We are well into the season for colds and coughs; our family has already suffered from one bout with a nasty cold. I thus wanted to share some remedies that gave us relief from some of our symptoms.
My daughter is still at an age where it is not safe to give her over the counter (OTC) cold and cough medications. The FDA strongly recommends that children under 2 not be given OTC cough and cold products at all. It is still studying the safety of these products for kids ages 2 to 11, and thus has not issued a recommendation regarding kids in this age group. In addition to potentially dangerous drugs, most conventional cough and cold products for kids also contain things like artificial dyes, artificial sweeteners and harmful preservatives that I want to avoid.
We had good results from two chest rub products that we tried. My daughter was able to sleep through the night despite having a persistent cough during the day with each of these products. Badger Aromatic Chest Rub is certified organic and contains essential oils of eucalyptus, peppermint, rosemary and tea tree in an olive oil and beeswax base (it smells really good).
We also tried another rub that worked well for her: Maty's All Natural Baby Chest Rub (even though she is no longer a baby). This also contains essential oils, including eucalyptus, lavender and chamomile, in a sunflower and coconut oil base. Maty's also makes an All Natural Vapor Rub to be used by anyone age 2 and up.
I purchased the Badger Chest Rub at Whole Foods and the Maty's at the South Hills Giant Eagle Market District.
It is important to me that these ointments don't contain the potentially harmful ingredients found in more popular products, such as Vicks VapoRub. The camphor in the Vicks product can be toxic if it is absorbed through mucous membranes or broken skin. VapoRub also contains turpentine oil, which is not safe for children or people with lung problems, including asthma. Finally, it also contains petrolatum, a petroleum product which I prefer to avoid.
In addition to these products, I also gave her teaspoons of honey to mitigate her cough. Several studies (including this one, and one here) have demonstrated that, in addition to soothing a sore throat, honey may be an effective cough suppressant. Remember: never give honey to infants under one year of age; in rare cases it can cause infantile botulism.
The combination of one of the above chest rubs and honey worked really well for us. What do you use to treat your family's colds?
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Monday, October 22, 2012
Controlling Stink Bugs Safely
They're
back. As reported in this recent article in the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette, our area is seeing an increase in stink bug activity this
fall. We are experiencing this increase at my house--a large number
of these annoying creatures are turning up inside.
Although
stink bugs are completely harmless to people and pets, the article reports that
a local pest control company is currently hard at work spraying the outside of houses
with pesticides! An employee of the pest control company is quoted in the
article: "They don't pose any threat, but still people don't want them .
. . They are ugly."
Yes,
they're ugly, but it makes absolutely no sense to spray your home, outside or
inside, with hazardous pesticides in an attempt to control these harmless bugs.
Pesticides are poisonous. The pesticides sprayed on the exterior of homes to
control stink bugs, synthetic pyrethroids (click on link to PDF), are toxic to people and the
environment. What's more, according to this fact sheet from the Penn State Cooperative Extension, these pesticides
offer, at best "minor relief," as they "may not kill the insects
much beyond several days or a week."
In addition,
the Penn State Department of Entomology advises against the use of pesticides
inside the house after stink bugs have entered the structure. Pesticides used
indoors, such as insecticidal dust, spray insecticides and aerosol-type
foggers, are not effective at controlling stink bugs. They may even cause
infestations of carpet beetles (they feed on dead stink bugs) which will then
attack woolens, dry goods and other natural products in your home.
So,
what is the best way to control these pests? The best way to keep them from
entering your home in the first place is to seal all cracks in your home
through which stink bugs might enter, and to repair any damaged door and window
screens. If bugs are entering your home, try to locate interior openings where
they are coming in. Usually these will be openings such as cracks in
baseboards, around window and door trim, and around exhaust fans or ceiling
lights. These entry points need to be sealed. Live and dead bugs can be
removed with a vacuum cleaner. But, the above fact sheet warns, "the vacuum
may acquire the smell of stink bugs for a period of time."
Finally,
this video from the University of
Maryland Extension provides a lot of information about keeping stink bugs out
of your house and getting rid of them if they do get in (although I think I
yelled "heck, no" out loud at my computer when the presenter suggests putting
stink bugs that you've collected with a vacuum cleaner in your freezer to kill them).
Sunday, October 7, 2012
Chloramine in our Water
If you are a customer of Pennsylvania American Water (PAW) living in Washington County or southern Allegheny County, since March of this year your water has been disinfected using chloramine. Perhaps like me you are wondering why PAW switched from chlorine to chloramine for disinfection, and if there are any reasons to be concerned about the use of chloramine in the water flowing into my home and from my faucets.
WHY PAW SWITCHED FROM CHLORINE TO CHLORAMINE
Chlorine creates toxic disinfection byproducts (DBPs) when it reacts with certain chemicals and organic matter in water. These DBPs have been linked to cancers and birth defects.
One of the class of chemicals with which chlorine reacts to create dangerous DBPs are called bromides. In 2010 and 2011 the Monongahela river, from which PAW draws its water supply, was found to have elevated levels of bromides, threatening the safety of our drinking water. Bromides get into our rivers from various sources, including power plant, conventional oil and gas drilling wastewater, and Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater discharges.
From 2008 until the spring of 2011, natural gas drilling companies brought millions of barrels of chemically tainted shale drilling wastewater to municipal water treatment plants. These plants, which were not equipped to properly treat this wastewater, discharge directly into the rivers from which hundreds of thousands of us get our drinking water. This practice did not stop until the state Department of Environmental Protection asked the drilling companies to voluntarily stop it. Nevertheless, at the end of 2011 bromide levels remained high in our rivers. Nobody appears to have a definitive answer as to why levels remain elevated; one possibility seems to be that wastewater from power plants, as well as from conventional oil and gas drilling (all of which contain bromides) is still being discharged into our rivers.
The combination of chlorine disinfection and elevated bromide levels caused the water supplied to many western Pennsylvania homes to exceed permitted levels of certain DBPs. Specifically, in 2011 some samples of the drinking water that PAW supplied to its customers exceeded the maximum allowable levels of some of these DBPs by nearly 30%. (You can access the 2011 Water Quality Report for the Pittsburgh, McMurray, Mon-Valley service area here). In previous years, some samples contained nearly double the maximum allowable levels of these toxic substances.
PAW made the switch from chlorine to chloramine in order to comply with new, stricter federal regulations, to go into effect this year, governing levels of chlorine DBPs in drinking water. Chloramine produces lower levels of certain DBPs regulated by the EPA.
ISSUES RAISED BY THE USE OF CHLORAMINE
Unregulated Disinfection Byproducts
However, "[c]ompared to water treated with chlorine, water treated with monochloramine may contain higher concentrations of unregulated disinfection byproducts." This is from the EPA's statement on Chloramines in Drinking Water. In other words, our water may now contain different, even more dangerous DBPs that are simply not monitored and not regulated by the EPA. The best the EPA can give us is that it and other organizations are conducting research into potentially dangerous but currently unregulated DBPs.
The EPA acknowledges that the use of chloramine with source waters with high bromide, high iodide or high total organic matter may lead to the formation of unregulated disinfection byproducts such as iodoacids and nitrosamines.
Studies have shown that chloramine can indeed react with bromides, iodides and organic matter to create DBPs that are highly toxic, yet are not regulated by the EPA. These unregulated DBPs include iodoacids, discovered in water treated with chloramines in a 2004 study. One of the scientists conducting that study said iodoacids "may be the most toxic family of DBPs to date." He went on to note that the study demonstrated that switching from chlorine to chloramines " . . . may be opening a Pandora's box of new DBPs, and these new DBPs may be much more toxic, by orders of magnitude, than the regulated ones we are trying to avoid."
Another chloramine DBP of concern is NDMA (it is also a chemical used in the manufacture of rocket fuels). NDMA is a nitrosamine and is classsified by the EPA as a probable human carcinogen. The World Health Organization, on the other hand, says it is "clearly carcinogenic." But even though NDMA is clearly dangerous, and has been detected in our drinking water, the EPA does not regulate it, so it is permitted in our drinking water at any concentration.
Leaching of Lead
The EPA acknowledges that changes in water chemistry from chloramine use may impact lead levels in water. Chloramines can make water more corrosive, which can lead to pipe corrosion (in the distribution system or in the home) and an increase in lead levels in water. This happened when Washington, D.C. switched from chlorine to chloramine in 2001, causing lead to leach from aging pipes into drinking water. Between 2001 and 2004 tens of thousands of children were exposed to extremely high lead levels; in some homes lead levels in the water were hundreds of times higher than the amount the federal government considers a level of concern. Blood tests revealed that hundreds of young children had potentially damaging amounts of lead in their blood.
Closer to home, West View began using chloramine in its water in 2009. Testing in 2010 revealed high lead levels in water supplied to older homes with lead pipes. West View stopped using chloramines in 2010, but started using it again this year.
As my house was built in the 1930's, I am extremely concerned about the possibility of chloramine causing lead to leach into our water. PAW states that it practices "corrosion control" at its water treatment facilities. However, this is a complex science and the details of all the related environmental chemistry are not fully understood.
Removing Chloramine from Your Water
So, are there ways to remove chloramine and its dangerous byproducts from our water? Chloramine is not easy to remove from water; it is much more difficult to remove than chlorine. According to the EPA you cannot remove chloramine from water by boiling it, allowing it to sit at room temperature, or by using a reverse osmosis filter.
While it appears that some products claim to remove chloramine from drinking water or from shower water, the NSF only certifies certain products for chloramine reduction.
I am continuing to research ways to reduce or remove chloramine and chloramine DBPs, and will follow up in a future post.
WHY PAW SWITCHED FROM CHLORINE TO CHLORAMINE
Chlorine creates toxic disinfection byproducts (DBPs) when it reacts with certain chemicals and organic matter in water. These DBPs have been linked to cancers and birth defects.
One of the class of chemicals with which chlorine reacts to create dangerous DBPs are called bromides. In 2010 and 2011 the Monongahela river, from which PAW draws its water supply, was found to have elevated levels of bromides, threatening the safety of our drinking water. Bromides get into our rivers from various sources, including power plant, conventional oil and gas drilling wastewater, and Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater discharges.
From 2008 until the spring of 2011, natural gas drilling companies brought millions of barrels of chemically tainted shale drilling wastewater to municipal water treatment plants. These plants, which were not equipped to properly treat this wastewater, discharge directly into the rivers from which hundreds of thousands of us get our drinking water. This practice did not stop until the state Department of Environmental Protection asked the drilling companies to voluntarily stop it. Nevertheless, at the end of 2011 bromide levels remained high in our rivers. Nobody appears to have a definitive answer as to why levels remain elevated; one possibility seems to be that wastewater from power plants, as well as from conventional oil and gas drilling (all of which contain bromides) is still being discharged into our rivers.
The combination of chlorine disinfection and elevated bromide levels caused the water supplied to many western Pennsylvania homes to exceed permitted levels of certain DBPs. Specifically, in 2011 some samples of the drinking water that PAW supplied to its customers exceeded the maximum allowable levels of some of these DBPs by nearly 30%. (You can access the 2011 Water Quality Report for the Pittsburgh, McMurray, Mon-Valley service area here). In previous years, some samples contained nearly double the maximum allowable levels of these toxic substances.
PAW made the switch from chlorine to chloramine in order to comply with new, stricter federal regulations, to go into effect this year, governing levels of chlorine DBPs in drinking water. Chloramine produces lower levels of certain DBPs regulated by the EPA.
ISSUES RAISED BY THE USE OF CHLORAMINE
Unregulated Disinfection Byproducts
However, "[c]ompared to water treated with chlorine, water treated with monochloramine may contain higher concentrations of unregulated disinfection byproducts." This is from the EPA's statement on Chloramines in Drinking Water. In other words, our water may now contain different, even more dangerous DBPs that are simply not monitored and not regulated by the EPA. The best the EPA can give us is that it and other organizations are conducting research into potentially dangerous but currently unregulated DBPs.
The EPA acknowledges that the use of chloramine with source waters with high bromide, high iodide or high total organic matter may lead to the formation of unregulated disinfection byproducts such as iodoacids and nitrosamines.
Studies have shown that chloramine can indeed react with bromides, iodides and organic matter to create DBPs that are highly toxic, yet are not regulated by the EPA. These unregulated DBPs include iodoacids, discovered in water treated with chloramines in a 2004 study. One of the scientists conducting that study said iodoacids "may be the most toxic family of DBPs to date." He went on to note that the study demonstrated that switching from chlorine to chloramines " . . . may be opening a Pandora's box of new DBPs, and these new DBPs may be much more toxic, by orders of magnitude, than the regulated ones we are trying to avoid."
Another chloramine DBP of concern is NDMA (it is also a chemical used in the manufacture of rocket fuels). NDMA is a nitrosamine and is classsified by the EPA as a probable human carcinogen. The World Health Organization, on the other hand, says it is "clearly carcinogenic." But even though NDMA is clearly dangerous, and has been detected in our drinking water, the EPA does not regulate it, so it is permitted in our drinking water at any concentration.
Leaching of Lead
The EPA acknowledges that changes in water chemistry from chloramine use may impact lead levels in water. Chloramines can make water more corrosive, which can lead to pipe corrosion (in the distribution system or in the home) and an increase in lead levels in water. This happened when Washington, D.C. switched from chlorine to chloramine in 2001, causing lead to leach from aging pipes into drinking water. Between 2001 and 2004 tens of thousands of children were exposed to extremely high lead levels; in some homes lead levels in the water were hundreds of times higher than the amount the federal government considers a level of concern. Blood tests revealed that hundreds of young children had potentially damaging amounts of lead in their blood.
Closer to home, West View began using chloramine in its water in 2009. Testing in 2010 revealed high lead levels in water supplied to older homes with lead pipes. West View stopped using chloramines in 2010, but started using it again this year.
As my house was built in the 1930's, I am extremely concerned about the possibility of chloramine causing lead to leach into our water. PAW states that it practices "corrosion control" at its water treatment facilities. However, this is a complex science and the details of all the related environmental chemistry are not fully understood.
Removing Chloramine from Your Water
So, are there ways to remove chloramine and its dangerous byproducts from our water? Chloramine is not easy to remove from water; it is much more difficult to remove than chlorine. According to the EPA you cannot remove chloramine from water by boiling it, allowing it to sit at room temperature, or by using a reverse osmosis filter.
While it appears that some products claim to remove chloramine from drinking water or from shower water, the NSF only certifies certain products for chloramine reduction.
I am continuing to research ways to reduce or remove chloramine and chloramine DBPs, and will follow up in a future post.
Monday, September 24, 2012
PVC in School Supplies
A report published last month provides yet another reminder of why we should avoid products made of PVC (polyvinyl chloride) in every instance--especially products used by our children.
PVC is damaging to the environment and our health at every stage of its life cycle. A variety of toxic substances are used, created and released during its manufacture, use and disposal. Lead and other heavy metals are added during production. Dioxins, highly toxic and persistent pollutants, are generated as a by-product. Additives, including phthalates, are added before it is molded into final products, including children's products, such as vinyl school supplies and rainwear.
Phthalates are plasticizers used to soften PVC. Several phthalates have been determined to be probable human carcinogens. Exposure to phthalates has been associated with adverse reproductive outcomes in humans, including changes in fetal reproductive development. They are pervasive in the environment, making their way into the food chain. They are also pervasive in our bodies; the CDC has found that phthalate exposure is widespread in the U.S. population.
The environmental health advocacy group, the Center for Health, Environment and Justice (CHEJ), issued the report. They tested children's vinyl school supplies, including backpacks, lunchboxes and 3-ring binders, as well as raincoats and rainboots. These included Disney, Spiderman and Dora branded products. 75% of the products tested contained elevated levels of phthalates. The levels found would be unlawful if the products were toys. However, no laws cover permissible levels in products such as school supplies and raingear. 65% of the products tested contained elevated levels of the phthalate DEHP, classified by the EPA as a probable human carcinogen. These phthalates are not chemically bound to the vinyl; they therefore can be released from the products, potentially exposing children to elevated levels of these dangerous substances.
Avoid vinyl school supplies, and all other vinyl products, such as shower curtains, miniblinds, wallpaper, flooring, raingear and garden hoses, as much as possible. Vinyl products are not always labeled as such, but may be labeled as "vinyl" or "PVC." Also avoid vinyl packaging--look for the number "3" in the recycling symbol, or the letters "V" or "PVC" underneath.
Finally, the CHEJ offers a comprehensive guide to PVC-free school supplies (go here for link to the PDF). The guide includes tips for avoiding PVC school supplies, as well as a spreadsheet of companies that offer PVC-free products.
Friday, September 7, 2012
Shower Filters for Chlorinated Water
Note: If you live in the city of Pittsburgh, your tap water is disinfected using chlorine. However, if you are a customer of Pennsylvania American Water living in Allegheny County, as of March 22, 2012, your water has been disinfected using chloramine.
When chlorine is used to disinfect water, it reacts with organic matter in the water to create volatile by-products known as trihalomethanes (THMs). One particularly dangerous THM is chloroform, deemed by the EPA to be a probable human carcinogen. According to the 2010 report of the President's Cancer Panel, long-term exposure to chlorine disinfection by-products such as chloroform may increase cancer risk.
Showering with chlorinated water is of particular concern. According to the Centers for Disease Control, chloroform easily enters the body through the skin and you can breathe chloroform that evaporates from hot shower water. Chloroform that is absorbed through the skin or inhaled quickly enters the bloodstream and is dispersed throughout the body. It affects the brain, liver and kidneys. In addition to being linked to various cancers, chloroform has been linked to reproductive disorders, including miscarriage.
Thus, experts recommend shower filters to reduce chlorine and chlorination by-products in shower water as much as possible. According to this article from Green America, the best type of filter to remove chlorine and its by-products is a combination carbon/KDF adsorption filter. The article recommends Bestfilters.com as a resource. However, NSF, a not-for-profit organization that provides independent third-party testing and certification for water treatment units, does not currently certify any shower filters to reduce chloroform and other THMs. NSF only certifies shower filters for chlorine reduction.
If you do not have a shower filter, or if you don't trust that your filter is in fact reducing certain dangerous chlorination by-products, you can take steps to reduce your exposure to those by-products. Take shorter, cooler showers and ensure that your bathroom is ventilated as well as it can be. Also, don't use a mist or fine spray setting on your shower head, as that can increase the amount of chloroform inhaled.
As for those of us whose water is now treated with chloramine--according to the the EPA, chloramine is more difficult to remove from water than chlorine. For example, showerhead filters and bathtub filter balls do not remove chloramine. In addition, the by-products of chloramine disinfection have not been studied and their health effects are unknown. According the the National Resources Defense Council, they may be as bad, or worse, than THMs. Stay tuned for a future post about chloramine.
When chlorine is used to disinfect water, it reacts with organic matter in the water to create volatile by-products known as trihalomethanes (THMs). One particularly dangerous THM is chloroform, deemed by the EPA to be a probable human carcinogen. According to the 2010 report of the President's Cancer Panel, long-term exposure to chlorine disinfection by-products such as chloroform may increase cancer risk.
Showering with chlorinated water is of particular concern. According to the Centers for Disease Control, chloroform easily enters the body through the skin and you can breathe chloroform that evaporates from hot shower water. Chloroform that is absorbed through the skin or inhaled quickly enters the bloodstream and is dispersed throughout the body. It affects the brain, liver and kidneys. In addition to being linked to various cancers, chloroform has been linked to reproductive disorders, including miscarriage.
Thus, experts recommend shower filters to reduce chlorine and chlorination by-products in shower water as much as possible. According to this article from Green America, the best type of filter to remove chlorine and its by-products is a combination carbon/KDF adsorption filter. The article recommends Bestfilters.com as a resource. However, NSF, a not-for-profit organization that provides independent third-party testing and certification for water treatment units, does not currently certify any shower filters to reduce chloroform and other THMs. NSF only certifies shower filters for chlorine reduction.
If you do not have a shower filter, or if you don't trust that your filter is in fact reducing certain dangerous chlorination by-products, you can take steps to reduce your exposure to those by-products. Take shorter, cooler showers and ensure that your bathroom is ventilated as well as it can be. Also, don't use a mist or fine spray setting on your shower head, as that can increase the amount of chloroform inhaled.
As for those of us whose water is now treated with chloramine--according to the the EPA, chloramine is more difficult to remove from water than chlorine. For example, showerhead filters and bathtub filter balls do not remove chloramine. In addition, the by-products of chloramine disinfection have not been studied and their health effects are unknown. According the the National Resources Defense Council, they may be as bad, or worse, than THMs. Stay tuned for a future post about chloramine.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Packing a Waste-Free, Plastic-Free Lunch
When I posted earlier this year about avoiding plastic food containers and packaging due to the potential leaching of harmful chemicals, a few people asked about packing school lunches.
Well, it's time to start thinking about that seemingly endless parade of school lunches, and of what to pack them in.
Last fall, I purchased a stainless steel PlanetBox for my daughter, and a year later I am still a big fan. The PlanetBox is a bento-style lunchbox with four compartments. (The company recently started selling a version with three, larger compartments). It works perfectly for us. I usually fill two of the compartments with fruits or vegetables, one with a halved hard-boiled egg and the largest one with a sandwich. I purchased a carry bag that accommodates an ice-pack, so everything stays fresh.
Her lunch is completely waste-free, there is nothing to throw away. The lunchbox is easy to clean. I wash it by hand but it is advertised as being dishwasher-safe. My daughter likes the cute magnets that you can purchase to decorate the PlanetBox. And I love the fact that after one full year of use (including lunches for summer camp) it is still in perfect condition. The price does reflect the quality of the product; I paid $60 for the lunchbox and carry bag.
If this style of lunchbox doesn't work for you, there are still a myriad of options available. Reuseit.com is a wonderful source of products for packing a waste-free lunch. They have a wide selection of stainless steel containers. I have several of the LunchBots containers; they are great for packing sandwiches and otherwise replacing plastic bags. Whole Foods in East Liberty is selling some To-Go Ware stainless steel food carriers that look nice and functional.
Pack reusable utensils, and a reusable water bottle or insulated bottle, and you'll be doing your part to reduce the 67 pounds of lunch waste that the average American school-aged child throws away every year.
Well, it's time to start thinking about that seemingly endless parade of school lunches, and of what to pack them in.
Last fall, I purchased a stainless steel PlanetBox for my daughter, and a year later I am still a big fan. The PlanetBox is a bento-style lunchbox with four compartments. (The company recently started selling a version with three, larger compartments). It works perfectly for us. I usually fill two of the compartments with fruits or vegetables, one with a halved hard-boiled egg and the largest one with a sandwich. I purchased a carry bag that accommodates an ice-pack, so everything stays fresh.
Her lunch is completely waste-free, there is nothing to throw away. The lunchbox is easy to clean. I wash it by hand but it is advertised as being dishwasher-safe. My daughter likes the cute magnets that you can purchase to decorate the PlanetBox. And I love the fact that after one full year of use (including lunches for summer camp) it is still in perfect condition. The price does reflect the quality of the product; I paid $60 for the lunchbox and carry bag.
If this style of lunchbox doesn't work for you, there are still a myriad of options available. Reuseit.com is a wonderful source of products for packing a waste-free lunch. They have a wide selection of stainless steel containers. I have several of the LunchBots containers; they are great for packing sandwiches and otherwise replacing plastic bags. Whole Foods in East Liberty is selling some To-Go Ware stainless steel food carriers that look nice and functional.
Pack reusable utensils, and a reusable water bottle or insulated bottle, and you'll be doing your part to reduce the 67 pounds of lunch waste that the average American school-aged child throws away every year.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Mattresses: Conventional vs. Organic
I'm in the process of choosing a mattress for my daughter's new bed and updating the research that I did five years ago when my husband and I purchased a new mattress. What I'm finding confirms the reasons we chose an organic latex mattress back then and why we will be purchasing an organic mattress now.
Most conventional mattresses are constructed of materials that can off-gas and otherwise degrade, releasing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and toxic dust that we then breathe, absorb through our skin, and even ingest during the hours we spend sleeping.
Conventional cotton used to make mattresses may be contaminated with pesticide and insecticide residues. It also is treated during the production process with chemicals, some of which are very toxic. These include formaldehyde, dioxins and heavy metals.
Formaldehyde is also used in some mattresses to make the adhesives that hold the mattress together. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that has been linked to asthma, as well as lung, nose and throat cancer.
Most conventional mattresses contain polyurethane (PU) foam. There is nothing good to be said about PU foam. It is a petroleum-based material that emits VOCs linked to respiratory problems and skin irritation. Memory-foam mattresses contain a host of troubling materials--one lab analysis revealed that one model of this type of mattress emitted 61 chemicals, including the carcinogens benzene and naphthalene.
In addition, PU foam is extremely flammable and thus, in order to meet federal safety standards, manufacturers must take measures to make it resistant to flames. They do this by using toxic flame retardants or barrier fabrics, which also may contain harmful chemicals.
Many conventional mattresses manufactured prior to 2004 used PDBEs as flame retardants. The use of these substances was banned or phased out by industry as the evidence of their toxicity mounted. They are developmental neurotoxins as well as potent thyroid disruptors. PDBEs accumulate and persist in our bodies. They are still found in women's breast milk and the bodies of polar bears in the Arctic.
There is no way to know what manufacturers are using today to meet federal regulations regulating the flammability of mattresses. Major mattress companies refuse to disclose this information, claiming that their materials are protected as proprietary trade secrets.
This article cites an industry spokesperson who says that most of the manufacturers now use fire-resistant barrier fabrics. Some of these are made of melamine-formaldehyde resin; as these fibers degrade they release formaldehyde. Others are made of modacrylic fiber, which contains antimony oxide, another known carcinogen. Still other barrier fabrics used in mattresses are cotton bonded with boric acid (which some object to as it is also used as roach poison) and rayon treated with silica (tiny fragments of glass or clay).
Of course, avoiding harmful materials is of paramount importance when shopping for a child's or baby's mattress. A report released in November of last year found that 72% of the crib mattresses sold in the U.S. contained one or more chemicals of concern, such as antimony, polyurethane, vinyl, other volatile organic compounds, and undisclosed flame retardants.
Wool is naturally fire-resistant. An organic mattress can meet federal fire safety regulations without the use of chemical flame retardants if it is properly constructed using wool.
If you are in the market for a new mattress or shopping for an infant's or child's mattress, there are many sources of safer alternatives to conventional mattresses that you might want to consider. We bought our organic latex mattress at the Organic Mattress Store in Hellertown, PA. We took a side trip there on a trip to Philadelphia; it is about 1 1/2 hours away.
I was happy to discover that an organic mattress store recently opened in Pittsburgh: the Natural Sleep Shop in Cranberry. This store carries the Savvy Rest line of organic mattresses and crib mattresses.
An organic mattress will almost certainly cost more than a conventional mattress. However, a natural latex mattress will also last longer than a conventional mattress. We were told that ours should last 20-25 years. When I considered that we spend 8 hours a day breathing and otherwise absorbing whatever is being released from our mattress, it made sense to me to go organic.
Most conventional mattresses are constructed of materials that can off-gas and otherwise degrade, releasing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and toxic dust that we then breathe, absorb through our skin, and even ingest during the hours we spend sleeping.
Conventional cotton used to make mattresses may be contaminated with pesticide and insecticide residues. It also is treated during the production process with chemicals, some of which are very toxic. These include formaldehyde, dioxins and heavy metals.
Formaldehyde is also used in some mattresses to make the adhesives that hold the mattress together. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that has been linked to asthma, as well as lung, nose and throat cancer.
Most conventional mattresses contain polyurethane (PU) foam. There is nothing good to be said about PU foam. It is a petroleum-based material that emits VOCs linked to respiratory problems and skin irritation. Memory-foam mattresses contain a host of troubling materials--one lab analysis revealed that one model of this type of mattress emitted 61 chemicals, including the carcinogens benzene and naphthalene.
In addition, PU foam is extremely flammable and thus, in order to meet federal safety standards, manufacturers must take measures to make it resistant to flames. They do this by using toxic flame retardants or barrier fabrics, which also may contain harmful chemicals.
Many conventional mattresses manufactured prior to 2004 used PDBEs as flame retardants. The use of these substances was banned or phased out by industry as the evidence of their toxicity mounted. They are developmental neurotoxins as well as potent thyroid disruptors. PDBEs accumulate and persist in our bodies. They are still found in women's breast milk and the bodies of polar bears in the Arctic.
There is no way to know what manufacturers are using today to meet federal regulations regulating the flammability of mattresses. Major mattress companies refuse to disclose this information, claiming that their materials are protected as proprietary trade secrets.
This article cites an industry spokesperson who says that most of the manufacturers now use fire-resistant barrier fabrics. Some of these are made of melamine-formaldehyde resin; as these fibers degrade they release formaldehyde. Others are made of modacrylic fiber, which contains antimony oxide, another known carcinogen. Still other barrier fabrics used in mattresses are cotton bonded with boric acid (which some object to as it is also used as roach poison) and rayon treated with silica (tiny fragments of glass or clay).
Of course, avoiding harmful materials is of paramount importance when shopping for a child's or baby's mattress. A report released in November of last year found that 72% of the crib mattresses sold in the U.S. contained one or more chemicals of concern, such as antimony, polyurethane, vinyl, other volatile organic compounds, and undisclosed flame retardants.
Wool is naturally fire-resistant. An organic mattress can meet federal fire safety regulations without the use of chemical flame retardants if it is properly constructed using wool.
If you are in the market for a new mattress or shopping for an infant's or child's mattress, there are many sources of safer alternatives to conventional mattresses that you might want to consider. We bought our organic latex mattress at the Organic Mattress Store in Hellertown, PA. We took a side trip there on a trip to Philadelphia; it is about 1 1/2 hours away.
I was happy to discover that an organic mattress store recently opened in Pittsburgh: the Natural Sleep Shop in Cranberry. This store carries the Savvy Rest line of organic mattresses and crib mattresses.
An organic mattress will almost certainly cost more than a conventional mattress. However, a natural latex mattress will also last longer than a conventional mattress. We were told that ours should last 20-25 years. When I considered that we spend 8 hours a day breathing and otherwise absorbing whatever is being released from our mattress, it made sense to me to go organic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)








