Question from Debra’s Answer:

I am looking to buy a baby crib.

The solid wood cribs are phenomenally expensive and not in my budget.

I have managed to find the Ikea Sniglar crib, which is unfinished and solid wood, except it has a fiberboard mattress support. I am going to view this crib in a few days to see if it is possible to remove the fiberboard and replace it with slats (I am handy).

So I have two questions:

1) If the fiberboard cannot be removed, would AFM Safeseal do the trick? And then wrapping the fibreboard in food grade polyethelene after the Safeseal has cured? I have both.

2) I’d like the crib to be mahogany color. I see that AFM makes a stain called Duroseal in mahogany that is low-voc. Usually I try to buy NO-voc, but AFM is well know for their non toxic products. Is this safe to use in a sleep environment for a baby or is there a better option?

Debra’s Answer

I’ve seen the Sniglar crib at IKEA and think it is a good choice.

There is a type of fiberboard that is used in the bottom of drawers that has no formaldehyde–it’s just pressed fibers that are steamed together. If this is the type of fiberboard used, it’s fine as is.

If you think you should remove it and cannot, yes AFM Safeseal would do the trick. You wouldn’t need to wrap it in food grade polyethylene too. One or the other would be fine. Foil would also be fine.

I haven’t used the AFM stains, but from the description it should be fine, especially with a six week cure and especially if you put it outdoors in the sun.

However, let me just give you the super-caution. Babies are extremely vulnerable to toxics even in very small amounts. If it were me, I would just leave the wood unfinished and take no chances at all. I can’t stress this enough. Exposures early in life can cause problems later in life. I can’t tell you for sure what is in these products, so better safe than sorry. Yes they are less toxic, but baby-safe? I don’t know.

Add Comment

Press release

A new Public Health Institute (PHI) study indicates for the first time that a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer as a young adult, before age 50, is three times higher if she has a high fraction of one form of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in her blood during her reproductive years.

The study, published online Sunday in the journal Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, linked breast cancer development to chemical exposures, and identified risk due to exposure during a time when the breast is particularly vulnerable to toxins–during puberty, pregnancy, and just after giving birth.

1 out of 4 women in the study had a high proportion of PCB 203, along with a lower proportion of two other PCBs. These women had a 3-fold increased likelihood of developing breast cancer by age 50, when compared to the quarter of women who had the lowest proportion of PCB203.

The study, by the Child Health and Development Studies (CHDS), is of particular import because nearly everyone alive today has been exposed to PCBs. PCBs are synthetic chemicals that are endocrine disruptors, interfering with the body’s normal functioning by blocking or mimicking hormones. Classified as persistent organic pollutants, they were widely used from 1929 until 1977, when the U.S. banned their manufacture and use.

However, PCBs are ubiquitous, still found today in the soil, water, the food chain, stored in human body fat, and also found in fish from contaminated waters– meaning even many children born today will still be exposed. In fact, all pregnant women in a 2011 study by University of California San Francisco associate professor Tracey Woodruff, PhD, were found to have PCBs in their blood.

The CHDS team analyzed blood samples collected from pregnant women who were Kaiser Permanente members in the Oakland area from 1959 to 1967, a period when PCBs were routinely used in coolants and lubricants, paints and plasticizers.

Researchers measured PCBs in blood samples obtained shortly after giving birth, when women were an average of 26 years of age. These women were then followed for breast cancer for an average of 17 years. Because the PCBs measured in this study remain in the body for a long time, levels measured just after giving birth reflect what was in the woman’s blood during pregnancy, and may also indicate what was in a woman’s blood years before the blood sample was taken, possibly during puberty, when the breast is also vulnerable.

“To our knowledge, this is the first study to report on breast cancer associations in relation to measured PCB blood levels during critical periods of vulnerability for the breast,” wrote lead author Barbara A. Cohn, PhD, director of the Child Health and Development Studies (CHDS) in Berkeley, where the research was conducted.

This study illustrates how long it takes to determine whether exposures do harm, since breast cancer occurs many decades after the period when the breast is most vulnerable. “What is concerning,” says Cohn, “is that important exposures happened decades before these women’s cancer actually developed. And women are still being impacted today. One must ask, what are the long term effects of chemicals on the market today? And how can we do a better job of protecting ourselves?”

Cohn’s findings support efforts to minimize exposure to other environmental chemicals that could disrupt biological systems—whether they have been tested for relation to breast cancer or not. Today’s chemicals are distributed throughout the world and in the food supply, so that controlling exposures to new chemicals will require broad cooperative or regulatory efforts that recognize potential harm, rather than proven harm. In the absence of regulation of chemicals against potential harm, Cohn advises young girls and women who might become pregnant to try to reduce unnecessary exposure to environmental chemicals whenever possible, even chemicals not yet studied for their effect on breast cancer, to minimize the total exposure. She suggests taking steps to avoid chemicals with a similar structure, such as flame retardants found in furniture, as well as fish high on the food chain like bass that contain more contaminants, and to avoid toxic chemicals found in some cosmetics and household products. She refers those looking for specific guidelines to The Breast Cancer Fund website.

The study does not explain why some of the women developed breast cancer while others didn’t, but posits that certain people have higher risk because of the way their bodies metabolize or respond to the exposure.

The current study follows another CHDS study on PCBs in 2011, which found a possible connection between a daughter’s exposure to PCBs in her mother’s uterus and difficulty becoming pregnant as an adult. This is the second breast cancer study conducted by Cohn and colleagues in a unique study population that was followed beginning in pregnancy, the Child Health and Development Studies comprised of 15,000 women in the Kaiser Foundation Health Plan who have been followed since the 1960’s.

Co-authors of this study are Mary Beth Terry of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, Piera M. Cirillo of the CHDS and Marj Plumb of Plumbline Coaching and Consulting, Inc., in Berkeley.

About the Public Health Institute

The Public Health Institute, an independent nonprofit organization, is dedicated to promoting health, well-being and quality of life for people throughout California, across the nation and around the world. PHI’s primary methods for achieving these goals include: sharing evidence developed through quality research and evaluation; conducting public policy and advocacy; providing training and technical assistance; and promoting successful prevention strategies to policymakers, communities and individuals. www.phi.org.

Add Comment

Question from Mary

I purchased a pair of scissors with Microban. I wouldn’t use a dish drainer with Microban. Presumably with the scissors I could wash my hands after using them, but I might still absorb Microban through my skin. Also, I have health problems. Shall I keep the scissors or pass them on?

Debra’s Answer

Pass them on. Scissors with Microban? What will they think of next? We don’t need Microban on every product in the world.

Add Comment

Question from Janet Scarth

My husband and I bought a latex foam mattress topper. We’ve had it airing out for the past month (outside and in the garage) and it still smells. We put in on our bed for the first time yesterday. We put it in a zipper vinyl mattress protector (which we aired out for a week) and the odour is still there. Will it ever go away? Any ideas on how to get rid of the odour?

Debra’s Answer

I don’t know how to get rid of the odor except time.

I have said many times that I do not personally buy latex products because of the odor.

Readers, any suggestions?

Question from greenmama29

Hello! What is the safest bra material? I realize organic cotton would be ideal, but I cannot afford them, and even worse am having trouble finding one I like. I would assume wireless cotton would be next best, but considering it is likely GMO and treated with pesticides, I’m not quite sure. Others I’ve found are nylon, but it’s a petrochemical, yuck! Thoughts on this?

Debra’s Answer

Actually, though non-organic cotton is grown with pesticides and may be GMO, those residues are removed during the processing of the cotton into fabric, so you’re not being exposed to them when fabric touches your skin.

Have you looked at Decent Exposures?

Add Comment

The International Fragrance Association (IFRA) has published a list of fragrance ingredients used in consumer goods worldiwide and also evaluates fragrance ingredients for safety. It is the trade association representing the global fragrance industry.

“To support our drive for increased transparency, IFRA has published an alphabetized list of fragrance ingredients used by IFRA affiliated members around the world. This list represents the industry’s palette of materials from which fragrances are formulated. We believe releasing information on our materials will help us in our efforts to communicate about the industry’s extensive safety program more comprehensively.”

“IFRA’s Safety Program establishes safe use for fragrance materials. The IFRA Code of Practice and the IFRA Standards are based on risk assessments and may prohibit or restrict the use of fragrance materials in consumer goods if there is concern for human health or the environment. The Code of Practice and the Standards must be adhered to by all IFRA affiliated member companies. Adherence is enforced through the IFRA Compliance Program.”

Natural and synthetic ingredients are listed alphabetically by their chemical name and their Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number. 3194 of them.

In the IFRA Code of Practice, it says “Fragrance ingredients should only be used when, based on appropriate information and evaluation, it has been concluded that they present no unreasonable risk to human health and the environment and are safe under their intended conditions of use.”

Indeed the entire mission of this organization seems to be to determine the safety of fragrance ingredients and allow only safe fragrance ingredients to be used.

They have a list of prohibited ingredients and restricted ingredients and lots of information about how they come to these decisions.

You can even find out from them what specific chemicals are in the fragrance of a specific brand name product.

I will just say, browsing the list of acceptable fragrance ingredients, there are many I recognize as toxic: styrene, ethylene glycol, phenol, benzene, xylene, formaldehyde…some of these are among the most toxic solvents that exist.

* * *

There is also the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). They have “the most comprehensive, worldwise source of toxicology data, literature and general information on fragrance and flavor raw materials” but you have to be a member to access it. And to be a member, you need to be in the industry and be sponsored by two RIFM members. So consumers don’t have access.

But industry safety standards are maintained by IFRA, using data from RIFM.

Add Comment