How safe is the furniture in your home? Studies conducted by the Environmental Working Group revealed humans can and often do carry toxic chemicals in their bodies, linked to household items treated with flame retardant.
Gov. Jerry Brown’s office is attempting to revise the state’s 40-year-old flammability standards by mandating that furniture, for example, no longer has to be coated with a flame retardant.
“Toxic flame retardants are found in everything from high chairs to couches and a growing body of evidence suggests that these chemicals harm human health and the environment,” Brown stated in a news release.
According to a 2008 EWG study, children have some of the highest levels of the flame-retardant chemicals in their bodies. Toddlers often test three times higher for the chemical levels than their parents.
Scientists with the California Environmental Protection Agency found women have higher levels of the chemicals in their breast tissue than women in other states and countries.
Russ Heimerick, with the Department of Consumer Affairs, said Thursday that the bureau that reviews flammability standards is aiming to eliminate the need for flame-retardant chemicals by changing the way manufacturers develop their products.
“You can construct, through the use of barriers … textiles that are extremely flame resistant by virtue of the kind of fabric you’re using and the weave of that fabric,” Heimerick said.
He noted the state’s flammability guidelines were developed before smoke detectors and carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide detectors were used in households.
Heimerick said the state will revise its flammability tests to a smolder-only test, rather than an open flame test, meaning if a material can resist catching flame when exposed to a smoldering cigarette, it will be approved as safe. He cited lit cigarettes as the leading cause of most house fires.
Oftentimes, foam cushions underneath couch and seat covers are treated with flame retardants. The chemicals don’t always bind to the fibers of the foam or fabric they were used on, causing them to leach out into the environment and human skin, according to the EPA.
Fire Battalion Chief Mike Snow of Yucca Valley said flame retardants aren’t burn-proof.
“Flame retardant materials don’t prevent the fire. What they’re designed to do is inhibit the burning process, in other words, slow it down, make the materials a little more difficult to catch fire than they would if they were untreated,” Snow explained.
The anti-flame liquids are known risks to firefighters, who inhale a myriad of chemicals each time they enter a burning home.
Investigations on behalf of the Chicago Tribune and Environmental Health News revealed that chemical companies, some working through groups like Citizens for Fire Safety, pumped millions of dollars into stopping legislation to regulate flame retardants.
In 2006, the EPA phased out common flame-retardant chemicals called polybrominated diphenylethers from U.S. production and from imported products. Similar chemicals, like chlorinated tris, remain in most flame-retardant treatments.
The EPA has linked such chemicals to liver toxicity, thyroid toxicity and neurodevelopmental toxicity.
Brown’s release cites “numerous studies,” including one in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, that shows firefighters have much higher risk of cancer than the general population.
The reason, the study concluded, was that firefighters inhale elevated levels of toxic chemicals like those used in flame retardants.
“Anything that’s manufactured out there nowadays in the chemical world has a potential side effect,” Snow said. “Even though we wear our protective firefighting gear and have our respirators, those chemicals can still be absorbed through the skin and may be hazardous as far as a carcinogen is concerned.”
Snow said the burden is on consumers to know what they are bringing into their home.
He added decor items and seasonal items like Christmas trees are often treated with flame retardants.