Question from Lois

We have found case bearing clothes moths in our home. They might be the carpet variety. I think they came in on mover’s cloths when we had some furniture delivered although I am not sure. Do you have any suggestions on how to get rid of them. We have vacuumed constantly and put lavender bags in closets. I still pick up the case stage on the floor or walls. I am recovering from breast cancel and dread using chemicals. Any thoughts?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Debra’s Answer

Here is a pretty thorough writeup about controlling clothese moths without toxic pesticides:

Evergreen Pest Control: Clothes Moths

Add Comment

Question from Debra’s Answer:

I am looking to buy a baby crib.

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

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

So I have two questions:

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

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

Debra’s Answer

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

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

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

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

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

Add Comment

Press release

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

About the Public Health Institute

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

Add Comment

Question from Mary

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

Debra’s Answer

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

Add Comment

Question from Janet Scarth

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

Debra’s Answer

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

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

Readers, any suggestions?

You may have seen the commercial on TV for SC Johnson products where they say they are disclosing all their ingredients for products like Windex, Glade, Pledge and more.

I went to their website and easily found this information. I just want to discuss it a bit because I think it’s a great idea and want to encourage more major manufacturers to do the same.

A whole section of their website is devoted to “What’s Inside SC Johnson: A Cloer Look at the Ingredients Inside Our Products.”

Start at Find a Product By Brand. I chose Windex and then Windex Original Glass Cleaner.

Each individual product page has a list of ingredients organized by function. Better yet, you can click on each ingredient and you will get a popup page that tells you what the ingredient is and what it does, plus links to information from various sources that give safety and toxicity data, so you can make your own decision as a consumer. Sources include places like Skin Deep, International Fragrance Association, FDA, EPA, TOXNET, and others. (After looking at a few products, I noticed the same links were on all ingredients, but they don’t point to the ingredient on that site, only to the site itself, you have to search for the ingredient. I would prefer to see a synopsis of the data from these sources on one page).

SC Johnson has their own Fragrance Palette, a list of ingredients they use to formulate their “secret recipe” fragrances. While they don’t specify the ingredients used in each fragrance in their ingredients list, if you see an ingredient on the Fragrance Palette list that you are concerned about, you can call their 800 number and they can “help you with specific product choices.” While their fragrance palette has more than 1500 ingredients, they also specifically list ingredients they don’t use, like formaldehyde and phthalates and “any known carcinogens, mutagens or reproductive toxins listed by the U.S. National Toxicology Program, the European Union’s REACH and Substances of Very High Concern programs, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Carcinogens, or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.”

And, they also include the MSDS at the bottom of the page.

Great resource!

Did it make me decide to use their products? NO.

But at least I can evaluate them more easily than before. And at least they show what toxic chemicals are NOT in the products as well.

I appreciate the thoroughness of disclosure of ingredients. What is still lacking is an easy at-a-glance summary of the toxicity or safety of those ingredients.

But kudos to SC Johnson for a step in the right direction.