Water | Resources
Ecos Paints
Question from Joe
Debra, Are you familiar with ecos paints? They are a South Carolina paint company that produces paints that they claim are water based, VOC Free paint. Solvent-free, Glycol-free, Eco-friendly, Allergy-safe finishes. Totally free of all pesticides, herbicides and toxins.
I recently purchased some from painting my basement floor and was holding off while i do more research. Do they seem as safe as the ones you are familiar with?
Thanks,
Joe
Debra’s Answer
According to their description, these paints are BETTER than most of the paints I’m familiar with that come in a can.
Can’t wait to try them.
Readers, any experience with these?
The Dangers of Antimicrobials and How to Choose Products Without Them
My guest today is Larry Plesent, Founder of Vermont Soap. We’re going to talk about why you shouldn’t use toxic antimicrobials, which products contain them and where you can find antimicrobial-free alternatives, and some toxic free ways to kill germs. Vermont Soap makes “100% natural and non-toxic alternatives to the chemical based personal care products now in general use, including; handmade bar soaps for sensitive skin, anti-aging products, 100% natural shower gels, castile liquid soaps and non-toxic cleaners. Most products made by Vermont Soap are certified to USDA organic standards.” Larry is also a writer,philosopher, restaurateur and farmer. www.debralynndadd.com/debras-list/vermont-soap
TOXIC FREE TALK RADIO
The Dangers of Antimicrobials and How to Choose Products Without Them
Host: Debra Lynn Dadd
Guest: Larry Plesent
Date of Broadcast: November 14, 2013
DEBRA: Hi, I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And this is Toxic Free Talk Radio, where we talk about how to thrive in a toxic world. And we need to talk about that because there are a lot of toxic chemicals out there.
There are a lot of chemicals that can harm our health and well-being, that can affect how we think, and how we feel, as well as how our body operates. There are chemicals that can make us fat, chemicals that affect our sexual drive and performance, and chemicals that do all kinds of things to our bodies.
And in fact, when I was writing my latest book, Toxic-Free, I researched all the health effects of toxic chemicals. Again, I’ve been researching them for more than 30 years. And I found that every single illness or symptom can now be associated with exposure to toxic chemicals. There are studies which show this.
And so, it’s not just about one body system. Every single body system in your body is being affected by toxic chemicals. And some chemicals are affecting more than one body system.
It’s something we really need to know about. And we really need to know how to protect ourselves from those exposures or eliminate them.
So today is Thursday, November 14th 2013. I’m here in Clearwater, Florida on a beautiful autumn day. And today, we’re going to talk about antimicrobials.
You’ve probably seen the word antimicrobial on all kinds of products now—everything from shoes, to toilet seats, to cutting boards. And we’re particularly going to talk about antimicrobials as a group of chemicals and how they affect your body.
But we’re also specifically going to talk about how we can eliminate the need for using antimicrobials to wash our hands.
My guest today is Larry Plesent. He’s the founder of Vermont Soap. Larry has been on before. And the reason why I asked him to come on again is because I received an e-mail from him a few weeks ago where he said, “Recently, a customer asked if our castile soap was antibacterial, which led us to dig into the science of getting your hands clean. And the results may surprise you.”
And at the same time, I went to a webinar where the whole webinar was on antibacterial. This question comes up so much on my Green Living Q&A blog. “What about this antibacterial and what about that antibacterial?” So, I thought it’s time to do a show on antibacterials.
Hi Larry. How are you?
LARRY PLESENT: Hi, Debra. Thanks for having me back again.
DEBRA: You’re welcome. It’s my pleasure.
LARRY PLESENT: [inaudible 02:56]
DEBRA: We just need to do a little test because I’m not understanding you on your phone. So could you talk right into the phone?
LARRY PLESENT: Okay, can you hear me clearly now?
DEBRA: That’s a little better, better than before.
LARRY PLESENT: A little better? Okay.
DEBRA: That’s even better.
LARRY PLESENT: That’s even better, all right. I’ll talk very near into my telephone.
DEBRA: Talk boldly into your telephone.
LARRY PLESENT: Thank you! Thanks for having me on.
DEBRA: You’re welcome. I know that you told us your story before. But why don’t you tell us your story again of how you came to be interested in toxic chemicals and how you came to have a soap company?
LARRY PLESENT: I’ll give you the cliff notes. I was a window cleaner [inaudible 03:45]. I was a window cleaner. I jumped off buildings with a safety line. And my life [inaudible 03:51] Spidey, like Spiderman. And we made our own cleaning chemicals to clean buildings. And we were doing commercial work primarily.
These were just common cleaning chemicals that came right out of the supermarket, every one of them. And I got very, very, very sick. And what people used to call multiple-chemical sensitivity, what I like to refer to as “having a reactive body.” I became highly reactive to pretty much everything that was in that window cleaning mix which included fake color, fake scent, methanol and detergents.
So, rather than be depressed about it, I took action. And I started a non-toxic soap company. We make a wide variety of products now, including non-toxic cleaners, pet products, oral care, anti-aging.
We’re actually going to be releasing very, very soon (we’re working on the labels for) some new sanitizer sprays which are organic ethanol-based, organic alcohol and essential oils.
DEBRA: Oh, great! Great! I really think that would be a really needed product.
LARRY PLESENT: I agree. Our first in the series, our first sanitizing spray, once we got our Homeland Security-cleared license to work with cosmetic alcohol—which actually was quite a process.
DEBRA: Wow!
LARRY PLESENT: Yeah! It wasn’t easy. It took us over a year.
So, the first product we did was toothbrush sanitizer. I wanted to illustrate that there are over a trillion germs crawling around on your toothbrush right now. And that’s not good. And these aren’t good, happy germs. These are the germs that cause tooth decay and gum disease. And you’ve been working really hard to clean them off, so we need to stop re-inoculating ourselves.
So, the first step to regaining the health of your gums is to sanitize your toothbrush.
Now, alcohol is nature’s sanitizer. Alcohol and soap and water are really all that you will ever need. The reason I like alcohol is that it evaporates off. And if you’re highly asthmatic or reactive, you’re going to have issues with that. So open a window or go outside when you do it. We don’t want you getting alcohol sensitive through over-exposure when you’re in a reactive state. I like alcohol.
DEBRA: I’m just going to add something here because I know some people will hear the word alcohol, and they’ll say, “Oh, no, no. No, not alcohol.” But there’s a difference between alcohol like in isopropyl rubbing alcohol and the alcohol that you’re talking about, correct?
LARRY PLESENT: Oh, boy! Let’s talk about alcohol.
DEBRA: Let’s talk about alcohol for a minute. Go ahead and tell us.
LARRY PLESENT: Okay, okay. In hand sanitizers, alcohol, as you know, is a liquid. Hand sanitizers are a gel. And I discovered that the commonly used gelling agent for alcohol—there are very few things that will gel alcohol when it’s at 64.5%– 62.5% or better of that which is what you need to make a germ-killing sanitizing or disinfecting claim. So, you have to have a product that’s mostly alcohol.
Now, the thing that gels it up is something called carbomer. And I found time and time again in my tests on our focus groups that carbomer dried people’s hands. And they didn’t like it. So, right there, it gives alcohol-based sanitizers a bad name.
So, we looked at that and said, “Wait a minute. We’ll make little spray bottles, little handy sprays you could keep, you could carry, tie around in your pack or your bag. And then, you can quickly sanitize your hands, rubbing around in 20 seconds or so.
You kill the germs and it’s evaporated. And you’re not all dried out as you would from the carbomer.” So, you greatly reduce reactivity. I’m not going to say none.
Now, let’s talk about alcohol. In order for alcohol to be—not drinking alcohol. Drinking alcohol is taxed at 90%, first of all. And the cosmetic alcohol or non-drinking alcohol is taxed at a much lower rate, probably state sales tax. I don’t want to get into it. It would be different everywhere.
But in order for something to be non-drinking, it has to be poison or something. It has to smell bad and make the air be bittering.
So, typically, you would use what are called bittering agents. And the commercial product is called bitterant. You can look it up.
I’m unable to find anything negative about it. But certainly, the internet wasn’t able to know anything about bitterants—other than if you are artificial scent sensitive. If you don’t like artificial fragrances, we stay away from that.
The other thing […], methanol can be used in low-grade rubbing alcohol. Rubbing alcohol will be immediately suspicious, especially the cheap ones you get on sale.
DEBRA: We need to take a break. It’s a good place to take a break. We’ll be right back. And we’ll talk more about antimicrobials and their ingredients.
This is Debra Lynn Dadd. You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. Mnd my guest today is Larry Plesent, founder of Vermont Soap. And you can go to his website at VermontSoap.com. And we’ll be right back.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And my guest today is Larry Plesent, founder of Vermont Soap. And that’s VermontSoap.com. And we’re talking about antimicrobials and safe personal care products that are good for you and don’t have these toxic chemicals in them.
Larry, I was just, during the break, looking at—I happen to have a bottle of your toothbrush sanitizer here. It smells really good.
I really like it. It says certified organic alcohol.
And I know that isopropyl alcohol, which is probably the kinds that’s used in most hand sanitizers, is a petroleum product. And so I’ve been telling people for years that instead of using that distilled alcohol from petroleum, that they should just use vodka.
At least the vodka is from a natural source—much more expensive.
But now, tell us, you started with—
LARRY PLESENT: Hold on now. Your vodka is 40%. And to make a germ-killing claim, it needs, it needs to have over 62.5%.
DEBRA: Oh, good point.
LARRY PLESENT: But maybe if you use something stronger, probably a 60% vodka or something a little stronger, 80% vodka, that would certainly kill [inaudible 11:19].
DEBRA: Oh, great! That’s really good to know. So then your alcohol would be certified organic alcohol. It certainly wouldn’t be made from petroleum because you can’t certify that to be organic.
LARRY PLESENT: There are two sources of this. It’s from the Brazilian sugar cane, which is fermenting the alcohol. There’s a whole industry built around that. And some of it is from midwest [grains]. And we traced that, that there’s absolutely no gluten or wheat residue of any kind in it. We made absolutely sure that was [inaudible 11:58]. Our operations manager is gluten intolerant. And so, it was a top priority for her [inaudible 12:04].
DEBRA: That’s very good. So that’s very different. This certified organic gluten-free, natural-based alcohol is very different from what you think of as the alcohol they put on a swab in the doctor’s office for when you get a shot or if you use isopropyl alcohol that you buy for a dollar for a bottle in the drug store. Even though they’re both called alcohol, they are two very, very, very different things.
LARRY PLESENT: I gave a bottle [inaudible 12:45] back when we had a video rental (you know, a CD rental, or DVD). And they said, “Hey, do you have anything that we can use to clean these DVDs coming back from the rental?” So I said, “Well, all I have is this toothbrush sanitizer. Try that.”
And I got a cryptic call from the manager of the place who wanted to know why was it that our toothbrush sanitizer cleaned those DVDs better than anything else. It’s because the properties of the ethanol were different from any of the alcohol that they had been using previously.
Of course, I didn’t tell him that. I said, “Oh, you just have to keep buying it, I guess.”
DEBRA: So, you could also use it as a cleaner for anything else, anything else you want to sanitize?
LARRY PLESENT: Yeah, to really clean and sanitize, yeah, you absolutely can. And that’s a lot of what we’re doing. With a slight adjustment to essential oils, we’re coming out with additional sprays that are being marketed for that. We have the product we were calling universal sanitizers. We’re thinking galaxies and other I don’t know. But we’re working on it. It’s coming soon.
Sign up for our e-blast, so that you’ll be right on top. In the meantime, the toothbrush sanitizer works pretty good.
DEBRA: Absolutely! Llisteners, you should go to VermontSoap.com and sign up for their newsletter because they send out interesting things. And whenever they make something new, you’ll find out about it if you’re on their newsletter mailing list.
So, let’s talk about triclosan.
LARRY PLESENT: Triclosan. See, you’re right there. But I want to give a little background as part of talking about triclosan because we’re of one mind here, Debra.
What does the word “antimicrobial” mean?
DEBRA: Oh, yeah. Let’s talk about that.
LARRY PLESENT: We’ve got to do that because that’s how we lead into triclosan.
So, antimicrobial has a legal definition. There is an FDA legal definition. It’s called the 30-second kill rate. And it means that within 30 seconds, 99.999% of all germs (nearly 100% kill rate) will occur—within 30 seconds. Now, there are no natural products on earth that can match that.
However, according to the Harvard Review, they’ve done some studying by an FDA panel in 2005, if you wash your hands with, hey, pure natural soap and water for 30 seconds, you will kill 99.99% of all germs—not enough to make an antimicrobial claim. So, you get where we’re going.
So, soap and water, the message is—your grandmother was right—put alcohol in the cut, and use lots of soap and water.
DEBRA: Yes, I’m a member of Toastmasters. In fact, this weekend, I’m going to a Toastmasters Conference to get the highest award of Distinguished Toastmasters. And that’s a big deal for me.
What I wanted to say is that at a Toastmasters’ meeting, one of our members was a registered nurse. And we get all kinds of speeches on all kinds of subjects at Toastmasters. And she gave a 5-minute speech on how to wash your hands. And she gave us all handouts about exactly—and she had us sing the alphabet song.
LARRY PLESENT: Oh, you didn’t do happy birthday. You did the alphabet song.
DEBRA: No, we didn’t do happy birthday. We did the alphabet song. And that you really need to wash your hands for that 30 seconds, or whatever it is, because it’s the rubbing action, it’s the friction, that does the job as much as the soap. You need to have the soap, but you need to combine it with the friction. And if you do that, that’s what doctors do in hospitals. They’re washing their hands with this soap and friction.
LARRY PLESENT: I’ll answer that. The foamy action acts upon the cell membranes of the bacteria. And so there, you’re making sure that the soap is being worked into the bacteria and having enough time to actually kill it.
DEBRA: I think it’s very interesting. There are so many things. There was a big shift back in the ‘50s where, suddenly, everybody thought, “We need to use all these toxic chemicals.” Prior to that, people were disinfecting their hands without triclosan.
We need to take a break again.
LARRY PLESENT: And then, we’ll talk more about that dangerous drug.
DEBRA: Yes, we will! You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And my guest today is Larry Plesent from Vermont Soap. And that’s VermontSoap.com.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And my guest today is Larry Plesent, founder of Vermont Soap. They’re at VermontSoap.com. And we’re talking about antimicrobials.
So Larry, can I tell our listeners what the health effects are of triclosan now?
LARRY PLESENT: Let’s talk about it. Do you want to start or would you like me to?
DEBRA: Let me start, and then you can fill in.
LARRY PLESENT: You got it! [inaudible 18:18]
DEBRA: So, this is the latest that I got from a webinar that I attended on antibacterials.
So, what triclosan is is what’s called an endocrine disruptor. And the endocrine system communicates all parts of the body via hormones. And one of the most important one is your thyroid gland. It sends thyroid hormones all over your body to tell your body what to do.
And triclosan blocks your thyroid function. It alters metabolism and makes it difficult for the thyroid hormones to go through your body and communicate. It also increases the action of estrogen, another hormone, so you get more estrogen than you need. And it blocks testosterone, so there is less testosterone and less sperm production. Those are the major things that they brought up in this webinar.
So Larry, you tell us whatever else you know.
LARRY PLESENT: I’m way more excited [inaudible 19:28] not being able to reproduce, I’m buying a lot of shoes. That was a joke, was it? Now, you got it.
Okay, those things are bad, but I’m afraid of triclosan for reasons way more serious than that.
DEBRA: Okay, tell me.
LARRY PLESENT: And here it is. I got a call from a guy looking to reach out. And he had gone as an adult into an autistic feud where he actually became autistic. And the only thing he had changed in his life was that he had changed his underarm deodorant. He had stopped using it because of a comment his son made. The man was suicidal at that time. And his son said, “Gee, pop. How can you use that stuff? It makes me all sad and stuff.” And he said, “It makes you all sad? Well, I’m all depressed. And I’m showing all these autistic symptoms.”
So, obviously, he was extra sensitive. He stopped using that underarm deodorant, and it cleared up. He then started using it.
After 10 days, he started using it again. He went back into an autistic feud, if you will, sitting and rocking in front of the TV. He stopped using it, it went away again.
That’s when he called me to see if I could help him identify what it was in that product that caused him to have that reaction.
And I learned to research that that product (which had been around a long time) had recently reformulated using triclosan as an added ingredient. Obviously, he was highly sensitive to it. That’s a true story.
And I would say triclosan also is only one carbon atom, one methyl group away from Agent Orange defolient. Agent Orange, I had watched some vets come down and die a horrible death as a result of exposure to Agent Orange. This product is one carbon atom away from it. EU considers it highly suspect. And I know it’s considering banning it all together.
And you’re absolutely right. When it’s mixed with something, it creates dioxin. Do you remember what that is, Debra?
DEBRA: I don’t remember when it’s mixed with something, but I was—
LARRY PLESENT: I have a note here. It just says it can react with other chemicals to form dioxin and chloroform. That’s all I know on my notes here.
DEBRA: It’s just that it’s only this one little link away from dioxin.
Anyway, I want you to tell our listeners some other places besides disinfecting hand soap where they might find triclosan because it’s really something that you want to be aware of and stay away from.
So, it’s in hand soap. It’s in lotion, mouthwash, detergent, shampoo. It’s in clothing to reduce odors. So they have triclosan in socks and things like that. And your skin can absorb it very, very easily. It absorbs it immediately. It’s in toothpaste, cosmetics, kitchen supplies (like I mentioned before, chopping boards), in furniture, toys, school supplies, sports equipment, and much, much more.
Now, here’s the good news.
LARRY PLESENT: And there’s one more, and it’s the first place I would look. If anybody listening or finding us on the web has a plug-in air freshener of any kind that makes an antimicrobial claim, please get rid of it and treat the product as a toxic waste.
Please don’t do that particularly in children’s room. Plug-in air fresheners or plug-in germ-killers in children’s rooms are a really bad idea. Please don’t do that.
DEBRA: I totally agree. Now, here’s the good news. It’s required by law, it’s regulated by the FDA as an over-the-counter drug, triclosan is. And so it must be listed on the label.
So, if you’re buying any of those kinds of products that I just listed, look at the label and see if it says triclosan. And if it says triclosan, don’t buy it.
Sometimes, it’s getting used so ubiquitously in some products. I got an e-mail from a woman who was trying a buy a toilet seat.
And every single one of them in the store had triclosan in it.
LARRY PLESENT: As far as that goes, there’s a human issue there. There’s an epidemic of staphs in human population. And it can be spread by toilet seats. So there might be an advantage to that.
DEBRA: Let me say this. I think that there’s way too much attention on antimicrobials and disinfectants and all of these things.
It’s like people think we need to use these toxic chemicals because, otherwise, we’ll get sick.
But here’s the thing. A lot of these disinfectants harm your immune system. And the best defense that you can have from flu, viruses, or any of these things, the best defense you can have is a strong immune system.
LARRY PLESENT: Thank you for saying that.
DEBRA: Larry and I both went through this thing of having multiple chemical sensitivities. And we both recovered from that.
And that’s an immune system thing. It’s a thing where your immune system breaks down from chemical exposure.
And so, what you want to do, part of the survival in today’s toxic world, is to boost your immune system—not to kill all the germs in sight with chemicals, but to boost your immune system, so that you could be walking through a world with a lot of germs, and your immune system will know what to do with them.
So, that’s I think a better solution than using triclosan or taking flu shots.
And we have another break, but we’ll be right back. This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And I’m here with my guest, Larry Plesent, founder of Vermont Soap, which is at VermontSoap.com. Stay with us!
DEBRA: This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And if you’ve been listening to that last commercial over and over and over again, listening to my show every day, about the water filter, I just want to let you know that that company is running a special right now until November 22nd. And there’s a discount on top of their sale prices especially for my readers and listeners—just for you guys.
So, if you’ve been wanting to buy one of those water filters, the kind that I have in my own home—and I even took out my old water filter and put in a new one—if you want to buy one of those water filters, then this is a great time. And it would also make a great gift. You need to have pure water in order to remove the toxic chemicals from your body.
I’m about to put up a post on one of my blogs after the show that talks about what’s in bottled water—and and you don’t want to drink it. So, get yourself a water filter.
Okay, Larry, do you have a water filter?
LARRY PLESENT: No, I live on a mountaintop. And it’s beautiful.
DEBRA: That’s right, so you don’t need it. Lucky you!
LARRY PLESENT: I actually use carbon filter with some minerals in it, but I’m okay.
DEBRA: So now, I want to go back to the e-mail that you sent out originally, the one that got me to get you on the show. And it says, “Here’s the big question. Which product cleans your hands better—plain soap or antibacterial soap?”
“First of all, the labels on plain soap may not say antibacterial, but they eliminate germs just as well as those soaps that are antibacterial—sometimes, even better. In fact, the FDA even stated”—the FDA statement—“that antibacterial soaps show no evidence that they prevent infections more effectively than plain soap.”
And I’ve read that. I’ve been reading that for years.
LARRY PLESENT: Plain soap is not [inaudible 28:15].
DEBRA: Yes! So, tell us about your soaps because it is getting harder to find. And I have some of your soaps. They’re just lovely soaps.
LARRY PLESENT: You are already addicted, so you’re a customer for life. And by that, I mean that if you or somebody that you care about has sensitive skin—and this can come from everything, genetics or I don’t know—we make products for people who have sensitive skin.
We make products for people who have reactive bodies, who cannot use the common chemicals. Some people are detergent-sensitive. They say, “Every time I use shampoo, I itch all over… every time I do my laundry, I itch all over.” This is your body saying, “Hello! Get these molecules away from me. I cannot tolerate them.” And it’s important, so listen.
And there are alternatives out there. A lot of the alternatives are, “Okay, we have a different kind of detergent, and we’ve taken the scent out.” And you go, “Oh, that’s better.” But you still have some problems where they go to a lower level.
There’s no need for that. You have to identify the molecules you are sensitized to and locate the alternative.
And for me, I looked around, I couldn’t find the alternatives. And because I really did not like to hear myself whine, I went out and started making the alternatives. Fortunately, I was an amateur chemist. It worked out fine for all of us.
So, as we’d like to say, if you or someone you love has sensitive skin, check out our stuff. You’d be glad you did.
DEBRA: One of the things that I noticed when I started using your soap is that it’s very soft—that’s the word that comes to mind—and it doesn’t dry my skin out.
A lot of soaps use coconut oil. I remember the first time years and years and years ago, I was looking for any unscented soap that I could find, I went to a popular brand of coconut soap because that was all that was available. And my skin got really, really dry.
LARRY PLESENT: Yeah, and turn red, and little bumps perhaps even if you kept using it. And that’s because if too much coconut oil is in soap, then—let’s put it this way. The more coconut oil in soap, the better it lathers, but the more drying it becomes.
So, there’s a sweet spot where a little bit of coconut oil does a really good job, you get over that sweet spot, and you start drying people’s skin.
There is a very rare reactivity some people have which is a coconut-oil-turned-into-soap reaction. And stay tuned. I hope to be able to do something for you, folks, too one day. But it’s a very, very small group.
So what you do is—
DEBRA: Go ahead! Tell us more about your soaps.
LARRY PLESENT: Yes, we’re a soap company. Oh, it’s really cool. We have all kinds of oils from around the world, coconut and palm, certified organic. We’re very careful about where we trade from. Our palm oil supplier just won a Greenpeace Award. So, that’s the level we are sourcing at.
And we want to support the good guys. We don’t want our money to go to the bad guys. We want to support the good guys, so the good guys do better.
And that’s where you can vote with your dollar. Every purchase you make of a yummy product made by good people, people close to home, people maybe in your own town, that money just keeps circulating. Every dollar you send out, that money is gone. It’s not in your circulation. It’s not creating new economy and new jobs.
And that’s the importance of shopping local, or as we used to say here in Vermont, “Keep your money in the valley.” We knew every dollar that stayed in the valley created more prosperity. Everybody wins!
DEBRA: Yes, absolutely! That works that way. So I see on your website that it takes nearly a month to handcraft a bar of your soap because—
LARRY PLESENT: [inaudible 32:31]
DEBRA: You use a 200-year-old process. And I can tell, this bar of soap feels different. I’ve tried a lot of handmade soaps and yours feels totally different.
LARRY PLESENT: We’ve been working on this for 21 years now, Debra.
DEBRA: Wow! You obviously know what you’re doing. And your soaps, they’re certified to USDA organic standards. And they’re free of artificial colors, fragrances, preservatives or any synthetics. And they’re just very good. Well done, Larry.
LARRY PLESENT: [inaudible 33:15] You love the butter bar, right? That’s your favorite.
DEBRA: I love the butter bar.
LARRY PLESENT: I know! It’s so good.
DEBRA: Now, this is unscented. This is unscented. Anybody can use this.
LARRY PLESENT: We get more just rave reviews on that.
So, if you’re looking for one product, you’re saying, “Okay, I’ll try Vermont Soap,” buy a butter bar. But we also make a lot of unscented hand cleaners. We make a very interesting soap-based shower gel. So, if you absolutely have to have the shower gel, we have a good alternative for you there. But if you have the most sensitive skin, try the butter bar. That’s the mildest that I have.
We also make moisturizers like Green Gold, right, Debra? Have you gotten the unscented Green Gold?
DEBRA: I have some of that, and I like it a lot. It just goes right into your skin.
LARRY PLESENT: Hemp and shea are the two main ingredients. But both of them, for a very special reason, are a green organic hemp seed oil. And then, into that, we infuse anti-inflammatory herbs, calendula and Saint John’s Wort. Those are the most anti-inflammatory herbs I found from over 20 years of working these herbal soaps—I don’t say, as a medicine, but for their soothing value when people are hurt.
And we make pet care products, oral care products, anti-aging and moisturizing products, sanitizers now.
And our goal is to replace all of the yucky stuff in your world with yummy, safe, non-toxic, yummy alternatives. When you buy from Vermont Soap, you’re buying factory direct. We cut out the middleman. Because we’re factory direct, if you find something you really love, like you can’t live without Liquid Sunshine, our non-toxic cleaner, we run specials in gallons, and sometimes even five-gallon containers […] that you buy in. You can really get your price down because we’re making it and we’re selling it right to you.
DEBRA: And also, if you sign up for the newsletter, then you get notified when they have special deals.
We only just have a couple of minutes left. So I just wanted to ask is there anything else that you want to say that you haven’t said?
LARRY PLESENT: I do. I have a message and a philosophy about natural products that I feel compelled to express whenever given the format. And that’s that all of us arose on this earth, as part of a very long evolutionary process that’s at four billion years, with everything being in balance, there is no waste in the ecosystem, everything is reused and recycled for billions of years—and eventually, we came along.
And we started creating new and novel substances that never existed before. They’ve never been part of the ecosystem.
Nothing has been exposed to it. And we go along like simpletons, just making stuff that never existed and putting it all over the planet as if it’s all “It’s got to be just fine,” thinking that the world is our dump ground and it will all magically get cleaned up somehow when mommy comes home. This is just ridiculous thinking.
And we have to look at the implications of the products we all use every day. Yes, it’s been multiplied by 7.5 billion people on this planet. But it starts with you and your household and making your home a non-toxic household and making your body a non-toxic body.
This will build up your immune system. You’ll be able to fight things off better. You’ll be more clear-headed. And you’ll make better decisions in your life.
And that’s all we can do. We’re given a hundred years, and all we can do is live our hundred years as well as we can.
DEBRA: And with that, I’m going to say thank you for being with us because the end of this show is going to happen momentarily. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. And you can find out more about this show in the archives, and listen to this show again, at ToxicFreeTalkRadio.com.
Choosing Cosmetics Without Synthetics
Today my guest is Marj Melchiors, Founder of Cosmetics Without Synthetics. We’ll be talking about what she’s learned about dangerous and safe cosmetics in more than fifteen years of choosing and creating cosmetics. After a professional career for 13 years as an interior designer, Marj Melchiors founded her natural cosmetics company as a mail order business in 1997, to meet the needs of others who were seeking cosmetics without synthetics. Two years later her company went online. Today her site sells all kinds of cosmetic products (and more) that are fragrance-free, 70% or more organic, vegan, gluten-free, carmine-free, and, of course, synthetic-free. Long before the current craze for mineral makeup, Marj developed her Earth’s Beauty® line based on arrowroot, to meet the demand of customers wanting even lesser ingredients in makeup than what was being offered in the natural cosmetics realm in the late 1990’s. Marj has many years experience evaluating and creating cosmetic products. www.allnaturalcosmetics.com and www.earthsbeauty.com
TOXIC FREE TALK RADIO
Choosing Cosmetics without Synthetics
Host: Debra Lynn Dadd
Guest: Marj Melchiors
Date of Broadcast: November 13, 2013
DEBRA: Hi, I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And this is Toxic Free Talk Radio, where we talk about how to thrive in a toxic world. And the reason that we do that is because there are so many toxic chemicals out there, and we need to be able to find our way through all of that maze of products, toxic and not toxic, and be able to choose the ones that have the least health effects and the most benefit.
And that’s a skill that requires having information, that requires knowing how to apply that information. And I choose my guests for this show because they are doing these things out in the world to make the world a safer place to live in, to provide products, to provide information.
Today is Wednesday, November 13th 2013. And it’s a beautiful autumn day here in Clearwater, Florida, a little overcast, windy, cold, which it isn’t usually. I have my flannel shirt on, and so I know it’s getting to be winter.
And we’re going to be talking today about cosmetic products with a woman who—actually, I should put my mute button on because I’m going to sneeze, or maybe not.
Anyway, my guest today has not only chosen cosmetics that don’t have toxic chemicals to sell on her website, but she actually is a pioneer in creating her own non-toxic, toxic-free cosmetics. So we’re going to talk about all of that today.
Her name is Marj Melchiors. And she’s the founder of Cosmetics without Synthetics.
Hi Marj! Thanks for being with me today.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Hi, Debra. Thanks for having me.
DEBRA: Thank you so much for being here. One of the things that I love about doing this show is that I know about a lot of businesses from all the many years that I’ve been working in this field, evaluating products, and choosing the ones that are safest. And I’ve known about your business for many years. But this is the first time I’m actually talking with you, and the first time that I’m actually finding out about you.
And it’s so interesting to me to see what I find out about people and their businesses that I would have never known otherwise.
So, I’m so glad to be having you and my other guests on the show. I’m so happy to have this show and to be sharing all this information with everybody because you actually have a very interesting background.
So tell us! Let’s start out with you just telling us how you got into doing this. Why do you do what you do and about the things that you’ve done along the way to get to where you are now?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Sure, I’d like to tell you everything. I grew up in the Midwest, and I had allergies as a child. So when I became a little older, I was starting to also have more sensitivities and more sensitivities.
So I became aware of the fact—and this was in the ‘70s, so I’m dating myself here. I became aware of preservatives and artificial food colorings as a teenager. And so, I started to shop at a health food store. And in those days, as you know, health food stores are not very common. So my mother and I would have to travel at least 45 minutes away just to reach the only health food store that was as close as possible. So I grew up trying to eat as healthy as possible.
And so, shopping at a health food store, I would realize that there some things, other than foods there, that were very interesting to me—and one of them was natural make-up. And at that point in time, there were very, very few companies that were making all natural—
DEBRA: I remember that! I have one those moments that you never forget. When you were talking about this, this is popping up. I was in a health food store. And in those days, it was mostly packaged foods and vitamins and these natural cosmetics, soap and things like that.
And I remember one day I was in a particular store where I looked at the fresh produce, and it was just so wilted and horrible-looking. It was organic, but it was so wilted, I didn’t want to eat.
And then I went and looked at the make-up, and they had all these lipsticks in a row on a display. I opened one, and it was this Pepto-Bismol pink and all chalky-looking. And it didn’t look like anything I wanted to put on my lips. It didn’t look red and luscious like all the other toxic lipsticks are.
And so, I understand. And all of the brands that exist today, I don’t think any of them existed when you and I started looking at this.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Actually, yes, there is one brand, which I would get to later that was around. It’s called Penders. And I am now their U.S. distributor.
There were very few brands out there in those days. I think Rachel Perry, Paul Penders, and some that have fallen by the wayside.
Anyway, I used some of those cosmetics. Maybe they didn’t perform the best, but I just thought it was interesting that they were made with so-called natural ingredients.
So, I did that and still carried on the health food scene when I was in college. I went to college to become an interior designer.
And so I did accomplish that. I got my Bachelor’s Degree. And then I got married. And I was practicing as a professional interior designer.
And years later, in the ‘90s, I had my two daughters. And I decided that I really didn’t want to work away from my home anymore now that I had my two wonderful daughters. So I was reading Mothering Magazine. It’s a great magazine! And I noticed that there were a lot of people that had home businesses that were advertising in there such as cloth diapers and handmade wooden toys.
And I realized that there really wasn’t any company out there that was promoting natural cosmetics, which I thought, “Well, this would be a great place to advertise because it’s all women reading the magazine” or pretty much all women.
So, I thought, “Well, maybe I would try doing this. It would be something that I could do from home.”
And so, I did start my business then as a mail order business in 1997. And the only way to advertise in those days was through major magazines because, let’s face it, the internet was not anything like it was back in 1997. So, I had to put in ads in national magazines, which is extremely expensive.
And I built my business around a book that I read called The Safe Shopper’s Bible. And that book was written in, I believe, 1995. And it was a consumer’s guide kind of a handbook. They took products in there—anywhere from household cleaning products to paint and cleaners and cosmetics—and they rated them as far as dangers go. And I thought, “Wow, I’ve never seen anything like this.”
And so, I built my business around the products in there that they said were safe. And I based it on just the body care and make-up products.
So, I had this business, a little business, mail order. And it just was really slow-going. And I actually almost gave up because the orders were just few and far between. And so I almost gave up until almost two years later, 1999, and the internet was starting to become popular. And so I decided, “Well, what the heck, I might as well just try having a website.”
So, I bought the domain name AllNaturalCosmetics.com, which right now, you can’t touch anything like that, anything even close to that. Now, the natural cosmetic industry has become huge.
DEBRA: We need to take a break (as long as you just stop right there). We need to take a break. And so we’ll continue right after this.
I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. And my guest today is Marj Melchiors, founder of Cosmetics without Synthetics. And we’re going to learn more about how you can choose natural cosmetics when we come back.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And we’re talking about natural cosmetics today with my guest, Marj Melchiors. She’s the founder of Cosmetics without Synthetics.
So Marj, you got a website. And then what happened?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Well, a lot happened after that because now, I had worldwide exposure. And I really didn’t have to pay a lot of money and advertise in little magazines now because now, everyone in the world could find me basically because of the name of my company, my domain name, All Natural Cosmetics. So, someone would just have to type in those words, and basically, they would find my website.
So I now had companies coming to me who wanted me to represent their lines in the United States. So that was pretty exciting for me because, at that point, there weren’t a huge amount of companies out there. I had to really search and search to find things now to set the criteria that I was establishing because of reading the Safe Shopper’s Bible.
So, it was really exciting for me to be able to offer things to customers that they couldn’t get in the United States.
DEBRA: Well, let’s talk about your criteria. What is it that you’re looking to avoid and why?
MARJ MELCHIORS: What we’re looking to avoid are:
The first thing would be the synthetic preservatives. And that would be your parabens. And we also want to avoid synthetic fragrances, synthetic colorings, and ingredients that are carcinogenic, such as DEA, TEA, talc and lanoline. And just a host of other chemicals that are hard to pronounce, we stay away from.
DEBRA: So, you’ve figured out what those chemicals are, and you have a list. And if it’s on the list, then you don’t use that product.
MARJ MELCHIORS: That’s correct, yes.
DEBRA: Yes, that’s about what I did. When I started out, there weren’t any lists of toxic chemicals that I could find. And so I went and as you did with Safe Shopper’s Bible (I started doing it before that book was written. So I had to just go and find whatever studies I could find to figure out that this was toxic or that was toxic.
And I had to laugh today because, at that time, when I started more than 30 years ago, I had a list of 40 chemicals that I was looking to avoid. And now, the lists are just hundreds and hundreds of chemicals of things that we know about that are toxic.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes, exactly, because when the Safe Shopper’s Bible was written, the studies were not out about the dangers of parabens. So, for a while, the products that I sold did contain parabens because we just didn’t know about the harmful effects of the parabens.
And as recently as 2004, there was a study that showed that they found a huge variety of parabens in [inaudible 13:27] to what they’re using on their body because [inaudible 13:44].
DEBRA: We’re just going to take a break. You all listening may have noticed that my guest, the sound was breaking up. So we’re going to call her back and have her back again.
I think that we may have a commercial, yes. So, we’ll just go to commercial break now and we’ll be right back. And we’ll have her say what she said again.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And today, my guest is Marj Melchiors, founder of Cosmetics without Synthetics. And we had a bit of technical problem with the telephone line. So Marj, are you there with us now?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes, I am.
DEBRA: Okay, great. So I think the last thing you were starting to tell us about, the last thing I heard was about a study in 2004 about the danger of parabens.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes. In 2004, they did a study that showed that there was a large concentration of methyl paraben in some breast tissue samples that they had examined. So that is part of the paraben [inaudible 15:03] preservative used in […] body care and make-up and health care products. [inaudible 15:16]
So, that, I think opened the eyes of a lot of companies that were making natural products already and forced them to have them look for other […] products.
DEBRA: We’re still having the sound break up. I’m trying to figure out what to do here because I do want to talk to you about this. We still have half of the show to go, but I can’t hear what you’re saying.
Marj, if you have another line that you can call in on—oh, you know what? Todd, would you play another commercial? I think I have another phone number for her.
DEBRA: Okay, I think we’re back. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. And I think we now yet again have Marj on the phone. Technology, this is what happens when it is live radio.
MARJ MELCHIORS: I know! Of course, it would.
DEBRA: Why don’t you say what you just said for the third time? Third time’s a charm,
MARJ MELCHIORS: Third time’s a charm.
Okay, parabens. In 2004, there was a study conducted on parabens found in—actually, they did a study on breast tumors. And they found a high concentration of methyl paraben in these breast tumors that were removed from women’s bodies. And methyl paraben is one of the paraben families.
So, I think this really opened up the eyes of a lot of natural body care and cosmetic companies because they were using parabens all these years, thinking that it was safe ingredient.
DEBRA: I thought it was a safe ingredient. It wasn’t on my list. In the beginning, I was trying to avoid artificial colors, artificial fragrances, and preservatives. And I thought parabens were fine because they were in every natural cosmetic or beauty product that there was on the market. And I couldn’t find any studies about them.
But this is, I think, an important point to make because there are a lot of ingredients that still have not been studied. And so this is where part of the difficulty is, that there’s so much that’s unknown, that if we know something, like this about parabens, we should at least be acting on the things that we know about. And then, we should be continuing to study to find out if there are more things that we didn’t know about.
When I started, we didn’t know about Bisphenol-A, we didn’t know about any of the endocrine disruptors, we didn’t know about the parabens. And as all these things were coming to light, what’s happening is that the products are getting purer and purer as the manufacturers take out these ingredients that we find to be toxic. So, it’s an evolutionary process.
MARJ MELCHIORS: That’s true! It’s leading customers to just demand more and more because now, customers are demanding organic ingredients. And there are some ingredients that you just can’t get in an organic form right now (or that you may never be able to) such as some of the natural colorings that are used in cosmetics like the iron oxide. But the consumers are just really being educated and just demanding more pure products.
Actually, that is what led me to create my own line of cosmetics. And actually, that was just a couple of years after I started my business. So in the year 2000, I created the brand, Earth’s Beauty.
DEBRA: And tell us about that. That’s a very different product than you find in any other place. Tell us your whole story about that one.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes, well, I had a group of customers that were ultra-sensitive. And they said to me, “We like what you’re selling, but we need something with even less ingredients.”
So, that led me to do a lot of research. And I came up with a line of products that are based with arrowroot. An arrowroot is actually something you can use to bake with or cook with.
DEBRA: I cook an arrowroot, and it’s wonderful.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Do you?
DEBRA: I use arrowroot because I eat gluten-free. And arrowroot is, it does a couple of things. One is that you can use it instead of wheat flour to thicken gravy, and it works beautifully because it just dissolves and it doesn’t lump.
And the other thing it does is that I had a recipe I don’t eat anymore because it has wheat flour in it. But it was a way to use whole wheat flour so that it wasn’t so dense. You could take a tablespoon of flour out of a cup of flour, and replace it with a tablespoon of arrowroot, and it would make your whole wheat flour light.
And so, I’m very familiar with arrowroot. It’s in my cabinet, and I use it frequently.
And it’s very, very soft. So, when I saw that your cosmetics are based in arrowroot, I thought, “That must be really good on the skin.”
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes, it does feel really good, and it gives a very nice fine appearance to the skin as well. And many women who are ultra-sensitive can use this product line.
And it was actually ahead of its time because, maybe about five years after that was when the mineral make-up started becoming popular. And how we differ from that is that many mineral make-up uses titanium dioxide as the base, and that ingredient is questionable in the loose form.
It’s used a lot in sunscreens because it has natural sunscreen properties. And when it’s in a liquid form, it is safe. But it’s questionable now. When people inhale that, if you’re applying a loose powder all over your face, you’re going to get a dust in the air. And if you’re doing that daily, it’s just questionable whether that is really healthy for the lungs.
So, our product is much different than the typical mineral make-up out there that will contain a base of titanium dioxide and sometimes mica.
DEBRA: So when you take a basic titanium dioxide, I just want to clarify, that’s a lot of titanium dioxide. And then you put in a little bit of iron oxide for color, right?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Right!
DEBRA: I mean, not you, but the other manufacturers. When you say a base, that’s a lot of material.
MARJ MELCHIORS: That’s the base. That’s the majority. Now, some will have titanium dioxide with mica. So it’s not like it’s all titanium dioxide. Very few of them are going to be 100% titanium. But there’s going to be a huge percentage of titanium dioxide in the base, which means that’s probably 70% to 80% of the actual product will be a mica or a titanium dioxide.
So, we do not have that in our products as far as the large majority.
And so we began with that. And it’s exciting because nowadays, just as you mentioned, a lot of people want to stay away from gluten. And they’re even wanting to stay away from gluten in their body care and make-up products and their skin care.
So, we have many customers who will call us and say, they’re looking for such-and-such product, and they want to make sure that it’s gluten-free. And so we can say without any question that the Earth’s Beauty line is gluten-free.
DEBRA: Because you’re making it yourself, and you know what’s in it.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Right, we’re making it, and we’re using safe ingredients. And we have some other items that we’ve expanded upon. We have mascara now. And the mascara is actually made in a certified gluten-free laboratory.
DEBRA: Wow, that’s great.
MARJ MELCHIORS: And we also have a line of pencils that are handmade. We also have some lipsticks. And so we can just guarantee that our Earth’s Beauty line is gluten-free.
DEBRA: And then, also, I’m looking at your website right now, EarthsBeauty.com, for this product. And it says that it doesn’t contain nanoparticles, which is another thing to be concerned about in mineral make-ups because if they’re using powders that have been ground as fine as nanoparticles, then those nanoparticles, you can breathe them in, they can get through your skin.
MARJ MELCHIORS: That’s another problem with that titanium dioxide, most of the titanium dioxide out there is in the nanoparticle form. So, besides inhaling it, if you have it on your skin, even if it’s in a skin care product, and it’s a nanoparticle titanium dioxide, there’s a very good chance that that can actually be absorbed by your skin.
DEBRA: Also, on your site, I noticed that you have make-up for women, and make-up for teens, and make-up for girls. And I think that that’s wonderful. Tell us what the differences are.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Well, the make-up for the adults, for the women, that would be our traditional Earth’s Beauty line of products. And we decided that we wanted to start women out or girls out early, so we came up with two other lines. And the one line that we’ve had for the longest time is the Little Earth Beauty.
We came up with a plain make-up set. And many women just really appreciate that it’s great for the holidays, or for birthdays, to give a totally safe, non-toxic product line of plain make-up to your favorite little girl because if you just go look in traditional stores, discount stores, and you see little girl play make-up sets, and you look at the ingredients, I can tell you, you are going to see it’s just totally filled with chemicals.
DEBRA: It’s horrible! It’s horrible. I think this would make such a great holiday gift for little girls. I love seeing that on there because, children, as we’ve discussed many times on this show, are much more susceptible to the harmful effects of all these toxic chemicals than we are as adults simply because their bodies are smaller.
And so, if you have an exposure of, say, one unit of a toxic chemical, and there’s an adult and a child, because the child’s body is smaller, they’re twice as susceptible just because there’s half as much body present.
In any home where you have children, you need to be even more careful about what’s in your house and what you give them to play with.
So, well done. Well done!
MARJ MELCHIORS: Exactly, exactly. Well, thank you. Thank you. We’re proud of that particular set.
And so then we decided to expand on that. And about two and a half years ago, we came out with a line for teenagers. And that line is called Meisha. And it’s an eco-friendly line of make-up and the fact that it has compacts that can be refilled.
So, you can buy, for example, an eye shadow. And then once you’re finished with it, you can pop it out and just buy the inner replacement. So that is just really setting a good example for that generation to not only be eco-friendly, but look at the ingredients that you’re putting on your skin.
DEBRA: So, I noticed that in the Meisha line, you have a cream eye shadow. And in the women’s line, it’s a powdered eye shadow. Can you tell us the difference?
MARJ MELCHIORS: In the women’s line, Earth’s Beauty line, all the products are in the loose form (unless, of course, they’re a mascara, the liner or the lipstick). So those are more of a mineral make-up. If you think of a mineral make-up where it’s in a loose form, which means, when you apply it, you would need to dampen your make-up brush, and then dip it in the powder, and then apply it.
In the teen line, we made it a little bit more convenient. Let’s face it. Teenagers are going to want convenience. We have pressed or caked eye shadows. And we also have cream eye shadows and cream blush. So, those are easier to transport.
And they are in the compacts, magnetic compacts, so those are a little bit more convenient.
So, instead of having a loose powder, you would have it pressed or in the cream form.
DEBRA: Thank you. Tell us about some of the other products that you’ve chosen that don’t have synthetics, and your criteria. I know you have a whole lot of different products on your AllNaturalCosmetics.com website, including things that have 70% or more organic ingredients that are fragrance-free, some are vegan, some are gluten-free, carmine-free.
Tell us about carmine. What is carmine and why do people want to be free of it?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Carmine is technically actually a natural pigment. Some people are fine with using it. But if you are vegan, you may want to stay away from it because it is actually derived from the shell of a beetle.
So, it’s a personal decision on carmine. We don’t totally say it’s terrible, but it is a way to get some nice pink tones in cosmetics. So if you are looking for a brighter pink tone, unfortunately, at this time, that is what the best choice is to use. If you want to go with more earth tones, then it’s very easy to create cosmetics without using carmine.
DEBRA: I just want to point out that carmine isn’t toxic to the best of my knowledge. I’d never seen anything that says it’s toxic.
MARJ MELCHIORS: No.
DEBRA: But it would be a choice, if you’re vegan, to be aware of that.
So, what are some of the other products, what are some of the brands that you’ve decided are non-toxic enough for you to carry and what kind of range of products could people find on your website?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Well, we have a wide variety of natural skin care products. We have Aroma Bella, and we have Lotus Moon, Miessence, which is a certified organic line from Australia, Mukti from Australia, which is certified organic as well.
And we have Paul Penders. And as I mentioned earlier in the interview, Paul Penders has been around since the 80s. And in 2008, he looked me up, and he said he wanted me to be his U.S. distributor. So we are now distributing his products. We are pretty much the full source of where you can buy his wonderful, wonderful skin care and hair care products. He has lipsticks as well and mascara.
DEBRA: I remember when I used to be able to see them in the natural food stores, but I haven’t seen them.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes, you can’t find them readily now. Through me is the main source of Paul Penders. And his products are just absolutely wonderful.
DEBRA: And what other brands do you have?
MARJ MELCHIORS: We carry hair coloring.
DEBRA: Let’s talk about that because a lot of people are interested in hair coloring. So what makes natural hair coloring?
MARJ MELCHIORS: The basic thing about natural hair coloring is that it’s going to be derived from henna—either henna alone or henna with some additives such as herbs and [cossy]. For example, we carry the Logona Herbal Hair Coloring line.
And you can buy it in the powdered form or you mix it yourself like traditional henna or you can actually buy it pre-mixed in a tube.
This brand is a wonderful brand. And it will cover the grey, believe it or not.
It’s the safest line other than just straight henna that you can find. Even at a health food store, you’ll see some brands, and they’ll say that they have natural pigments. Well, the pigments might be natural, but if you look at the ingredients in there, if it has TTD or if it says, “Will cause blindness if you get this in your eyes,” then stay away from it because there are chemicals in it.
But if there is a line that is out there that—if it’s on our website, it’s without chemicals basically. If they would be more available, we would have it. But right now, this is the best that we have.
DEBRA: I think that that’s an important point. I know for myself and others that I’ve talked to a bit, it’s easy to get into saying, “Well, I want this perfect product. I don’t want any of this and any of that.” And for some products, that means that you just don’t use that product at all because it doesn’t exist.
I know, for myself, I don’t remember the last time I wore nail polish because I can’t find a nail polish that’s not made from acrylic. And I don’t want to put acrylic on my fingers. That’s it! They can take out all the formaldehyde and everything that they want. But as long as it’s still acrylic plastic, I’m not going to put that on my fingernails.
So, I just get a buffer brush, just buff my nails, and they get shiny. And that’s what I do for my nails. So, no red nail polish for me.
We really need to be thinking about, sometimes, is it really necessary to be using these toxic chemicals because we’ve decided that we have to have nail polish, or whatever the product happens to be, we decided that we have to color our hair, or we have to wear perfume, or whatever.
I remember actually a long time ago when I was removing toxic chemicals bit by bit from my life as I could identify them, the last thing to go was my red lipstick. It had taken me so long to find the perfect shade of red. And I was absolutely dedicated to my brand of red lipstick, and exactly that color of red. I was like, “No! I’m not going to give this up. I’m not going to give this up.”
But it was more important to me to not have the toxic chemicals in the lipstick than it was for me to have red lips. I finally had that breakthrough to say, “Okay, it’s more important to be healthy. It’s more important to feel good. It’s more important to take that toxic stress off my body that this lipstick is giving me.”
So, it’s really wonderful that you and other people are offering these less toxic, non-toxic, organic alternatives so that we can have replacements for those toxic products that we’re so accustomed to having and have them be much more helpful.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes, I totally agree. Some women are just addicted to that certain shade of lipstick, as you said, or having to have their hair look a certain color or a certain way. And I agree that we need to choose our health first. We try our best to find those substitutes in natural form, and we are very particular on what we sell.
DEBRA: Yes, and I appreciate that very much. We only just have a couple of minutes left to the show. Is there anything that you’d like to say that you haven’t said?
MARJ MELCHIORS: Well, I just love your philosophy. And I just give you so much credit for doing this all these years.
DEBRA: Thank you.
MARJ MELCHIORS: And I just think it’s great that we’re educating everyone out there so that they can become more healthy.
And there are just so may incidences now of people getting sick, and it just makes me wonder, if people would just look at what they’re eating, and what they’re being surrounded by, and what they’re putting on their body, maybe if they would think twice, perhaps they could have better health.
DEBRA: I’m sure that they would have better health. I know that I’ve seen that and I think you’ve seen that in your life too. So I think that anybody who wants to be health, eliminating toxic chemical exposures, I think is the first step across the board.
One of the things that’s great about what you’ve done, Marj, is that it’s really so difficult to take that leap into trying to figure out what’s toxic and what isn’t, for there to be websites like yours, and websites like mine, where those of us who have taken the time to learn all this and be able to evaluate the toxicity of products, that we have a list of toxic chemicals that we know we want to avoid.
The consumers can just go to our websites and know that what they find there has already been evaluated.
So listeners, if you’re looking for some natural cosmetics, you can just go to Marj’s site and choose anything she’s got, and know that you’re getting the best that’s out there, the least toxic products that are available at this time. And I’m sure that as there are more, even less toxic products, that they’ll be on your site too.
MARJ MELCHIORS: Yes. We’re always searching, and we always have companies approaching us, and we very carefully evaluate what is being shown to us. And sometimes, we have to turn it down and say no. I’m sorry, it’s not quite pure enough.
But we are always searching and looking for the best products possible. And you can always trust us because we are very concerned for other people’s well-being.
DEBRA: Thank you so much for being on the show, and I apologize for the technical difficulties, whatever they were. It’s been lovely to talk with you.
I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. And to find out more about this show, go to ToxicFreeTalkRadio.com.
What Do I Do About Toxic Chemicals in Clothing?
Question from Diana
Dear Debra – I typed in toxins in clothes and read the article provided.
It answered one of my questions that had to do with whether more expensive clothes had less toxins in them. Might have known! I just bought some jeans and a warm-up outfit at Kohl’s. They are all outside, day and night.
I’ve read that soaking them in baking soda and later water diluted with vinegar will take care of the smell. However, I’m wondering if the toxins are still there doing damage to the wearer. I’m guessing they are.
If so, this rules out all department stores and leaves only organic clothes (haven’t found many of those) and consignment shops where clothes have been washed many times.
Could you comment on this?
To me it seems like a silent holocaust — aimed especially at juniors. Mudd and So manufacturers are two that have cute jr. clothes but the smell on them is enough to knock you out. Just bury your nose in them and inhale. Then taste the inside of your mouth. Next, run for your too toothbrush.
Debra’s Answer
Yes, average clothes DO contain a lot of toxic chemicals that we need to watch out for.
The best thing to do is wear organic. There are many online sources of organic clothing, some of which are on Debra’s List: Textiles: Clothing.
I have to say, though, I find this to be easier said than done. It’s difficult for me to find suitable organic clothing in my size, style, and budget. And so I do what I’ve been doing since before organic clothing was available, and that is, wear ONLY 100% natural fibers.
I find of the clothing I purchase if I wash them before I wear them, I have no problem. But I am wearing very simple clothing. I have a drawer of 100% cotton tank tops and a drawer of 100% cotton capri pants and mostly I wear those. I can just reach in the drawers and pick any top and any bottom and they all coordinate because I stick to neutral black, beige, brown, blue, and cream for the bottoms and buy both neutrals and colors for the tops.
I also have a couple of 100% natural fiber jackets.
All clothing usually has “sizing” on it, which is made from scented cornstarch. I find this washes right out.Beyond this, if clothing smells bad to me in the store, I just don’t bring it home.
Pumpkin Muffins
These low-carb, gluten-free muffins are moist, delicious, and easy to make. Almond flour instead of wheat flour gives them extra protein.
- 2 eggs
- 1/2 cup pumpkin puree
- 1/4 agave or other natural sweetener of your choice
- 4 tablespoons (1/2 stick) butter
- 1 teaspoon vanilla
- 3/4 teaspoon baking soda
- 1/2 teaspoon salt
- 1 1/2 teaspoon cinnamon
- 1/2 teaspoon freshly grated nutmeg
- 1/4 teaspoon ground cloves
- 1/4 teaspoon ground ginger
- 2 1/2 cups almond flour
- 1/2 cup chopped walnuts
- 1/4 cup currants
- Preheat oven to 325 degrees F.
- Place all the ingredients EXCEPT almond flour, walnuts, and currents in a large bowl. Use an electric hand mixer to combine (or a stand mixer).
- Mix in the almond flour until well combined.
- Add the walnuts and currents (break them up as you add them) and mix by hand with a silicone spatula.
- Spoon the batter into the muffin cups.
- Bake for 25-30 minutes, until golden brown and a toothpick comes out clean.
How to Make These Great Muffin Papers
You can use unbleached muffin cups for these muffins, but I like these parchment papers so much better! They take a little longer to make, but give such a dramatic presentation, especially if you are taking these to a party, serving them to guests, or giving them as a gift. It’s like a little gift in itself that you unwrap to eat. You can also tie ribbons around them for even more festiveness!
You’ll need unbleached parchment paper, which you can buy at any natural food store. Cut 5-inch squares, and then place one square in each opening in your muffin pan. Push the paoer down inside with your fingers to fit and crease any folds. They won’t sit flat when empty, but when you fill them they will be perfect.
Tools
I use a 2-Tablespoon scoop when I make muffins because it gives an even portion. This results in all the muffins baking evenly.
You can use this tool to portion ice cream, cookie dough, meat balls and many other foods.
They are usually available in three different sizes wherever kitchen gadgets are sold.
How to Determine Your Risk of Harm From an Exposure to a Toxic Chemical
Toxicologist Steven G. Gilbert, PhD, DABT, a regular guest who is helping us understand the toxicity of common chemicals we may be frequently exposed to. Dr. Gilbert is Director and Founder of the Institute of Neurotoxicology and author of A Small Dose of Toxicology- The Health Effects of Common Chemicals.He received his Ph.D. in Toxicology in 1986 from the University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, is a Diplomat of American Board of Toxicology, and an Affiliate Professor in the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington. His research has focused on neurobehavioral effects of low-level exposure to lead and mercury on the developing nervous system. Dr. Gilbert has an extensive website about toxicology called Toxipedia, which includes a suite of sites that put scientific information in the context of history, society, and culture. www.toxipedia.org
LISTEN TO OTHER SHOWS WITH STEVEN G. GILBERT, PhD, DABT
- Toxics in the Air We Breathe—Indoors and Outdoors—and How it Affects Our Health
- Toxic Solvents and Vapors
- How Pesticides Can Harm Your Health
- Why Do People Doubt the Science Behind Toxics?
- There is No Safe Level for Lead Exposure
- Fewer Chemicals Make Healthier Babies
- Why We Shouldn’t Have Nuclear Power Plants
- How Mercury Affects Your Health
- Nanoparticles
- Persistant Bioaccumulative Toxicants
- How Endocrine Disruptors Disrupt Our Endocrine Systems
- The Dangers of Exposure to Radiation and How to Protect Yourself
- Toxics Throughout History—Exposure to Toxic Substances is Not New
- The Ethics of Toxics
- The Basic Principles of Toxicology
- Meet a Toxicologist
TOXIC FREE TALK RADIO
How to Determine Your Risk of Harm from an Exposure to a Toxic Chemical
Host: Debra Lynn Dadd
Guest: Steven G. Gilbert, PhD, DABT
Date of Broadcast: November 12, 2013
DEBRA: Hi, I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And this is Toxic Free Talk Radio where we talk about how to thrive in a toxic world.
Today is Tuesday, November 12, 2013. And the reason that we talk about this is because we live in a very toxic world. There are toxic chemicals all around us, and they’re making a lot of people sick in a lot of different ways.
But we don’t have to get sick from them. We do need to clean them up. We do need to be choosing the right products, so that we’re not exposed to toxic chemicals. But there’s a lot that we can do to make those right decisions, and to protect ourselves.
And there are a lot of people who are doing good work in the world, in order to help us understand these things, to change regulations, to make good products.
And those are my guests on this show—people who can help us make sense of this crazy toxic world, and learn what it is that we can do to protect ourselves and others.
Today, we’re going to be talking about risk.
Now, I didn’t even think of associating the whole field of risk management with toxic chemicals until a few years ago when I was invited to give a seminar at a conference for insurance agents.
And as a good public speaker, I thought, what could I possibly say to insurance agents that would make a connection for them between their interest and my subject?
And as I started looking at it, of course, a whole field of risk management because what insurance is about is determining what is the risk that they’re taking in insuring somebody against some harm that’s going to come to them.
And there actually is a whole methodology to figuring this out, and a whole logic of how to think of this. And when I looked at that, I thought, this absolutely applies to toxic chemical exposure so much so that I included it at the time I was writing my book, Toxic-Free, and I wrote a whole chapter about risk management.
So today, toxicologist, Steven Gilbert, PhD, DABT, is going to be back with us, and he’s been on before a couple of times, so please go look up his other shows and listen to them, as well as this one, because he knows so much about toxicology. And I’m having him on regularly to share all of that with us.
And today, we’re going to just talk about this piece of risk management, so that we can reduce the risk of having harm from toxic chemical exposures.
Hi, Dr. Gilbert.
STEVEN GILBERT: Hey, Debra. Thanks for having me back.
DEBRA: You’re welcome! It’s my pleasure to have you on the show. So where should we start with risk management?
Before you say anything, I want to also say that you’re the author—Dr. Gilbert is the author of A Small Dose of Toxicology: The Health Effects of Common Chemicals. And you can go to his website, which is Toxipedia.org, and get this book for free. And it’s a very, very good introduction to toxicology, the whole field of toxicology, and you’ll understand a lot more about what we need to be concerned about in making decisions as consumers, if you take a look at this book, and it’s free.
So go to his website, and get this free book.
Okay, Dr. Gilbert, it’s your turn.
STEVEN GILBERT: There’s actually a chapter on risk assessment and risk management in the book.
DEBRA: I have that right in front of me.
STEVEN GILBERT: That’s great. And each chapter, we’ll come to the PowerPoint presentation that you can download if you might want to do that.
DEBRA: I love reading it out of the PDF.
STEVEN GILBERT: That’s good! So, risk is really interesting. We manage risk all the time. I bet you drove into work today?
DEBRA: I work at home. I have no risk in walking from my bedroom, or my kitchen, into my office.
STEVEN GILBERT: That’s great. I work at home also most of the time.
But risk, if you think of automobiles, we drive automobiles, there’s a lot of risk in automobiles. And we use seatbelts to mitigate some of that risk. That mitigation was actually enacted into law.
So, sometimes, we do a very good job at managing risks. we get great benefits from wearing seatbelts. It’s just a little bit of a hassle. But we know about the risk. And the first thing about risks is you’ve got to know what the end point is, what risks you’re worried about, and what kind of exposure you have. So, you’ve got to know what hazard you have, what’s hazardous.
Automobiles, it’s pretty straightforward, it’s injury with that. But with chemicals, it can be a wide range of potential hazards and complications. And then you manage the exposure to that.
DEBRA: That’s a very good summary of what I understand risk management to be.
STEVEN GILBERT: So really, the second most important words in toxicology is dose response or exposure response, what’s the dose that causes the response. In toxicology, you’re really dealing with adverse response. And then, hazard times exposure equals risk. So, is there a hazard? What is that hazard? How much exposure we have? And that will help us define the risk.
You really want to factor individual susceptibility into that. Some people will be more susceptible than others, like children, for example, who eat more, breathe more and drink more than adults do. So therefore, they have a small amount of exposure that translates into a much bigger dose which increase their risk.
DEBRA: I totally agree. I think that one of the most difficult parts of this is determining what is the hazard and also the individual susceptibility part. I’ve been doing a lot of research on toxic chemicals lately, and there’s not always agreement on how harmful something is—or maybe I shouldn’t say it’s not as people aren’t in agreement as to how harmful it is, but there sure is difficulty in sometimes getting people to understand that there is a harm—that you can look at a lot of studies. You can look at how you feel in your own body, but there’s a lot of toxic chemicals that are in products and easily available for exposure that shouldn’t be.
And they could be taken off the market, they could be banned, all those things, and they aren’t yet being.
And so there’s that whole question of where is the hazard, which is one thing, like what is the inherent toxicology of something.
STEVEN GILBERT: Yes, you raised a really good question. I think I’d carry it just a little further than that. Sometimes, the hazard industry or other interests create a lot of uncertainty around a potential hazard.
DEBRA: Yes, that’s exactly what I was trying to say.
STEVEN GILBERT: It’s a real key part of this discussion. Those industries and tobaccos are great example of that. Our tobacco industry, for years, created a lot of uncertainty about the potential health effects of tobacco, clouding the issue, raised the issue, “Does cigarette smoking really cause lung cancer?” It’s clear it does, but they clouded that issue. They did a lot of things to create a lot of uncertainty, so that delayed a lot of regulations on that.
And that’s been a problem with many different chemicals.
One of the most recent ones is Bisphenol-A, which some of your listeners might be aware of. And many of us are exposed to Bisphenol-A. We excrete it in our urine. And did we ever give consent? Did we ever consent to be exposed to Bisphenol-A?
No.
And then, we’re just learning more about the low-level effects, low-level endocrine disruptor effects, of something like
Bisphenol-A.
But I think it really is rying to understand the hazard, what potential hazardous health effects are, but it’s also trying to learn about exposure. Industry is not required to even disclose that some of these chemicals are in the products we’re using.
Pthalates is a great example of that.
DEBRA: Yes, a lot of these chemicals aren’t on the label. And so then if we’re trying to do a risk assessment and follow those guidelines that you offered earlier of knowing what is the hazard, knowing where the exposure is, factoring your individual susceptibility, and the considering what you could do instead to reduce the risk, we don’t even have the data a lot of times.
And this is part of why I wanted to talk about this today is because if we could look on a label and see, for example, that in a jar of apple sauce, there are apples and there are pesticides, then we could say, “Well, I’m going to choose this one that has no pesticides over the one that has pesticides.”
But what we have in the world today is that the jar says apples, and then another one says organic apples. And they don’t tell you that there are pesticides in the one with the apples. They just tell you that this other one over here is organic.
And I really think that if there were requirements, even if none of these chemicals got banned, if they were on the label of every single product, especially the most toxic ones…
STEVEN GILBERT: Yes, I really agree with you. I think we need more transparency and more disclosure of what chemicals are in a product. Washington State just voted—and California the year before—on a proposition to label genetically modified food. And it was defeated by industry pouring tens of millions of dollars into the [inaudible 09:40].
But that’s an example where I think we have a right to know. We have a right to know what’s in our products, what’s in our cosmetics, what’s in our personal care products, what chemicals we are being exposed. That’s the first step to figuring out what the hazard might be and how to reduce exposure to these chemicals.
DEBRA: We need to take a break, but we’ll be right back with Dr. Steven Gilbert, toxicologist, and author of A Small Dose of Toxicology. And we’ll be talking about how we can assess the risk of different toxic chemicals in our consumer products.
I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And this is Toxic Free Talk Radio.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And my guest today is Dr. Steven Gilbert, toxicologist, and author of A Small Dose of Toxicology: The Health Effects of Common Chemicals. And you can get that book free on his website at Toxipedia.org.
Dr. Gilbert, let’s talk about—take us through risk assessment for something, a product or a chemical. What are the steps that you would do?
STEVEN GILBERT: That’s a great question. And to lead off to that question, a risk assessment is a formal process where you gather data on exposure and response, and then you try to bring all data together to come up with some potentially least harmful levels of exposure to that chemical.
But I want to read a quote from William Ruckelshaus who was the first administrator of the US EPA in 1984. And he said, “We should remember that risk assessment data can be like the captured spy. If you torture it long enough, it will tell you anything you want to know.”
And I think that has been a real problem. We were just discussing the uncertainty that some people create around a chemical and the potential hazard. And that’s a real problem.
So, it is that you take risk assessment data, but it is very malleable. It’s very tough to come to an agreement on exactly what kind of exposure would be acceptable.
DEBRA: I think that these decisions are being made at different levels, like the government is deciding, and they’re not exactly objective because they’re being influenced by a lot of factors. But the government is deciding what do they think are chemicals that—what is the risk factor for how much you can be exposed to, to a chemical, in order to allow it in certain things.
There are regulations that say, “This amount of chemical can be allowed in our tap water” because the government has decided that they think that that’s the risk.
Now, I personally don’t think that I’m willing to take on that risk. And so I, for example, reduce my risk of exposure to those toxic chemicals in tap water by putting a water filter on my water, so that I can drink water that has fewer or none of those chemicals that the government thinks that it’s okay for me to risk being exposed to.
Different governments around the world incidentally have different opinions about what is safe for their citizens to be exposed to. And in my many countries, the regulations are much different than they are here in the United States.
STEVEN GILBERT: That’s very true. In some countries, Europe in particular, takes a more precautionary approach to looking at chemicals and potential risk of chemicals. So that means that they are putting the burden of demonstrating safety on the proponents of an activity.
And we do that. When we put drugs out in the marketplace, the Food and Drug Administration requires that the pharmaceutical and biotech industry provide significant data that show efficacy of the product that we’re being exposed to, and is it safe or what is the potential hazard for that product.
We don’t have similar process for industrial chemicals. We do some of that with pesticides, but our Chemical Policy Reform Act really needs to be moved forward. Right now, we’re governed by TSCA, the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 which is basically broken. And we consequently end up being exposed to a number of chemicals.
The other thing I want to mention was that risk assessment deals with one chemical at a time, but we’re not exposed to just one chemical at a time […]
DEBRA: We’re not just exposed to drinking water too, which has a range of chemicals in it. We’re exposed to—how many products are we exposed to during the day, hundreds? And each one of those has its own combination of chemicals.
So by the time you put them all together—a part of chemistry is that scientists are looking at the reaction of one substance with another, and what else does it make. We’re not looking at that as consumers. Nobody’s looking at that as consumers. Nobody is saying that once you mix even two or three products, the chemicals that are in two or three products together, what is going to come up with that. And then when you put all the chemicals we’re exposed to in our bodies, how are they interacting with each other?
Until I’ve decided for myself, after more than 30 years of study of this, that this is way too big a risk to just be wondering around in the world, being exposed to all the possible chemicals that are out there.
I just decided that I’m just going to do whatever I can to reduce the amount that I’m being exposed to because by doing that, that reduces the risk of harm.
STEVEN GILBERT: I think that’s very wise and a precautionary approach. I think we do need, as much as possible, to reduce our exposure to chemicals to mitigate the risk.
And if we learn more about some chemicals, we recognize the risk as greater. Lead is a great example of that. The more we studied lead, we recognized that there is no safe lead exposure. And yet, a few years ago, we had toy products coming in from overseas that had lead-based paint on them. And who plays with these toys but kids. So we’re putting our most vulnerable and susceptible population at risk for very silly things, like having a brighter colored paint, and not being aware of the manufacturing process in another country.
So, it’s very important that we manage these risks. And we often have the information and knowledge to do that, we just don’t take the precautionary approach to manage these risks well.
DEBRA: Well, I think that this whole thing about risk management is actually a skill that everybody needs to learn. I didn’t know until I went to speak at this insurance seminar, insurance conference, that risk management even existed as a field, which is one of the reasons why I wanted to talk about it today, just to make more people aware that there is a tool for assessing risk, so that you can make wise decisions about what your exposure is to toxic chemicals.
And I know we have a break in just a few seconds, so let’s talk more about that after we have the break. You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And today, we’re talking about risk management with my guest, Dr. Steven Gilbert, and he’s the author of A Small Dose of Toxicology: The Health Effects of Common Chemicals. And you can get a copy of that for free at his website, Toxipedia.org. We’ll be right back.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And my guest today is toxicologist, Dr. Steven Gilbert. And he is also the author of A Small Dose of Toxicology. You can get that book for free on his website at Toxipedia.org.
I want to read just a little paragraph from the risk management chapter of my book Toxic-Free. And I was trying to describe this. I had to figure out this whole thing about risk management—how does it work? What’s going on with it?
And I came up with a little example.
Here in Florida where I live, we have alligators in the water. This is definitely a hazard because if you go in the water with alligators, there is a high probability that alligators will attack your body. But here’s the important thing to grasp. An alligator in the water is not a risk until you put your body in the water.
Likewise, a toxic chemical is not a risk until you put your body next to it, or put it next to or on or in your body.
So we could be living in this whole toxic world, but it’s really not affecting you until it comes near your body, or you put your body near it. The number one thing in treating poisoning, the first thing that you do is you take the person away from the poison.
And so this is what we need to be looking at, is how we determine what’s a poison, and then where is it, and how can we stay away from it.
Those, I think, are the two biggest key questions that we need to be able to answer, and there are difficulties in answering both of them.
STEVEN GILBERT: And you’ve got to know that there’s an alligator in the water.
DEBRA: You have to know there is an alligator in the water. And then you need to know where is the alligator. Where’s the water with the alligator?
STEVEN GILBERT: There’s another route around it. And I think that, with toxic chemicals, we often don’t know that toxic chemicals are there. We’re not given sufficient information to know that that’s a potential hazard.
DEBRA: This is the number one thing that I think that we need to be fixing in the world because it’s not that there’s no field of toxicology. Certainly, you’ve been working in the field of toxicology for all these years. I’m not a toxicologist, but I’ve studied a lot of it for more than 30 years as a consumer advocate.
And so we know that there are dangers, we know how to assess risk and stuff, but what we’re missing is just that data about how products can affect us, and where are those toxic chemicals in our daily lives.
Dr. Gilbert, could you tell us—I’m looking at your book, and there’s this really good part starting on page 258, where you just give more details about each of the steps of risk assessment, hazard identification, and those—could you just start with hazard identification? I know we’ve been talking a lot about that, but I think that most people listening don’t have any idea what’s going on behind the scenes in the world of toxicology to assess the hazard.
Can you just explain part of that?
STEVEN GILBERT: Toxicology, a lot of toxicology is driven by risk assessment. And hazard identification is a big part of that.
So, one of the first steps of hazard identification is to look at structure/activity relationship. If it’s a new compound (or an old compound), does the compound look like another compound that we know something about?
And then you look to see do we have data, human or animal data, that would help us determine if an agent has a biological effect.
You can also look for cell culture data, and then do cell culture experiments to learn about mutagenicity and the potential for carcinogenicity.
And then, really, you’re trying to identify the hazard, but the trick with identifying the hazard is looking at what the end point might be. Is it a carcinogenic compound that’s going to cause cancer? Is it going to affect the immune system? Is it going to have reproductive effects, alter reproductive function, or cause transgenicity which is a malformed infant?
Is it going to be organ-specific? Is there ecological effects? Is it going to affect something in the wildlife? Is there a neurobehavioral effect? Is that going to affect the central nervous system development?
So, you have to go through a range of these things, of these types of questions. And I think the big problem with risk assessment is we end up doing risk assessments with the data we have, not necessarily the data we want.
And then, we are getting through all these hazard identification, the next step is characterizing the risks and looking at exposure—in particular, in doing dose response studies—to look at is there a low-level effect or you’re just seeing it at very high doses. So, that’s very important.
And now, we want to focus on which effect is the most likely outcome that you want to study and really focus on and do additional studies to understand.
Along with that, you want to understand susceptibility. There is some population that’s more susceptible. Are children more susceptible? Are the elderly more susceptible? Or are women of child-bearing age more susceptible? Are the developing fetus more susceptible? You’ve got to ask some important questions about that.
And then, the next thing is to try to bring all this data together to help you understand the risk that you’ve got. You’ve got to actually throw specific numbers about that and try to establish, through dose response experiments, specific numbers that might be a safe level of exposure.
DEBRA: Doesn’t that sound really complicated?
STEVEN GILBERT: It’s complicated. It can be very costly. But I think this is what needs to be done with frequent high-volume chemicals that we’re exposed to a lot of. Industry is not required to do or release a lot of this data. They have confidential business information, so a lot of data did not come out.
As I’ve mentioned before, the EPA’s response to many industrial scale chemicals, they don’t have the regulatory authority like the FDA does to require additional testing.
DEBRA: One of the things that has struck me over the years is that there is no one standard for how all products are evaluated, that different groups of products, pesticides, are regulated by a different agency than cleaning products, for example, and personal care products are regulated by a different agency than drugs.
And each one has a different standard by what needs to be revealed on the label, how things get labeled. And for example, in food products, you have to put on the label all the ingredients, and in the order of how much is in it is first.
And in cleaning products, which are much, much, more toxic, you don’t have to list all the ingredients at all. You just need to put a warning label on it.
So it’s really, really inconsistent and even within something like particle board, which is emitting formaldehyde, which is a toxic chemical, if it’s in a big sheet, it requires a warning label. If you cut it up and make furniture out of it, it doesn’t.
And so these are all really, really inconsistent, and if we just had one regulation that said that every product, no matter what it is, needs to put down all its ingredients. I think the world would be a very different place. We would be able to assess much better instead of having all these things, hidden away by all these regulations.
We’re going to talk more when we come back from the break with Dr. Steven Gilbert. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, this is Toxic Free Talk Radio. And we’re talking about risk assessment today.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. And my guest today is Dr. Steven Gilbert, toxicologist and author of A Small Dose of Toxicology, which you can get for free on his website at Toxipedia.org.
And that has a very good chapter about risk assessment. You can also read more about risk assessment in my book, Toxic-Free, and you can just go to ToxicFreeTalkRadio.com, and over in the right-hand columns, scroll down a little bit, and you’ll see a picture of the book cover for Toxic-Free, and it says underneath “start here” because it’s a good place to start on this whole subject is to read my book and Dr. Gilbert’s book too.
So just click on Toxic Free, it will take you to the page where you can order the book and read about risk assessment, and everything else.
Dr. Gilbert, since this is our last segment, I’d like to talk a little bit about managing risk by considering ways that we can reduce it. Number one would be something like just avoiding toxic chemicals all together, but we can also even reducing our exposure to toxic chemicals reduces our risk, and we can also share the risk with somebody else.
Give me your thoughts about how we can reduce our risk to toxic chemicals.
STEVEN GILBERT: I think the first thing is to learn a little bit more about the chemicals and what we’re exposed to and what chemicals are in the product, and then try to find out less toxic chemicals, less toxic products.
There are some very good websites out there. If you look at cosmetics, for example, there’s a website on cosmetics. It’s very good. They’ve been trying to figure out what chemicals are used in cosmetics and trying to find out the least toxic, potentially toxic products. So, I think that’s a good place to start.
And there are websites on toys. I think we really need to work to protect our children to have less toxic toys like the famous rubber ducky that have phthalates to keep it squishable. And so, we’re trying to reduce exposure to known hazard, the known potential chemical-laden products.
Trying to buy more organic products is always a good idea for the food area.
So, it’s really a matter of trying to control exposure. And you just have to constantly be looking at that. I think it’s unfortunate we don’t have a better system, a regulatory system, that makes that process a lot easier.
DEBRA: It would be a lot easier if our regulatory system did it for us, so that I wouldn’t have to do this.
So I’ll just mention on my website, you can go to Debra’s List, if you go to ToxicFreeTalkRadio.com. Near the top, there’s a button that says “shop” and it will take you to, on my website, Debra’s List, where I’ve been looking for all those toxic-free products for all these years, all the toxic-free products that I could find.
And even though I didn’t understand risk management, I knew that if I could identify where the hazard was, and then find something that didn’t have that toxic chemical in it as an alternative, then that would be better.
And so you can go there and you can find non-toxic cleaning products, and organic clothing, and just anything that you’re looking for is probably there.
You can also go to my Q&A section on my website because lots of people have been asking exactly these questions—“Where can I find a toxic free shampoo?” things like this.
And a lot of my readers have been just pouring information into this Q&A blog for years. And there’s a lot of resources there that will help you find the products that don’t have these toxic chemicals.
I want to say that for me, it’s been a process of looking for—trying to understand where are the hazards, what are the toxic chemicals, just making lists of them, and saying, “I want to find products that don’t contain this and this and this.”
And for everybody, I think that list is going to be different—that some people are willing to risk being exposed to some lesser toxic chemicals where I’m not willing to be.
Here’s an example. If you look on a material safety data sheet, that only tells you the most toxic chemicals that are on a certain list that was determined to be the hazardous list. But there are other things like for example, food colors. I don’t eat food colors. I tell people not to eat food colors. They’re made from petroleum, from coal tar, but they won’t show up on a material safety data sheet because they’re not toxic enough for that list.
And this is where we need to be making the decisions for ourselves.
STEVEN GILBERT: We really do. I really encourage your listeners to talk to your legislator folks about the Toxic Substances Control Act and the Safe Products Act. We need to have a better regulatory system that helps consumers. And one of the key provisions of that was having more of a precautionary approach as well as more access to data about what’s in our product, more transparent.
We really do have a right to know what we’re putting on our skin, what we’re ingesting, and what we’re close to, and what we’re being exposed to. And that’s not being respected by industry right now.
DEBRA: No, it’s not. And we didn’t sign up for this experiment. And it is an experiment. We don’t even have a choice, and we need to have that choice and have this regulation.
Dr. Gilbert, tell my listeners more about TSCA and what needs to be reformed.
STEVEN GILBERT: TSCA was, in fact, in 1976. And the idea was they would help provide data about industrial chemicals that were going to be widely used. And the problem was that EPA has to clear these chemicals for use. Industry has to report to EPA that they’re going to use a certain chemical. And there’s a very short timeframe for EPA to revise it.
And they would control those chemicals. There are 80,000 chemicals now that are potentially out there, many of them high volume production of about over a thousand chemicals at a million pounds per year. And then we don’t know all we need to know about potential hazards.
The bill really broke down over a court decision about asbestos. So the EPA lost a lot of its authority to really require industry to provide sufficient data to gauge the potential safety and hazards of a compound.
So, there’s been a big push over the last few years to try to amend that. That’s going on in Europe called the REACH Program, Registration, Evaluation, Authorization of Chemicals. Europe is actually quite a ways ahead of us in trying to provide more data on these chemicals.
There have been some efforts at the state level. And so a lot of the states, we’re working on that. For example, Washing State banned lead, cadmium and phthalates in baby toys. But that goal was taken to the federal level. And they prevented a lot of our rules and regulations around that.
So we need national regulation that really provides more of a precautionary approach that requires industry to demonstrate the safety of a product, and not have the burden on the public to show the hazards of products in commerce.
That’s really where we are right now. We, being the public, and the government have to show that a product is hazardous before it regulates it. And it really should be in reverse where industry has to demonstrate safety before the product is released.
DEBRA: How would this one demonstrate safety?
STEVEN GILBERT: Well, that’s a good question. So we have a lot of experience with doing that. We know how to do that through [unintelligible 00:33:45] to the FDA. There’s a wide range of very carefully quantified tests, toxicology tests. There’s a thing called Good Laboratory Practice, rules and regulations that require very strict protocols for doing the studies, careful data evaluation, and review of the information. So it’s all above board.
So, we know how to do this. We just don’t do it. Like you mentioned before, there’s a lot of contradictory rules and regulations about this.
I also want to mention we have a thing called the Safety Factor that when we find a level of exposure that we think is safe, that number is usually divided by 10.
So there is some effort to make things safe, but we really don’t follow through with that in a lot of situations because we don’t know the end point that we really need to be looking at. Endocrine disruptors are a great example of that where we found that, at low level of exposure, there are hazard there that we didn’t expect.
So, we really need to be very vigilant and really do more studies to understand the potential hazards of a product and the chemicals that were used in the product.
DEBRA: I totally agree with you. And at the same time, I’m just looking at the decisions that I’ve made over the years for myself. And again, I’ll just say, I’m not a toxicologist. I’m not even a chemist. I’m not a scientist. I’m a musician.
So I stopped being a musician in order to write about this because I saw that toxic chemicals were making me sick. They were in my house, and nobody was talking about it. And I thought, “Well, they made me pretty sick. It took me a lot to recover from that, but I did. And I didn’t want other people to be sick.”
And my logic has always been to find whatever data I could find, and then make a decision to find a product that doesn’t have those things in it. With food, for example, it’s pretty easy to see there are pesticides, there are food colorings, there are artificial flavors, there are preservatives, there are nitrates—all of those things. And even refined ingredients—sugar, white flour, all those things, they all have known health effects.
And so then on the other end of the spectrum, I can just say, “Well, let’s go to organic food. Let’s eat whole foods that aren’t coming in plastic packaging that’s leeching plastic into the food.”
Why can’t the government look at it this way? It’s so simple. It looks so simple to me.
STEVEN GILBERT: It does seem so simple, doesn’t it? A lot of countries are talking about that. But a lot of people make a lot of money off of these products. And we subsidize a lot of farm bills and all kinds of policies that has really promoted cheap food that’s not always healthy food.
DEBRA: We’re actually coming up to the end of the show, so I need to say thank you for being here. And we’ll have you back again because you have so much great information. Thank you very much.
I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and this is Toxic Free Talk Radio.
Pumpkin Pie for Everyone
I say this pumpkin pie is for everyone because the ingredients are so simple, practically everyone can eat it. There’s no crust (though you could add one if you want) so there are no grains, and there is no sweetener of any kind (though it tastes remarkably sweet!). And it’s so delicious you won’t miss the usually-soggy crust or the sugar. It’s my favorite pumpkin pie ever!
A thoroughly satisfying dessert for any day of autumn or winter!
I have made this with pumpkin and butternut squash and carnival squash (my favorite) they tasted almost exactly the same (except the carnival squash had more flaor and was sweeter. I think you could use any winter squash. And I’m also going to try sweet potatoes, and see how that works.
- 2 1/2 cups pumpkin puree (or other winter squash)
- 3 tablespoons softened butter (or oil of your choice)
- 3 eggs
- 1 tablespoon vanilla extract
- 1 teaspoon cinnamon
- 1/4 teaspoon fresh ground nutmeg
- 1/2 teaspooon salt
- Preheat oven to 350 degrees F.
- Place all ingredients in a food processor and process until smooth and creamy.
- Pour into a 9″ pie pan or baking dish.
- Bake at 350 degrees F for 40 minutes. I bake mine until really set, but not brown.
Allow to cool before serving. Once cooled, store in refrigerator.
I cut this in wedges, like a pie and top with vanilla whipped cream and just a sprinkle of coconut sugar. Yum! Yum! Yum!
How Recycling and Buying Recycled Products Helps Reduce Toxics
My guest today is Brenda Pulley,Senior Vice President, Recycling, for Keep America Beautiful. Brenda joined Keep America Beautiful in October 2010 to develop, execute, and expand America Recycles Day, an annual event that is happening this Friday, November 15. Keep America Beautiful is collaborating on this campaign with the Ad Council—the nation’s largest producer of public service advertising. Brenda also supports other recycling programs and connects with Washington-based stakeholders. In this role, she identifies and develops strategies for policy issues key to Keep America Beautiful, its mission and members. Brenda began her nearly 30-year career working for the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Environmental Small Business Committee. In addition to her work on Capitol Hill, she has also worked for both corporations and trade associations. Brenda also serves on the Board of Directors of R2 Solutions – the organization charged with promoting environmentally responsible practices throughout the electronics recycling industry. www.americarecyclesday.org and www.kab.org
TOXIC FREE TALK RADIO
How Recycling & Buying Recycled Products Helps Reduce Toxics
Host: Debra Lynn Dadd
Guest: Brenda Pulley
Date of Broadcast: November 11, 2013
DEBRA: Hi, I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and this is Toxic Free Talk Radio, where we talk about how to thrive in a toxic world.
Today is Monday, November 11, 2013, and we’re having a beautiful autumn day here in Clearwater, Florida.
Today, we’re going to talk about something a little different. Usually, we talk about toxic chemicals that we’re being exposed to in our own homes, or as we’re going about our daily lives, and how they’re toxic, how they can affect our lives, and what we can do instead.
Today, we’re going to talk about something that’s a little less direct, but is affecting us nonetheless. And that is about how recycling and buying recycled products can help reduce our exposure to toxic chemicals.
Now, that may sound like, “What’s toxic about recycled products, or what’s safer about recycled products?”
But the thing is that there are things about recycled products that actually involve toxic chemicals, which we’re going to find out about today. And that by doing these things, whether it’s recycling something that you could recycle instead of throwing it in the trash or the landfill, or by buying a recycling product, you can help reduce the amount of toxic chemicals that are in our environment that may come back to you in breathing the air, drinking the water, or eating food that has been grown in the environment.
Now, we’re going this today because this Friday, November 15th, is America Recycles Day. It’s an event that happens every year to educate Americans about recycling because it seems that not everybody is yet recycling, so we’re going to learn about this today.
My guest is Brenda Pulley. She’s the Senior Vice President of Recycling for Keep America Beautiful.
Brenda joined Keep America Beautiful in 2010 to develop, execute and expand America’s [inaudible 00:02:01].
Thanks for being with me, Brenda.
BRENDA PULLEY: Debra, I’m delighted to be here. Thank you.
DEBRA: Well, tell us more about—let’s start with tell us about Keep America Beautiful.
BRENDA PULLEY: Sure. Keep America Beautiful has been around for 60 years. In fact, we’re celebrating our 60th year anniversary this year. We started as an anti-litter organization back then, and took on those issues for several years.
We have affiliates located in communities across the country and various partners, so we have over a thousand affiliates and partners that we work with. And we’re all about bringing people together in their respective communities, and working with them, engaging them, to help make their community, what I call, their common environment—cleaner, greener and better.
DEBRA: I remember when I was a kid—I’m almost 60, so I remember when I was a kid, and I remember those commercials about not littering, and I remember that phrase, “Keep America beautiful.”
So when I heard it again in association with recycling, I thought, “Well, this is just the newer version of what you’ve been doing for a very long time.”
So thank you so much for having that organization, and being part of it, and making less litter on the highways, and in our towns, and all those places, and whether it goes into the garbage or whether it goes into recycling.
It’s all about putting our trash in the right place, and not just throwing it around the environment.
BRENDA PULLEY: It is exactly like you say it. We still need to work in every community across the country to make sure that litter is picked up, and that litter is prevented. And that’s one thing I say about recycling and waste production or recycling.
It is what I call a preventive maintenance to littering, so you’re exactly right. Thank you.
DEBRA: Yes, I see the connection. And I’m thinking about particularly all those soda cans. Those are something that could easily be recycled. But I think that a lot of people, especially people of my age, that saw those commercials [inaudible 00:04:14] they really stuck.
I just want to let you know that they really made an impression on me. And in fact, I have a friend, one friend in particular, who, every time she sees a piece of litter, she picks it up. And she picks it, and she recycles is or puts it in the trash because she’s just taking responsibility for other people not doing that.
And as we walk down the street, she’ll just pick up the litter. And I think that’s very admirable and something other people could be doing as well.
BRENDA PULLEY: Those are the ambassadors we rely on, frankly. And there’s nothing like creating that example that she has. That’s actually exactly what we want to do with the recycling these days, is how do you create that example that social norm where recycling is just the natural thing for all of us to do.
DEBRA: Well, one of the things that I learned a number of years ago, I went to Germany for the first time. Germany is an interesting place because I went there in 1990, before we had anything green here. And in Germany, I was very surprised to see that there are recycling bins on every street corner.
So where we have public trashcans, and in some places we have recycling bins, but they have them everywhere, and they’re divided into glass, paper, metal.
And when you’re done with your soda can or your paper plate, or whatever, it just goes straight into the recycling bin.
I would like to see more of that in America because I think that the reason that some people don’t recycle is that they may be have more to recycle, but it’s difficult to do that.
BRENDA PULLEY: Well, I share that objective with you. And there are a lot of reasons we can talk about why other countries have much more infrastructure and much more of a culture recycling than we’ve developed here in the United States.
But I would like to say it’s one of those things that we, Keep America Beautiful, and I think even as a country, are working on.
DEBRA: I think so too.
BRENDA PULLEY: First and foremost, it’s about making recycling convenient. And that means having that recycling bin, whether it’s at home or at work or at school, or as we say, you just point it out, when you’re out and about.
Particularly, we’re much more on-the-go society. And so we’re generating that soda can, that fastfood packaging. We’re generating it when we’re out and about. And so we want to be able, in those locations, to make it very easy and convenient for people to recycle.
DEBRA: Yes, I agree. And I just want to mention because this is something that I found out recently—the other day, I went to Best Buy, and I mentioned this on the show before, but I want to say it on this show.
I went to Best Buy, and when I just walked in the door, they had all these banners, very clearly marked about being able to recycle electronic-oriented things like cords and cell phones and things like that.
You can just walk in the door, and put it in the bin.
And I happen go there because I needed to buy a new mouse for my computer. And so I brought it with me, and even though there wasn’t a bin for mice, when I bought the new mouse, I gave the old one to the cashier, and she took it for recycling.
And I think that’s a wonderful, responsible thing to do. And I also had another guest on when we were talking about taking back pharmaceuticals, and keeping those out of the environment, and how we need to have more programs for recycling pharmaceuticals.
So this whole thing about recycling, really, as we will see today, will keep toxic [inaudible 00:07:46] out of the environment.
Brenda, before we go to the break, could you just tell us for a minute about how you personally got interested in recycling.
BRENDA PULLEY: I think similar to you—growing up in the 70’s, I would say, was when we really saw that first Earth Day come about. In fact, Keep America Beautiful and [inaudible 00:08:06] were both engaged in that—releasing one of the most famous commercials of the crying Indian.
DEBRA: I remember that.
BRENDA PULLEY: And I [inaudible 00:08:11] also, when my own home life, just being part of that culture, and being exposed to nature, and preserving, and the things that we could do to be much more conserving. I think it was instilled in me early on, and then having it reinforced from a society standpoint in the 70’s. I think it really made an impression on me.
And so my work—I worked for the US House of Representatives for years. And then since then, there are significant energy, environmental issues, that we have as a society. But having said that there’s so much opportunity, of things that we can do to become more energy-efficient with things like recycling where we can really preserve our natural resources and things like that.
So I think, for me, that was the personal passion, and then seeing the opportunity of how to make a difference.
DEBRA: Great. Well, we need to go to break in just a few seconds. And so we’ll talk more about this when we come back. My guest today is Brenda Pulley, Senior Vice President of Recycling for Keep America Beautiful.
This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and we’ll be back after this.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and today, we’re talking about how recycling and buying recycled products can reduce the overall toxics in the world. They may not make a difference to us much, although sometimes, it can, in the particular products we’re being exposed to, but how it can make a difference in the overall environment.
And my guest today is Brenda Pulley. She’s the Senior Vice President in Recycling from Keep America Beautiful.
Well, Brenda, let’s talk about recycling now.
So the biggest thing that I think is the thing that’s related to toxic chemical exposures is the fact that if you collect material, and then recycle it into a new product, there’s a tremendous amount of energy savings. So could you tell us about that?
BRENDA PULLEY: There is a tremendous amount of energy savings. When we think cumulative—so just take, we’re at EPA estimates, that we’re at a national recycling rate of about 34%. If you take out, what we call green waste, so grass clippings and things like that. So think of packaging and other things, and electronics you talk about, we’re at a 24%/25% recycling rate.
But of that 34% recycling rate, that’s energy equivalent of savings of nearly 230-million barrels of oil.
DEBRA: That’s huge.
BRENDA PULLEY: It’s huge. And it’s hard for me to comprehend that. So good old EPA even translates that into—but that’s really the equivalent of an annual energy consumption of nearly 15-million homes in the U.S.
So I know I throw a lot of numbers at you, but it is just what I believe people with the impression of, if there are in almost every situation of what can be recycled. There is significant energy savings by recycling.
And I would say, I worked for several years in the aluminum industry, and that aluminum can that you referred to earlier, when you recycle that aluminum can, there is literally going from can to can, it’s 80% energy efficiency saved there from doing this.
It’s a much easier streamline system to take a can and re-melt it down versus mining all that raw material and processing all that raw material into finish aluminum.
So a lot of facts, but [inaudible 00:11:48] point significant, significant energy savings.
DEBRA: So if people are saving energy, would you happen to know what are the toxic chemicals that are not being released into the environment?
BRENDA PULLEY: I would just say, I’m not sure which ones to label toxic or not. So please, you can name some of them for me.
DEBRA: Pollutants, whether they’re toxic or not.
BRENDA PULLEY: Yes. Look, where do you get your energy from? It’s either oil, or it’s generated by using coal, or natural gas. All the emissions, as many as [inaudible 00:12:27] that there are these days, all the emissions related to that can occur on a much significantly lower level.
That’s one. But for aluminum, it’s literally—there’s a lot of box site mining that must go on. And again, whether all kinds of control is in place from the mining and the processing, all those natural resources that don’t have to be mined and certain air emissions released, or just even the ground disturbed. Think of the dust that’s released, or the electricity that has to be generated, and all the releases related to that.
That’s how I think about all those different points in the manufacturing process that now don’t have to take place because we’re recycling materials.
Now, having said that, we’ve got to look at the recycling process, and there are certain controls and measures in place to make sure that the recycling process is also done in a very safe and efficient way.
DEBRA: Now, tell us about that.
BRENDA PULLEY: Well, let’s take electronics. You referred to that earlier. And we all have—it’s estimated 60-million to 100-million phones that we all have stored in our drawers, or in the cabinets, or in the basement [inaudible 00:13:48] just cell phones annually that are not being recycled.
And they have short, useful lives these days, since we all like the newest and greatest phone.
But electronics recycling is really one of those things that not only all the emissions that we just talked about that have to be generated when you manufacture new electronics. So it’s a lot of metals—it’s lead, it’s cadmium, mercury in some instances, so that’s less and less.
But it’s also more precious metals, if you will, that when they’re recycled, one of the things the industry have made great advancements in over the last five-plus years is making sure that they are now particularly globally, and more controls in place, to make sure that when those recyclables are processed—sometimes, many of the equipment can be refurbished and reused.
But now, they’re going to recycle it.
There are many instances where particularly in developing countries, there are not the appropriate controls in place, and there can be burning, for example, uncontrolled burning if you will, to extract some of the metals and things out of that.
So the industry is taking great strides at not only in the U.S., but developing global standards to put in place protections and criteria [inaudible 00:15:00] no longer happens.
So it is important for all of us, [inaudible 00:15:05] we’re going to recycle your electronics, so taking them to somewhere like Best Buy, or Staples, or your community electronic collection day. Those are instances where you can [inaudible 00:15:16] pretty assured that they’re being handled properly. But if there are other avenues that you want to get your material recycled, it’s very important to check and make sure that they’re validated and they’re licensed—there are some third party certifiers out there now.
And it’s important, and I encourage all your listeners to make sure a) to recycle, particularly your electronics, but to make sure that they’re turning them over properly.
And therefore, I would also say not only all the emissions that we just talked about, but proper data management is another issue.
DEBRA: Yes, I agree. And I think that part of it, about switching to having what we could probably call a recycling mindset, is to get out of the habit of just tossing things in the garbage can, and paying attention to what it is that we are actually throwing away.
And I found that as I have more awareness of that, then it’s not difficult to decide—I have a basket that’s just for paper, so that I don’t even have to sort my trash. This is the paper basket, and I have a bin that the city gives me, and I just put my recyclables that go to the city like a can—I have hardly any cans at all, but like a plastic tub from yogurt or something.
It just goes straight into the recycling bin, and I think that part of it [inaudible 00:16:43] with awareness and changing our habits.
We need to go to break again, but we’ll be right back. I’m talking with Brenda Pulley, Senior Vice President of Recycling from Keep America Beautiful. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and this is Toxic Free Talk Radio.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and my guest today is Brenda Pulley, Senior Vice President of Recycling for Keep America Beautiful. And we’re talking about how recycling can reduce your exposure to toxic chemicals.
Let’s see. What else should we talk about?
Let’s talk about recycling some other kinds of products that may be related to toxic exposures. One would be plastic, and another would be motor oil.
BRENDA PULLEY: Again, in each of those instances, there are many benefits to reusing and recycling them.
So let’s take our plastic bags. It took me several times, walking into that grocery store to remember to go back in my car and get that reusable bag. And it’s something I wanted to do. So it is something that we all have to work on and to be encouraged to.
And so where we can reduce and where we can recycle, I do want to encourage all your listeners, there are many benefits to doing it. And you’re pointing out one of the great aspects of how it really reduces emissions and toxics that we get exposed to every day.
So if you think of used oil, for years, it’s actually an issue I worked on when I worked for the U.S. House of Representatives.
People commonly would take used oil and pour it to kill certain kinds of weeds and things like that. And frankly, it’s one of the worst things that you can do because it leeches into the water system, which we drink.
And so the good news is over the last 20/30 years, there have been big messages for people that still—and there’s a large percentage of people that still recycle their—or I should say, change their own oils from their automobiles, from their lawnmowers, so those kinds of things, but at least there are many more places where they can take that used oil back, and get it recycled.
And in fact, it is now common for it to be re-refined into new used oil.
It’s taken years for that to happen, a lot of effort, but that is now used for used oil.
DEBRA: I think that that’s what we need to be changing our minds—the way we view this whole thing. There’s a wonderful, wonderful book—I don’t know if you’re familiar with it, called “Cradle to Cradle.” It’s been around for a long time, by William McDonough.
And in this book, he explains how nature, the environment, is just one huge recycling factory because everything, if you just think of it in terms of a tree, then in the spring, a tree grows new green leaves, and the leaves do their thing, photosynthesis and all these things.
And then in the fall, if you have a citrus tree, the leaves turn colors, and they drop off the tree.
But what happens next is that those leaves, when they go down into the ground, is that all the little microorganisms and the earthworms and everything come and break down the leaves into nutrients, which then go into the soil, which then feeds the tree to be able to produce a new crop of leaves.
That’s recycling.
BRENDA PULLEY: It absolutely is.
DEBRA: It’s inherent in nature. And so what William McDonough and his co-authors are saying that is that we should be doing like trees do, and that everything should be able to go back into the system and get recycled into a new product.
Now, we’re a long way from that. But if we start thinking in those terms, then we would have an abundance of materials to make into products instead of depleting our resources.
And certainly, recycling also includes, as you said, reuse and reduce, as well as recycle. That’s the first thing that we want to do. What’s even better than recycle is to reuse something, whether that’s—just like I cut up the backs of papers, if I print something out, and I don’t send it someplace off my computer, then I just put it in a pile, and if I need notepads to take notes, write down messages from a telephone or something, I just cut those pieces of paper in quarters, and I have a little basket that I put it in, and that’s how I make my notepads.
I don’t go to a store and buy a notepad. I can make the notepad. I reuse my jars.
All of these things, every time we reuse something in our houses, or any in our places of work, we’re, again, cutting back on the amount of energy even more because it takes zero energy to make a notepad out of a piece of paper that would have gone in the trash.
And then the more uses you get out of these things, the less and less energy we’re using, and the cleaner and cleaner our air will be, the cleaner our environment will be, just by taking these simple steps at home.
BRENDA PULLEY: And I would say that’s a great example. It’s all of us thinking about what we can do, what steps we can take, and knowing that those small steps cumulative help truly make a big difference.
So we talked about the energy benefits of recycling, and one more I would put out there are climate change related issues, such as carbon dioxide. Just the recycling that occurs today in the U.S. with that 34% recycling rate, believe or not, that recycling avoids emissions of greenhouse gases that are equivalent to taking 35-million cars off the road for a year.
So again, you’re talking about all the reduction that doesn’t have to happen, all the releases of various emissions and those kinds of things, [inaudible 00:23:07] air, in our water, or the land that don’t have to happen when we recycle and recycle properly.
DEBRA: I also want to mention, again, from Cradle to Cradle, that when people are designing products, it’s important to design them in a way that all the materials can be recycled, and for us, as consumers, to think about, are we buying products and packaging that can be recycled, for example.
I think, and you can correct me if I’m wrong, I think those aseptic boxes, those juice boxes, I think they can’t be recycled because there are layers, and they would have to be taken apart, the aluminum part, taken off the plastic part that something like a glass bottle, you just take the lid off, and you drink it or eat it or whatever, and then toss the glass bottle into the recycling.
But something like an aseptic package is very, very difficult to recycle. And if we start thinking about, at the beginning, how we’re going to recycle and reuse that material at the end, that’s something to consider. And I think that as we all start becoming more aware of these things that the world will change for the better.
This is just the right thing to be doing.
BRENDA PULLEY: You touched on so many points that I want to address, and one is, again, we have conversations all the time with manufacturers. They’re starting to look now more, what we call, a life cycle of a product. And your point about now, not only looking it in the life what happens, and what can be reclaimed and reused, but also, looking at the front end when designing that product or packaging to be thinking of what materials, what designs do you use, so they can be recycled at the end of life.
So there’s a plastic bottle out there right now that has full plastic wrap, but the recycling process can’t read and know where to put that recycled bottle. So the industry is working on how they can change that so the recycling process can, in fact, read it.
Or if you look at products, like you said, and there’s more and more effort looking at how can we better label products, so all of us when we go to purchase something, know that [inaudible 00:25:23].
DEBRA: I’m a big one about changing labeling, but we’ll talk about that more after the break.
BRENDA PULLEY: I’d love to.
DEBRA: I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. This is Toxic Free Talk Radio. And we’re talking about recycling with Brenda Pulley from Keep America Beautiful. We’ll be right back.
DEBRA: You’re listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd, and my guest today is Brenda Pulley from Keep America Beautiful. And we’re talking about recycling.
Brenda, you wanted to say something about labeling.
BRENDA PULLEY: I think you raised a couple of products that when you go to purchase, having that information about—one is, is it recyclable or not. But also, we know from surveys that individuals are interested in knowing if it has recycled content or not.
There’s so much that needs to go on a label, but like you, it’s a topic that truly interests me, so that consumers are aware when they go to purchase something, how to recycle it, and if it contains recycled contents, so we can close that loop you mentioned.
DEBRA: We do need to know about both ends. We need to know if it can be recycled. We need to know how much recycled content there is, so that we can make that choice.
I just think that consumers should have as much information as possible, and I think there are critical things, and I think the recycling information is one of those. The other thing is that I think we need to have a big revamp of how toxic products get labeled.
And I know that’s not a recycling issue here. But I think in terms of labeling, we just don’t have enough information. And I think that if the toxic ingredients of consumer products will really put on the labels, the people would stop buying them in droves because they would know instead of just looking at a label, and seeing nothing.
BRENDA PULLEY: You raise a very good point. Particularly, toxics, the way that you’re researching them and looking at them, it does get very complicated. But we do know some information that can and should [inaudible 00:27:39] be shared with the general public.
And frankly, we have some of that in recycling. It happens to be a complicated issue and very local issue. And so part of the task is encouraging people, so that they want to recycle, making it convenient, and then making the information for their unique community easily available for them, so they know how to recycle.
DEBRA: Yes, I totally agree. So I want to ask you a toxics question actually about recycled products because recycled content sounds like a good thing, and it is a good thing to recycle. But what if you’re recycling something that’s toxic?
Now, some of those recycled things, those plastic containers like, I think it’s #5 PVC. PVC is a toxic plastic. And you can recycle it, and it can be recycled any number of times. But it’s still a toxic plastic.
So do you have any comment about toxics in recycling like that? That’s just an example.
BRENDA PULLEY: I’m not as familiar, and I probably should be, with that one particularly. But I think also, as we talked earlier about manufactures looking at how products are made, and what goes in the products, that on their radar screen—I come, very specifically, from a recycling angle. You come in also from the toxic angle.
But if they can look at a host of those issues, and look at how to reduce things like toxicity factors that are going into them, or other factors that create all kinds of air emissions or other things, if they can reduce the use of those, and advocating for that, it’s an important thing to do.
So in my industry, it’s also not just about recyclability, but it’s also about light weighting, so it’s the use of less material to begin with.
So those are some steps that are being taken, but I know when you look at it particularly from a toxicity angle, are there ways to look at, can you avoid use of a certain material or not, and to continue to push for that and get it on the radar screen, I think it’s very important.
DEBRA: I think so too. And another one that falls in that category, for me, is recycled paper. What I want to say about this first is that sometimes, the issue is that we just don’t have enough information, as you said. And so my question that comes up about recycled paper often is, well, paper itself is just cellulose from trees. There’s nothing about paper that is a problem.
But then there are bleaches and there are inks. Some of those inks have lead in them, especially the colored ones. There are VOCs, all kinds of things in ink that is a big problem.
So then you recycle that paper, and what happens to those inks and metals and things? Are the recycling processes for paper set up to remove those kinds of things? I just don’t know the answer to that. And you may not either.
BRENDA PULLEY: But I actually have some familiarity with that. And you’re right. That is part of the process that we should think about. It’s not just the recycling benefits, but making sure the recycling process is also properly handled.
I can tell you that 20/30 years ago, it was not as much as it needed to be. And today, [inaudible 00:31:00] and emission controls, as I’ve said earlier on, air or water releases, or land releases—not that there’s not more to do, but I can tell you that there are many more controls than there were 20 and 30 years ago because we have had agencies, both the Federal EPA, and local governments, that now have looked and put in place controls on those kinds of things.
I used to represent the solvent recyclers. And so there were all kinds of air emission controls on them, as there should have been when it came to recycling, to make sure that those VOCs were captured.
DEBRA: Yes, they should be. And this is one of the things that, again, in Cradle to Cradle, they talk about that there may be a place for toxic chemicals. As much as it made me cringe when I read that, I have to agree with them.
That if toxic chemicals can be contained so that we’re not being exposed to them—and I think an example would be Freon or something, that would be used as a coolant. If it was contained, if it was collected, and if it was recycled, then use of that toxic chemical wouldn’t affect health or the environment, and it would be able to be used in a beneficial way but that’s not what we’re doing now.
So we just need to be, I think, as a culture, we need to be thinking about what kinds of steps do we need to be taking, so that we can all be living in a more responsible way, and have an agreement between consumers, regulators, manufacturers, and organizations, so that these things happen all down the line, whether we’re talking about recycling or reducing toxics, or any other issue that benefits our health and the environment.
It really is a cooperation between all those different levels, and that sometimes, like I know for example, I want to have chickens in my backyard, but I can’t because it’s illegal where I live. And astonishing as that sounds, I had some chickens. I [inaudible 00:33:00] and put chickens in my backyard, and the police came and took them away.
So that’s not a support of law. That law does not support life. But that’s what we need to be looking at, is are our regulations, our laws, our actions, are all the pieces of our society agreed and aligned on getting these kinds of things in that help all of us.
BRENDA PULLEY: An interesting point you raised because it is, how can we all work together and partner, so that we can figure out how to minimize or to find complimentary way. [inaudible 00:33:35] is generated, it can be positively used.
DEBRA: Yes, absolutely. Well, Brenda, it’s been a pleasure speaking with you. We only have just a few minutes left of the show. Are there any final words that you’d like to say? Anything that you haven’t said that you want to say?
BRENDA PULLEY: I appreciate the opportunity. One thing is—to reassure people that materials, it is worth recycling for all the reasons that we’ve talked about, whether it’s energy and environmental and the toxics reduced in our society, the waste that’s reduced. It really is worth recycling in so many instances.
And in those materials where it’s not yet, progress continues to be made, technology gets sophisticated more and more to where materials can be economically and environmentally safely recycled.
And so that would be my one thing of encouragement to share with you and your listeners, is the importance of, and that it’s beneficial too. You can really give new life to something when it is recycled.
And if they need more information, we did just launch a new ad campaign with the ad counsel, so if they can go to IWanToBeRecycled.org, and there’s information there on what can be recycled, and where to find recycling.
DEBRA: I went to that site. It’s really cute. There’s one about—there’s a picture of a plastic, a bench or something, and it says, “I want to be recycled.”
BRENDA PULLEY: Yes, it does. And that is to show people how it really is worth doing. You’re raising a set of unique issues about why it’s important. At the end of the day, there’s just a multitude of benefits to recycle, and we encourage people to do so.
DEBRA: There are. And do you want to give a plug for America Recycles Day? People can go to AmericaRecyclesDay.org to find out more about that, but there is anything special happening on the 15th?
BRENDA PULLEY: Listen, there are events across the country happening. That’s wonderful. It’s great to see all people that are very interested, and they want to share recycling in their community.
Literally, there are events going on across the country. From Washington D.C. tomorrow, we’re going to be on the National Mall, and down on the Business District, getting people caught in the act of recycling and inviting them to take the “I Recycle” pledge.
Or LA Live out in Los Angeles, there are going to be big events out there all day long with electronics collection, and at the game that night, there will be people getting caught recycling.
So literally, across the country, there are wonderful events occurring, and we encourage people to go to our site and take the America Recycles Day pledge, please.
DEBRA: Yes, I encourage that too. I think it’s a great idea.
Thanks so much, Brenda, and have a wonderful America Recycles Day and thanks for being on the show.
BRENDA PULLEY: Thank you, Debra. Keep up the good work. Thank you.
DEBRA: Thank you. You’ve been listening to Toxic Free Talk Radio. If you’d like to know more about this show, if you’d like to listen to other shows with other guests, you can go to ToxicFreeTalkRadio.com. Every Monday, I post the new guest for the week, so you could go there right now, and find out who else is going to be on this week.
And you could go to the archives and listen to—there’s more than a hundred shows archived there. You can also, across the top, there’s a menu where you can find out more about how to find non-toxic products. I’m Debra Lynn Dadd. This is Toxic Free Talk Radio.
Ceramic Glaze on Xtrema Cookware
Question from Mick
Dear Debra,
Thank you for this very useful website and your book. I have been using xtrema cook wear for the past two years. I was about to purchase an additional pot when I got interested in the ingredients that are using for the ceramic and the glaze. I could not find this information anywhere. It is true that their pots don’t leach metals but since it is such a highly sophisticated technology maybe there is another toxic chemical in this mix that is not tested for??? Since nobody knows what is in it, then nobody actually know what to test for. They tested for metal leaching but that was kind of pointless since they don’t use metal in the manufacturing. So while it is a good marketing tool, it would have been more useful to the consumer if they disclosed what is the material that they are using and then provide tests that these materials are not leaching to the food. Did anybody see the list of material that they are using and the method they use to manufacture? Maybe I didn’t look well?
Debra’s Answer
Here is the response I received from Rich Bergstrom, Founder of Ceramcor, the makers of Xtrema:
I would also add that after more than thirty years researching products I have found that the integrity of the company makes a big difference. There are those who are dedicated to things being toxic free and those who are just making claims. Rich is dedicated to making a healthy product and has decades of experience in the industry. So he knows what to do. I’ve been using his cookware for several years with no ill effects or concerns. In fact, I just bought their new 10 quart pot so I can finally make soup in a ceramic pot.
I’ve also studied glazes and lead and cadmium are the two ingredients to be concerned about. But as Rich says, if there are no added metals in their glaze, no synthetic chemicals and no synthetic materials, it isn’t toxic.
Finishes on Faucets and Drawer Pulls
Question from Tara
We are putting in a new kitchen faucet and new cabinet pulls. Do you have any advice on the best finish for these items? I will be handling the faucet and the door pulls often while handling food so I want to be sure nothing toxic will rub off onto my hands. I thought stainless would be the safest, but for the door pulls, I can only find a nickel finish in the size we need. For the faucet, I found a stainless faucet from Moen and one from Delta, but Moen’s faucet has a Spot Resist finish and the Delta faucet has a Brilliance Finish. Moen’s website didn’t have much on the Spot Resist finish, but Delta’s Brilliance Finish said they embed molecules deep into the finish through a process that uses various gasses and zirconium. Would I be better off going with a chrome finish for the faucets? The chrome faucets don’t seem to have these special finishes.
Thank you so much for your advice!
Debra’s Answer
I am at a loss at the moment as to how to respond to this.
Let me just tell you my thought process.
When I first became aware of things toxic, it was about products that offgassed toxic fumes into the air. And so I was just looking for products that didn’t offgas.
It wasn’t until only a few years ago that I began to be aware of metals, their dangers, and exposures.
While I don’t wear costume jewelry because the nickel gives me skin rashes, all my faucets are brushed nickel. I have had no problem with them at all.
Now, because lead can be released through touch and absorbed through the skin, I am now questioning other metals. OK I just looked it up. “Nickel is poorly absorbed through the skin.” If you want to know about other metals, search for “[name of metal] skin absorption.”