplace.com place.com - April 2002}
Fragrances are now used in almost every cleaning, laundry, and personal-care product on the market. Since people have been using perfumes for hundreds of years. It’s reasonable to wonder why the problem of using scents has surfaced only recently. Until the 20th century, perfumes were made from natural ingredients derived directly from plants and animals, and as fragrances became cheaper and more widespread, they also became more synthetic. The National Academy of Sciences reports that 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances today are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum, including known toxins capable of causing cancer, birth defects, central nervous system disorders and allergic reactions. We have been brainwashed by the industry to feel we must cover up our natural scents with toxic chemicals. Many of the same chemicals in perfumes are the same chemicals that are in cigarette smoke.
You would think the government would protect people by attempting to regulate the industries that are causing harm; however, the cosmetic industry is self regulated and isn’t required to give formulations, test results, safety data or consumer complaints to the FDA. When you use perfume or cologne, remember you are using powerful chemicals regulated solely by the industry that sells them. Just because they don’t affect you now doesn’t mean they won’t affect someone in line next to you (giving them a migraine or sinus problems), or that you will always be immune to their effects. These chemicals go directly into the blood stream when applied to our skin, and are also absorbed into the skin from our clothing. We also inhale these chemical fumes that go straight to our brains where they can do major harm, and many of these chemical fumes have a “narcotic” effect.
(“Smelling Good But Feeling Bad, Synthetic Perfumes, Colognes and Scents Are Turning Up Noses,” Green Living Your Health, and “The Health Risks of Perfume and Other Scented Products,” emagazine.com - March 2002} Author's comment: These effects from scents can surface days after the exposure, and many people do not connect the strong perfume/cologne smell on the lady or gentleman next to them at the opera to their headache or upset stomach days later.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the big toxic offenders is perfume and other scented products. Did you know that many of the ingredients in your perfume are the exact same ingredients found in gasoline???!! The scary thing is that the perfume industry is not regulated at all, and they can put any number of chemicals in fragrance without revealing what those chemicals are, and how they affect humans. We humans are all participating in a giant “lab” experiment against our knowledge and against our will, and it is making some of us very sick.
{“Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - Environmental Illness,” www.ourlittleplace.com place.com - April 2002}
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)