Reply to Massive paranoia about flame retardants in baby gear and hubby is angry! HELP!!

Forum Index » Expectant and Postpartum Moms

Reply to "Massive paranoia about flame retardants in baby gear and hubby is angry! HELP!!"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]
Maybe babies don't spend all their time in bouncers and swings. However, if you check all your baby staff, most of it has tags that states that the product confirms to California flammability law 117. That, most often than not, implies that the product was treated with fire retardant chemicals. Mattresses, bouncers, swings, playards, baby gyms, car seats, some baby carriers, even nursing pillows have these tags these days. So at the end of the day, whatever baby touches does contain chemical fire retardants. Because of the lower body mass and thinner, more absorbent skin, babies are much more vulnerable than adults, and, yet, they are the ones exposed the most. No, I'm just curious, have anybody heard of somebody catching on fire while pushing a stroller down the street? Why strollers need to be fire retardant by law? It seems so illogical.

Oh, it's been found that sometimes up 12% of a baby product is fire retardants. Average sofa may contain 5 pounds of such chemicals or more. These chemicals are not bond to material and tend to escape into the air or skin. Actually, my son's nanny used to be an engineer in her home country and participated in resin materials studies. Basically she dealt with fireproofing materials. She told me that a huge amount of fire retardant chemicals needs to be used to increase material's fire resistance just slightly. Just out of curiosity, I contacted a couple of companies regarding this issue. All they said was, yes their products are fire resistant, but they cannot say which chemicals were used... They are not required by law to disclose what chemicals they use to meet this California flammability laws.

Unfortunately, if we live in a different state it doesn't that we are safe. Manufacturers tend to go by the state with strictest laws when they make a product. They don't want to lose huge market in California, and they don't want to bother making different products for different states. At the end, all US babies and people get polluted with fire retardants because of California laws. Here is another tidbit on FRs. Quite a few years ago fire retardant called Tris was banned from children sleepwear, because it was proven that chemical changes DNA. Lately, this chemical has been used heavily in furniture due to tightened, in the last years, California laws.

There is an interesting detail about US policy about chemicals, by the way. In Europe, manufacturers have to prove that chemical is relatively safe for consumer before adding it to consumer products. In US,  manufacturers do not face such a requirement. EPA and consumers themselves have to prove that the chemical is harmful. It seems a bit backwards. How many people have to suffer serious illness before enough data can be gathered to ban the chemical? That doesn't sound right. I mean, really, if anyone digs any deeper than normal life requires, it's easy to see how one can get overwhelmed at first with some unpleasant facts.

Somebody said it reminds germ paranoia. I wouldn't put germs and chemicals in one basket, honestly. It's two very different things. No studies came out yet to say that lead is actually good for our health... And even germs are created equally. Nobody wants to get resistant to antibiotics E-Coli or salmonella. Nobody wants to get German measles either, and that's why we get vaccinated.

Bottom line, there are lot of issues in the world, environment, poverty; the list is endless. Each of us chooses what to care about or not to care at all, which is fine too. I think it's good when people are passionate about something, since it's passionate people who make a change in this world (though, do admit not all passions are good ones or expressed in a healthy way). It's probably not right to shut people down just because we don't like their level of involvement with something. Yes, there are some over the top cases, but usually it's hard to judge something like that from only one post. Besides, the person maybe coming from the point of greater knowledge about an issue than us. Finally, we do need to keep improving, and making positive changes when it's possible, that's how progress happens. Balance is a good thing too, as well as being patient with other people's opinions. I prefer the "live and learn" attitude to life. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics