1) It's important to note that the article title is actually: Flame retardant may cause hyperthyroidism in cats
2) Of note, they determined that a p-value of <0.10 was considered statistically significant, and of the studied compounds TDCIPP was the only one with significant odds ratio of exposure being associated with hyperthyroidism in cats (1.36, p value = 0.059).
3) Look. Organophosphates are probably one of those things that we should continue studying in detail. They seem more trouble than they're worth. But I don't think I'd hang my hat on this study alone.
The article shows that a flame-retardent increases risk of autoimmune condition with 94% confidence.
And you downplay it because... it's less than 95% confident? (by the way, the paper finds its main finding at p < .02)
To my mind, a major post-mortem is necessary, government funded. How many other flame-retardents cause health issues? How did they get past approval?
In the meantime, an immediate injunction against flame-retardent laws should be passed (numerous tobacco-lobbied laws REQUIRE retardents), and all used retardents should be listed on the labels of all products.
I expect the people in charge of public health to be as anal about their job as I am about mine.
> and of the studied compounds TDCIPP was the only one with significant odds ratio of exposure being associated with hyperthyroidism in cats (1.36, p value = 0.059).
Am I correct in reading that they tested 24 different compounds (or compound groups)?
Its insane. I always hear that level of chemical is so low it has no negative effect on a person. But you add up all the low levels of toxic chemicals and they add up to something significant! Pesticides, detergents, personal products such as perfumes, hair dye, make-up.. oh gosh. The list goes on. People are drenching themselves in chemicals then take pills to mask the effects.
And its expensive to avoid these things, my family of three spend about 2K per month on food alone trying to eat healthy. Nothing extravagant, fruits, vegetables, and organic when it matters. Sure we could live on $400 with highly processed or fast food... but you feel terrible afterword. The longer you stay away from them the more sensitive you are to toxic food.
I always see Americans with these crazy quotes for healthy food. I'm very curious what you spend the 2k on.
Here are some prices for central Europe. Kg of rice is 1 euro. Kg of oats is 1 euro. Potatoes and other tubers and root vegetables, even less. Cherry tomatoes, maybe 4 euros per kg. Lentils, peas, chickpeas less than 2 euros per kg. Whole chicken maybe 4 euros per kg. Chicken breasts are like 7 euros per kg if you don't want to bother with cutting it up. I think meat in general is cheaper in the USA (but quality may differ).
Do you guys eat a literal ton of vegetables a month, or do we have different ideas of what healthy food refers to?
> Its insane. I always hear that level of chemical is so low it has no negative effect on a person.
At some point lead in gas was "safe", lead in paint was "safe", asbestos was "safe". Safety is an afterthought, and in some cases I'd bet my left nut that the long term negative effects are even desirable : cause a disease, sell the cure, profit
The lobbying efforts of the manufacturers of the chemicals are a major contributor:
The legislators wrote that the “worst tactics outlined in the Chicago Tribune series — which we each saw some of firsthand in our states — included: deliberately misrepresenting the science around flame retardant chemicals relating to both their effectiveness and their health risks; employing an expert witness who repeatedly invoked a phony story of a child dying in a fire in order to justify flame retardant mandates; creating a front group called ‘Citizens for Fire Safety’ to counter the opposition to flame retardants among firefighters and health organizations; and using racial profiling to mislead community leaders about the impacts of toxic flame retardant chemicals.”
...
These powerful industries distorted science in ways that overstated the benefits of the chemicals, created a phony consumer watchdog group that stoked the public's fear of fire and helped organize and steer an association of top fire officials that spent more than a decade campaigning for their cause.
> The cats wore the tags for a week and owners filled out a questionnaire. Once collected, the tags went through a process to extract the chemicals by soaking them in a solvent.
Do we use these tags for humans? Would be cool to see what sort of chemical exposure we get.
The next paragraph mentions human equivalent items:
> The feline passive samplers—similar to a rabies tag—are produced out of the same material used in the silicone wrist bands invented in Anderson's lab for measuring exposure to environmental chemicals in humans, including after Hurricane Harvey in Houston in 2017.
You can use something such as awair (https://www.getawair.com/) to track your indoor air quality (voc's, etc.).
In the first few weeks of owning one we realized if we leave our bedroom door open the CO2 is much lower while we sleep. Our quality of sleep has improved.
It’s a public health menace that has also been implicated with childhood maladies. There’s some weak links to autism and allergies. Of course most people will dismiss this as conspiracy theory, but eventually the science will catch up.
Seem alike rooting out actually toxic substances, like leaded gasoline, is so important. Kudos to the experimenter here for the clever experimental design (cat collars that absorb chemicals for later study).
The title of the article doesn’t says that hyperthyroidism is 20x times higher because of flame retardants. I’m not sure if the article’s title was changed, or edited by the OP.
The odds ratios for the levels of thyroid hormone in cats exposed to the compounds detected are no higher than 1.61x times higher.
The 20x increase is an increase over time, and isn’t explained by the paper or the article.
I wonder what fraction of modern disease, and what conditions, are due to prolonged low-level exposure to random slightly toxic chemicals. I wouldn’t be surprised if we found out that relatively recently diagnosed conditions like autism are the result of some random seemingly innocuous product like shampoo detergent or sunscreen or something.
Bruce Ames, at the University of California, devised a method of screening for mutagens, using bacteria. One of his graduate students using the technique found that the flame retardants in children's pajamas and bedding were powerful mutagens, and were probably causing cancer. That event made Ames a celebrity, and in the 1980s he went on a lecture tour supported by the American Cancer Society. His lectures reflected the doctrine of the A.C.S., that industrial chemicals aren't responsible for cancer, but that individual actions, such as smoking or dietary choices, are the main causes of cancer. He used a fraudulently "age adjusted" graph of cancer mortality, that falsely showed that mortality from all types of cancer except lung cancer had leveled off after the A.C.S. came into existence. He described tests in which he had compared DDT to extracts of food herbs, and found DDT to be less mutagenic than several of the most commonly used flavoring herbs. His message, which was eagerly received by his audience of chemistry and biology professors, was that we should not worry about environmental pollution, because it's not as harmful as the things that we do to ourselves.
Can fire retardants be filtered by commercial off-the-shelf Air Filters?
If yes what type of tech or air filter type would filter these? For the sake of 'neutrality' would prefer a discussion focused on the working principle of the filter tech instead of just casual 'product naming'.
I think you have to have one that can capture VCOs, which puts you into expensive, but still considered normal consumer (as opposed to professional/enterprise/commercial/etc), products.
So, I'd suggest offhand to look at IQAir and Austin Air products to see if any of them state they can grab OPFRs. Their bottom level products probably won't.
If you own your residence, and live somewhere with good air quality most of the year, forget about air filtering and go for air changeovers. Read about ERV/HRV.
Activated carbon filters are inexpensive and remove VOCs but in my experience not terribly quickly.
> Many furniture manufacturers are no longer using flame retardants, thanks to an update to California's furniture flammability standard, TB117-2013. Most furniture that meets this standard will also include a label stating whether the product contains flame retardants.
Basically look at the tag if it was manufactured recently.
In general: be prepared to pay significantly more for natural fibres and fillings.
If you're in the UK, it's harder than that. You either find one of a handful of small companies that are prepared to interpret the law more leniently, or you import from somewhere else in the EU.
These chemicals are also in carpets, and here you're in a worse bind, because the natural fibre alternatives are generally treated against insects and/or impossible to properly clean.
This website (which I'm not sure strikes the most helpful tone) has more on the UK situation: http://www.toxicsofa.com/
In the SF Bay Area, we found a company selling natural latex mattresses, no flame retardants added. The showroom was on University Avenue in Palo Alto, so the price was high (at least $3K for a queen). But the factory was in Marin, so they could do custom sizes, and then we asked about replacing all our couch cushions, and we could special order those too. So we replaced all our mattresses and couch and chair cushions with natural latex. For covering and waterproofing, we also bought a natural wool mattress cover.
Sorry, I don’t remember the names of the businesses, but this was 10 years ago when the flame retardants were mandatory for synthetic materials. I don’t even know if they are still in business.
For chairs that had built in padding, we bought 1960s and 70s furniture from thrift stores with the hope this was before flame retardants were in use. We did all this after my partner and our female cat developed Hashimito’s, had years of low energy, and needed daily thyroid medication.
Any furniture we buy we always leave it out in the sun as long as possible to off-gas (release toxins) then leave it in the garage for a few weeks to further loose that new 'furniture' smell of chemical.
We've been introducing new flame retardants, discovering they are toxic, rinse, repeat on a 10-year cadence since something like the 70's. We're just about coming due for the next wave of discovery.
[+] [-] epmaybe|5 years ago|reply
1) It's important to note that the article title is actually: Flame retardant may cause hyperthyroidism in cats
2) Of note, they determined that a p-value of <0.10 was considered statistically significant, and of the studied compounds TDCIPP was the only one with significant odds ratio of exposure being associated with hyperthyroidism in cats (1.36, p value = 0.059).
3) Look. Organophosphates are probably one of those things that we should continue studying in detail. They seem more trouble than they're worth. But I don't think I'd hang my hat on this study alone.
[+] [-] zug_zug|5 years ago|reply
The article shows that a flame-retardent increases risk of autoimmune condition with 94% confidence.
And you downplay it because... it's less than 95% confident? (by the way, the paper finds its main finding at p < .02)
To my mind, a major post-mortem is necessary, government funded. How many other flame-retardents cause health issues? How did they get past approval?
In the meantime, an immediate injunction against flame-retardent laws should be passed (numerous tobacco-lobbied laws REQUIRE retardents), and all used retardents should be listed on the labels of all products.
I expect the people in charge of public health to be as anal about their job as I am about mine.
[+] [-] sellyme|5 years ago|reply
Am I correct in reading that they tested 24 different compounds (or compound groups)?
Not often you see such a faithful recreation of https://xkcd.com/882/
[+] [-] dnndevem|5 years ago|reply
And its expensive to avoid these things, my family of three spend about 2K per month on food alone trying to eat healthy. Nothing extravagant, fruits, vegetables, and organic when it matters. Sure we could live on $400 with highly processed or fast food... but you feel terrible afterword. The longer you stay away from them the more sensitive you are to toxic food.
[+] [-] literallycancer|5 years ago|reply
Here are some prices for central Europe. Kg of rice is 1 euro. Kg of oats is 1 euro. Potatoes and other tubers and root vegetables, even less. Cherry tomatoes, maybe 4 euros per kg. Lentils, peas, chickpeas less than 2 euros per kg. Whole chicken maybe 4 euros per kg. Chicken breasts are like 7 euros per kg if you don't want to bother with cutting it up. I think meat in general is cheaper in the USA (but quality may differ).
Do you guys eat a literal ton of vegetables a month, or do we have different ideas of what healthy food refers to?
[+] [-] lm28469|5 years ago|reply
At some point lead in gas was "safe", lead in paint was "safe", asbestos was "safe". Safety is an afterthought, and in some cases I'd bet my left nut that the long term negative effects are even desirable : cause a disease, sell the cure, profit
[+] [-] jrmg|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] waheoo|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PaywallBuster|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ddeck|5 years ago|reply
The legislators wrote that the “worst tactics outlined in the Chicago Tribune series — which we each saw some of firsthand in our states — included: deliberately misrepresenting the science around flame retardant chemicals relating to both their effectiveness and their health risks; employing an expert witness who repeatedly invoked a phony story of a child dying in a fire in order to justify flame retardant mandates; creating a front group called ‘Citizens for Fire Safety’ to counter the opposition to flame retardants among firefighters and health organizations; and using racial profiling to mislead community leaders about the impacts of toxic flame retardant chemicals.”
...
These powerful industries distorted science in ways that overstated the benefits of the chemicals, created a phony consumer watchdog group that stoked the public's fear of fire and helped organize and steer an association of top fire officials that spent more than a decade campaigning for their cause.
http://media.apps.chicagotribune.com/flames/index.html
[+] [-] rlt|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dzhiurgis|5 years ago|reply
Do we use these tags for humans? Would be cool to see what sort of chemical exposure we get.
[+] [-] finger|5 years ago|reply
> The feline passive samplers—similar to a rabies tag—are produced out of the same material used in the silicone wrist bands invented in Anderson's lab for measuring exposure to environmental chemicals in humans, including after Hurricane Harvey in Houston in 2017.
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] dnndevem|5 years ago|reply
In the first few weeks of owning one we realized if we leave our bedroom door open the CO2 is much lower while we sleep. Our quality of sleep has improved.
[+] [-] cm2012|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] savemefromchem|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cm2012|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mr_toad|5 years ago|reply
The odds ratios for the levels of thyroid hormone in cats exposed to the compounds detected are no higher than 1.61x times higher.
The 20x increase is an increase over time, and isn’t explained by the paper or the article.
[+] [-] centimeter|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hourislate|5 years ago|reply
-Ray Peat
[+] [-] lobster45|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DoingIsLearning|5 years ago|reply
Can fire retardants be filtered by commercial off-the-shelf Air Filters?
If yes what type of tech or air filter type would filter these? For the sake of 'neutrality' would prefer a discussion focused on the working principle of the filter tech instead of just casual 'product naming'.
[+] [-] DiabloD3|5 years ago|reply
I think you have to have one that can capture VCOs, which puts you into expensive, but still considered normal consumer (as opposed to professional/enterprise/commercial/etc), products.
So, I'd suggest offhand to look at IQAir and Austin Air products to see if any of them state they can grab OPFRs. Their bottom level products probably won't.
[+] [-] ip26|5 years ago|reply
Activated carbon filters are inexpensive and remove VOCs but in my experience not terribly quickly.
[+] [-] pwarner|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ed25519FUUU|5 years ago|reply
Basically look at the tag if it was manufactured recently.
https://goop.com/wellness/detox/flame-retardants-furniture/
[+] [-] gmac|5 years ago|reply
If you're in the UK, it's harder than that. You either find one of a handful of small companies that are prepared to interpret the law more leniently, or you import from somewhere else in the EU.
These chemicals are also in carpets, and here you're in a worse bind, because the natural fibre alternatives are generally treated against insects and/or impossible to properly clean.
This website (which I'm not sure strikes the most helpful tone) has more on the UK situation: http://www.toxicsofa.com/
[+] [-] ip26|5 years ago|reply
In other words, wood, wool, and tight weave cotton are your new friends.
[+] [-] 205guy|5 years ago|reply
Sorry, I don’t remember the names of the businesses, but this was 10 years ago when the flame retardants were mandatory for synthetic materials. I don’t even know if they are still in business.
For chairs that had built in padding, we bought 1960s and 70s furniture from thrift stores with the hope this was before flame retardants were in use. We did all this after my partner and our female cat developed Hashimito’s, had years of low energy, and needed daily thyroid medication.
[+] [-] coding123|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dnndevem|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Bud|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notmadnomad|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] remote_phone|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gnicholas|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ip26|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KennethPT|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cm2012|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ip26|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Gustomaximus|5 years ago|reply
Does anyone know if leather avoids/reduces these kind of chemicals?
[+] [-] laretluval|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 18af219e|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notmadnomad|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]