From the University of Melbourne:
Hidden hazards found in green products
Dr. Anne Steinemann, Professor of Civil Engineering, and the Chair of Sustainable Cities, from the Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Melbourne School of Engineering, is a world expert on environmental pollutants, air quality, and health effects.
Professor Steinemann investigated and compared volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted from 37 different products, such as air fresheners, cleaning products, laundry supplies, and personal care products, including those with certifications and claims of ‘green’ and ‘organic’. Both fragranced and fragrance-free products were tested.
The study, published in the journal Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health found 156 different VOCs emitted from the 37 products, with an average of 15 VOCs per product. Of these 156 VOCs, 42 are classified as toxic or hazardous under US federal laws, and each product emitted at least one of these chemicals.
Findings revealed that emissions of carcinogenic hazardous air pollutants from ‘green’ fragranced products were not significantly different from regular fragranced products.
In total, over 550 volatile ingredients were emitted from these products, but fewer than three percent were disclosed on any product label or material safety data sheet (MSDS).
“The paradox is that most of our exposure to air pollutants occurs indoors and a primary source is consumer products. But the public lacks full and accurate information on the ingredients in these products. Our indoor air environments are essentially unregulated and unmonitored,” Professor Steinemann said.
The most common chemicals in fragranced products were terpenes, which were not in fragrance-free versions. Terpenes readily react with ozone in the air to generate a range of additional pollutants, such as formaldehyde and ultrafine particles.
At this time, consumer products sold in Australia, the US and around the world are not required to list all ingredients, or any ingredients in a chemical mixture called ‘fragrance’.
“Given the lack of information, consumers may choose products with claims such as green, natural, or organic, but those claims are largely untested,” Professor Steinemann said.
Professor Steinemann will continue to investigate how and why we’re exposed to pollutants and ways to reduce risks and improve health.
###
Additional Information:
- Products selected are commonly used in Australia, the US, and other countries in a range of environments (e.g., homes, schools, hospitals, workplaces, hotels, restaurants, stores, residential buildings, parks, child care and aged care facilities, gyms, homeless shelters, government buildings, airports, planes and public transport).
- Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) headspace analysis was used to identify VOCs emitted from 37 products, representing air fresheners and deodorizers (sprays, gels, solids, oils, and disks), laundry products (detergents, dryer sheets, and fabric softeners), cleaning supplies (all-purpose cleaners, window and surface cleaners, disinfectants, and dishwashing liquids), and personal care products (soaps, hand sanitisers, sunscreens, lotions, baby lotions, deodorants, shampoos, and baby shampoo).
- Ingredients in consumer products and in fragrance formulations, are exempt from full disclosure to the public.
- For laundry products, cleaning supplies, and air fresheners, labels do not need to list all ingredients, or the presence of a fragrance in the product.
- For personal care products and cosmetics, labels need to list ingredients, except the general term “fragrance” or “parfum” may be used instead of listing the individual ingredients in the fragrance.
- For all products, material safety data sheets do not need to list all ingredients.
- Fragrance ingredients are exempt from full disclosure in any product, not only in Australia and the US but also internationally.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Alarmist Social Studies Report. So, why share and help propagate or seed an alarmist mentality?
If “green” really isn’t green, I would like to know. All consumers should be interested because green products usually cost more. Do you really think the following statement is unimportant and should be ignored?
“Findings revealed that emissions of carcinogenic hazardous air pollutants from ‘green’ fragranced products were not significantly different from regular fragranced products.”
The thing is, when products advertise “green” we assume we are safe and spray more liberally. With all the gajillions of silly laws and regulation, why not just one requiring an ingredient list on anything that is sprayed? Hundreds of products would be busted for implying they are “green”.
In my previous house I counted 12 deadly plants growing in the garden. ‘Naturally’
Sounds like The Little House of Horrors… ☺
Leo, I bet you had more than 12 in your old yard.
http://ucanr.edu/sites/poisonous_safe_plants/Toxic_Plants_by_common_Name_659/
Damn nature, you scary!
Well RWTurner’s toxic plants lists apple seeds as a type 1 poison requiring calling poison control.
That’s news to me, since when I eat an apple, the only thing that is left is the stem, if it had one, and maybe the shine is still fading away.
So I eat apple seeds almost daily. If you eat the whole apple, then apples are so much a pound and nobody cares how big or how small they are, and small is usually much cheaper.
Well I see Almonds are listed. Cyanide is supposed to taste like bitter Almonds.
Actually the bitter taste of almonds IS cyanide.
If you eat the whole apple , especially “organic” apples you often get the benefit of a protein bonus from some proteizoa that found its way inside the apple.
yummy !!
g
Once after my wife canned several boxes of peaches, I used a hammer to smash open the peach pits, and began eating the kernels until I started seeing stars and swirly patterns. I quit that in hurry!
When I see ‘Green’, ‘Eco’, ‘Lite’, ‘Organic’, ‘Fair-trade’ or any of a host of those sort of catch-words on a consumer product, I generally listen to my bullshit detector, leave them on the shelf for enlightened, progressive consumers to waste their money on and and buy something else based on the product’s actual merit.
Apple seeds and peach pits both contain cyanogenic glycosides – they release cyanide in the stomach. Apple seeds do not contain much cyanide, especially compared to peach pits.
I believe in skepticism, but more importantly I believe in informed skepticism, not burying your head in the sand. Good decision making should have information from a variety of perspectives.
Uhh, studying the VOCs that become airborne from the cleaning products you may have under your sink is alarmist? This is the exact type of environmental research that has merit and needs to be made public, because unlike CO2, toxins in household products ARE a risk factor.
Which nicely proves just how highly unlikely the conjecture about CO2 being “dangerous” is! 🙂
Yeah, except this post tells us NOTHING about the amounts involved. I suspect the concentrations resulting from the use of such products are trivial, well below IDLH levels.
Mr. Kafkazar,
O Engineer Extraordinaire, I highly respect your opinions and, in case that comment about amounts was directed to me…. I’m hoping that by my pointing you to my comment here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/05/study-green-household-products-have-hidden-toxic-hazards/#comment-1875957
you will see that, even though I am not an engineer, I DO understand.
Janice
Janice, it’s hard to follow, but the way replies align with previous comments is (ordinarily) a clue to which one was being replied to. My reply was in response to RWTurner, above and 1 tab to left, which said, “toxins in household products ARE a risk factor.”
Well HCN has a nice almond smell also.
Well, the thing about the “amounts involved” is, it’s never just one compound that’s an issue. So, let’s say I spray and encounter 1/10,000 of the hazardous level of compound A. Then there is compound B in my dish soap, C in my shampoo, D in my scented candle, to say nothing of the (yes, trace amounts) of thousands of other compounds in the tap water (like other people’s medications), and the thousands of trace amounts in the air when I’m stuck in traffic (twice daily, weekends excepted), and “sick building syndrome” at work, to say nothing of contactants, natural and otherwise, all over the place and preservatives and pesticides in my food, “adjuvants” in my medicines . . . .
The people who sneer, “It’s only a trace amount!” (singular, always in the singular) seem to forget that there are an awful lot of trace amounts around. How much can one liver do?
Because people get very sick, miss work and it costs us all.
The poison is in the dose. Enough cyanide can kill you. Your body manufactures it. Why aren’t you dead?
http://www.cyanidecode.org/cyanide-facts/environmental-health-effects
Cyanide is produced in the human body and exhaled in extremely low concentrations with each breath. It is also produced by over 1,000 plant species including sorghum, bamboo and cassava. Relatively low concentrations of cyanide can be highly toxic to people and wildlife.
=====================
So avoid places where humans are breathing?
Missed the point, that being: just because it smells good, doesn’t mean that its tolerable or safe. Plants also usually emit terpenes and other similar compounds for insecticidal protection, so that should also be a warning about inhalation.
@OmegaPaladin
Also, I’m guessing you would have to crack the seed coating in order to expose the cyanogenic compounds. Otherwise they pass through your gut unchanged.
More unintended consequencies from Green policies.
Thanks for the information. If there is reason to be concerned about the environment we live in, one thing seems to be clear from the study. Fragrance free is the way to go.
But you still must read the fine print… Due to allergies in the family we always seek out fragrance free if possible. One one occasion a bottle of “hypoallergenic” scent free cleaner listed as an ingredient “fragrance”… I kid you not! Another “fragrance free” proclaimed “fresh scent”… Sigh.
If you need a house cleaning product, skip the “green” ones and get the glutten-free, paleo version instead. One hundred percent evolutionary. Can’t beat that.
Regardless of whether a “green” product is fragranced or not, if it says “green,” I do not buy it.
“Green” (like “organic” and “pesticide free”) is a sc@m using pseudo-science to trick ignorant, gullible, and or easily frightened people into buying what is almost invariably a MUCH less effective product.
Personally, I enjoy the spicy tang of malathion on my apples…
D. B. #(:)) !! I TOLD you to stop taking food from that weird looking old man who lives in the shack at the end of the lane!
Next thing, you’ll be telling me you dumped a cup of salt onto your hamburger again.
I don’t know if malathion has a spicy taste, but it sure smells bad. We had a spray plane at Tan Son Nhut that used malathion, and it had its own revetment a long ways downwind of the rest of the squadron.
Mike,
I’m sure you know I was just funnin’ at the expense of the ‘buy organic’ crowd. You’re right, malathion smells terrible. But it oxidizes in just a few days, and it’s pretty harmless to mammals. Completely harmless after a week.
Hey, I was probably through Tan Son Nhut a few times when you were: ’68 – ’69? It shows why gun control is just another scare: literally thousands of guys sitting around with guns, lots of ammo, M-79’s, machine guns, grenades, etc. But I don’t ever recall anyone being violent there.
Much like the “gluten free” stuff. Unless you have celiac disease you shouldn’t waste the money. However, the best one I ever saw was on a package of Twizzlers. It said “Fat Free”.
lol, (not lol about the gluten — good point) — If it says (and is) “low carb” I’m interested — even if it’s LOADED with fat (even SATURATED fat, bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaa!). Been eating happily and not gaining weight since 2003 with my “watch the carbs and who cares about fat” eating. And NO, I did not weigh 250 pounds as of 2003, lololol.
(sorry (not really) for my silliness — this thread seems to allow for some… I hope….)
#(:))
Janice,
About 10 years ago I lost 38 pounds in 90 days on a very low fat, high carb, medium protein diet. Most of my carbs came from pasta that I ate every night, as much as I wanted. A while later I ran into a friend of mine whom I had not seen for some time. He had lost almost the same amount of weight in about the same time period only he was on a no carb, high fat, high protein diet. We were amazed at how we both accomplished the same results with different diets. The common denominator: we both did a lot of running to lose the weight! Calories in, calories out.
I’ve seen beef labeled “gluten free.”
Hi, Tom!
I haven’t significantly increased my jogging time. THAT’s why I had to do (and after 12 years… I’m stickin’ with the program!) that. 1. I HATE jogging (I make myself go, but know I won’t keep up a big increase in distance over time) — so had to do something about the intake. 2. I LOVE TO EAT! (and I’m … hm there’s common lack-of-self-restraint-theme going here….. even in my WRITING… aaaaaa) Can’t do portion control. Just ONE brownie? Just ONE piece of pizza?? ARE YOU KIDDING? So, here I am with low-carb pasta, low-carb tortillas for bread, a yummy chocolate cream cheese frozen dessert and on and on and IT WORKS FOR ME.
#(:))
Congratulations on losing all that weight. I got nervous after gaining about 15 pounds and stopped it right then (I’ve heard it just doesn’t come off after 40… not going to experiment!).
Oh, man this is a sickening comment! Feel free to snarl, Christopher “feminism makes men want to kill themselves” Dollis. I would understand.
But, I’m posting it anyway (because the above paper merits such a response, heh)!
Janice
@ur momisugly Duster… lol.
Maybe it’s not gluten that’s the cause of Celiac (and other health issues) after all. Something I didn’t know until recently is that Glyphosate (Roundup) is applied to sugar cane and wheat for even ripening and dessication just prior to harvest for a small increase in profit margin. Now this is one of many areas where the FDA/NIH should be protecting our health. But no, this would upset the agri and Monsanto lobby’s. What’s should be criminal is that these government entities are in the pockets of the corporations much like the politicians.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945755/
In South Africa sunflower oil is marked ‘cholesterol-free’. No seed oil contains cholesterol! But I think it helps sales.
Gluten affects people other than celiac sufferers. It can cause migraine headaches, achy joints, food allergies from leaky gut, fatigue, just to name a few.
Janice, that’s great! High fat, moderate or low protein and low carb seems to work for quite a few people. Jimmy Moore on youtube has many videos/shows discussing it. I don’t do well with lots of carbs, have suffered from hypoglycemia since I was a child (eating lots of cereals, breads, etc), and am finally eating more fats/less carbs and even less protein (not less than the carbs) now that I know for fact I feel better with more fat. It keeps my energy stable and I’m not painfully hungry every couple hours! I was so sick and tired of needing to eat that often, it’s not good or logical.
Janice, regarding the jogging, you should really find the episode of Smarter Science of Slim/SANE on youtube from Jonathan Bailor where he discusses the importance of high quality exercise. His analogy would essentially be that jogging is like pushing a couch with one finger a thousand times, trying to move it. It’s not going to move unless you give it a big shove (high quality exercise). Great info and free! Jogging is also very hard on the joints. Diet also has more impact on weight and body composition than exercise, it’s about 80% compared to 20% exercise, according to Mark Sisson.
‘if it says “green,” I do not buy it.’
Zactly. It’s marketing for chumps.
You are correct in assuming that many green products are a scam. There are many who take advantage of growing markets. However, there are a few quality green products available. You must be vigilant in researching your purchases because the government won’t be.
If I see a product that advertises itself as green, I read that as saying “Here is an inferior product more concerned with being green than actually doing the job it should.”
Well I don’t buy “organic” produce either. I tell the overpriced vendor, that organic foods contain carbon, which the US Supremes said is poisonous.
My local green supermarket, sells organic milk and other organics at often more than double the carbon free varieties (if they carry them) .
But then over in that other corner (right over there) you can buy almost any chemical, organic, or inorganic that you like, from A to Z (except arsenic), and so poison your own green food to taste.
They must have 57 varieties of Omega 3 or omega 6 fish oil pills, all made from the baitfish part of the ocean food chain. Which explains why game fish; even red snapper, is $25 per pound.
Well I had my daily dosage of cod liver oil when I was growing up so I know what fish oils taste like.
I like fish; specially shell fish, and specially New Zealand Green Shelled Mussels.
They are worth buying again, specially since I wrote to Prime Minister John Keys, to tell him that someone was exporting GS Mussels with fur growing all over them, which was putting off California gourmets, like me.
He sicced the guy in charge on to me, so I could tell him what was wrong, and he got it fixed, which surprised the hell out of my local Fish Market Restaurant. I even gave them the letter I got enquiring about the problem. (so did the restaurant chain head quarters.)
G
Omega 3s are used in the body for endocannabinoid production. A lack of them impairs emotional behavior:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21278728
All too many of the “non-green” products are still supposedly more “eco-friendly” these days.
Example – I fill my own bottles of window washing spray. About 90% of the “cleaning” product, and then top the bottle off with (consumer grade) ammonia. Then it actually gets the windows clean.
(Note – if you do this, be careful that the original product isn’t “disinfecting” also. All too many of those have bleach in them. Ammonia and bleach are NOT safe things to combine in an enclosed space.)
“… classified as toxic or hazardous under US federal laws, and each product emitted at least one of these chemicals.”
And nowhere does the “study” prove that these chemicals were ever emitted at anywhere NEAR proven-by-experiment/observation dangerous
(i.e., at all likely to cause cancer from exposure)
levels.
She should try going for a walk on a trail through a swamp (a.k.a. “wetlands”) on a warm day… . Ooooo, chemicals!
The only people who need be concerned about fragrances are those who are genuinely allergic to them.
Thank you Janice Moore.
Without a dosage level this is meaningless.
Sea Air and Sunlight are carcinogenic too.
Dang!
If I move to Florida to escape the Man-made-CO2-induced-Global Warming-cold then the sea air and the Sun will get me!
How did Man survive before Man made ourselves unsurvivable?
The POINT of this is that you cannot choose what is in your environment if they won’t tell you. All these ingredients should be disclosed.
People DO have problems that are caused by these chemicals but cannot make the connection because they don’t have the data.
You can allow or forbid these chemicals as you choose – but only if you know.
some 8000 chemicals and variants used under GRAS, when some, the most toxic were asked to be replaced with safer ones?
the makers bitched it would cost to do so.
a cent or less per unit probably
but profit wins over customers health.
most have never BEEN tested in the combinations they get mixed and sold in either. just individually
and synergist effects often have unexpected results.
btw
in Aus Ajax is banned for use by any govt /school etc cleaning due to being a risk to lungs from the fine powder silica
yet the kids/ teachers/parents etc can happily douse the home they live in and thats just dandy?
bicarb, vinegar and unscented sugar soap are pretty effective and cheap:-)
In the days when we lived in old drafty houses the level of these chemicals was not so much of a problem and even more toxic cleaning products were used but the rate of change of the internal air was such that they soon dispersed. The modern building reg’s in the UK require new build houses to be almost hermetically sealed ( a few years ago they started to require a bit more ventilation) meaning the occupants have longer exposure times to all the chemical compounds therein, also they found that the CO2 levels could reach dangerous levels if no doors or windows were opened for a day or two.
Maybe that is why the green blob want us back living in caves?
James Bull
It is a good idea to air out your home, here in the US at least. I don’t think air tight is the best idea.
“Radon is a radioactive gas that has been found in homes all over the United States. It comes from the natural breakdown of uranium in soil, rock and water and gets into the air you breathe. Radon typically moves up through the ground to the air above and into your home through cracks and other holes in the foundation.”
There are Radon tests for home use.
Personally I like a house that is slightly drafty. I am not a fan of a house where you have to open a window to shut the front door!
Judging from the number of victims, the most dangerous chemical on our planet is dihydrogenmonoxide.
More seriously, but just a tad, UN source for this stuff (IARC) declares ethanol carcinogenic. But mind you, only when served in beverages.
Since it’s impossible to survive life, let’s enjoy it while it lasts.
This is what she found:
“The most common chemicals in fragranced products were terpenes”
Hello. Terpenes are natural products. Just take a walk in the forest. Smell some oranges. It is even demonstrated that terpenes regulate the temperature of the forest. As reported by The Guardian terpenes are a new tool to fight global warming:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terpene
… terpenes are a new tool to fight global warming
Who in their right mind would want to?
I have no idea! But it is published. Terpenes are natural cloud seeders.
Terpenes are the VOCs that make the “smoke” in the Great Smoky Mountains.
Reminds me of a study done above China, where the amount of secondary oxidized organics, mainly terpenes, was an order of magnitude higher in the atmosphere above the inversion layer than of human emitted SOx.
Several other places are called the “blue mountains” (near Sydney, South Appalachian), because of the haze caused by oxidized terpenes.
Here a study about terpenes from Finland:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2006/04/12/312.5771.261.DC1/Tunved.SOM.pdf
Again much more terpenes than of human aerosols, be it that in winter it is reverse…
Another point: some years ago, non-water based paints were sold as “natural”, because they were thinned with real turpentine (all terpenes…) or with citrus oils. I am not sure if that was any better for health than white spirit…
An unlikely place for a discussion of terpenes:
http://www.hightimes.com/read/talking-terpenes
One paragraph:
Alpha-pinene (essential pine oil), the most common terpene in the plant world and one often found in cannabis, is a bronchodilator potentially helpful for asthmatics. Pinene also promotes alertness and memory retention by inhibiting the metabolic breakdown of acetylcholinesterase, a neurotransmitter in the brain that stimulates these cognitive effects.
You’ be surprised at the people who seem to think that if a poison is organic/natural, it’s safe.
And if it is dangerous, it is not natural. Like who’d normally call asbestos or crude oil natural?
‘This vase must be expensive? -It’s priceless.’
I’ll give you $75 for the vase, Hugh. Deal? ;o)
Good point about natural crude oil. I’m guessing that whales were quite relieved when we switched to petroleum products.
Nope. I’ve known a few folks who reasoned that if it came out of the meadow, it must be safe. One recovered from [severe] liver damage. He was surprised to learn that monomethylhydrazine (literally a key ingredient in rocket fuel) is a naturally occurring toxin in some fungi. He tried saving money on mushrooms.
In South Africa there are about fifty ‘listed’ toxic plants that farmers have to uproot. They all kill cattle, weak and unnatural species that they are.
Nature is filled with natural pesticides and fertilisers. Kill you in a minute, many of them, like naturally occurring black mambas and boomslangs. Don’t forget naturally occurring polar bears.
“The most common chemicals in fragranced products were terpenes, which were not in fragrance-free versions. Terpenes readily react with ozone in the air to generate a range of additional pollutants, such as formaldehyde and ultrafine particles.”
If terpenes are an issue, we had better get busy exterminating all the flowers in the world in addition to most (probably all) plant life in general.
Just what I was going to say, take a stroll through a pine forest – terpenes, like roses – terpenes. Like the rosemary, oregano and sage in your pasta sauce – terpenes. Like the lavender in the vase in the bathroom – terpenes. Clearing your nose with eucalyptus ( drops/inhalant) – terpenes. Grating some lemon/orange rind into your cake , lemon chicken or other citrus recipe – terpenes.
Most natural scents are combinations of terpene, – hydrocabon oils, It’s about time some of these dumb claims were called out as the alarmism they are, just another academic casting about in the popular press for funding.
While we do need to keep alert for causes for the epidemic in cancer, I hardly think naturally occuring terpenes we’ve been exposed to since adam was a boy are a likely candidate. Much more likely to be unnatural chemicals, pesticides, disinfectants, lack of vit D, sunscreen poisoning, refined sugar (pure sucrose), vege oil/margarine, where we deliberately expose ourselves to very high levels of chemicals we have not been chronically exposed to for millennia (as a species).
Eg sucrose, sure as a species we have been exposed – it’s a common carbohydrate, but not to the pure form, and not to foods containing almost 100% sucrose in any great quantity.
One word on cleaning products: vinegar!
Janice,
Yup, I get you – to reach toxic levels “you’d have to drink a bathtub full”. However, the study does bring out, as stated above that the words “green” and O(o?) rganic are just marketing ploys in these cases. Of course the word organic which equals healthy in the public’s mind has been that for years.
I wonder if it will get any popular press?
Mike
I think it just did… 🙂
Thanks for letting me know you “got me.” Very refreshing for me (on WUWT I am OFTEN misunderstood…. my sloppy writing SOME-times… ).
Janice
“Organic” spelt inside out is “rig a con.”
Skip fragrances and dyes. The utility isn’t worth the toxicity.
Since the toxicity has not been proven to be significantly above zero — I’m going to use them. Aaah. Lovely.
Toxicity has not been established.
I call scientific BS. The study is paywalled, but not the SI. Went looking for known harmful VOCs. Chose formaldehyde for this comment. There was some measured in some products. On the order of a highest measured 120 micrograms formaldehyde per cubic meter air in a kitchen cleaner/degreaser in SI table 1. Horrors—NOT!
To put this poison danger in perspective, the current EPA formaldehyde exposure limit is 2ppm for 15 minutes or 0.5 ppm for 8 hours. Just looked it up. The EPA also says 385 micrograms per cubic meter air is 0.14 ppm. So what was measured in the cleaner is about 0.04ppm. That is 50 times less than the 15 minutes exposure threshold which is supposed to be experimentally determined, with a safety margin added.
For all the VOCs this prof is complaining about, the measured exposures are far below workplace thresholds and pose NO known risk of harm. Especially with only occasional transitory household use, unlike a workplace with regular or chronic exposure. Pure sensationalism. A redo of a previous study that did not include ‘green’ products. More ‘worse than dubious’ science by press release.
NICE post, Rud Istvan!
— is that info. in one of your many e books, such as…. Blowing Smoke? 🙂
Best wishes (once again) for great sales,
Janice
Speaking of more BS, our supreme leader wants to dictate our diet (like everything else). Will try to tax anything meat. Save the planet.
“The Obama administration is considering a set of dietary recommendations that says Americans need to change the way the eat in order to help protect the environment.
The recommendations were put forward by an advisory group comprised of academics from around the country, but their advice has prompted Republicans to complain that the group has lost its focus and is far exceeding its mandate.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/05/obama-administration-mulls-nutrition-guidelines-that-say-americans-should-eat-foods-with-lower-environmental-impacts/
So. The soy lobby is at it again, eh? Want us all to eat soy burgers (gag) and drink soy milk and IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY. Enviroprofiteers are everywhere! Aaaaaaa.
Soy milk? What a horror: that contains a lot of all natural plant estrogen mimickers, enough to have the equivalent of the “pill” for a baby who is fed with soy milk instead of mother (or cow) milk…
FERDINAND! Hi. Nice to talk to you when we are not disagreeing about the FACT that CO2 emissions lag temperature increase by a quarter cycle.
lolololol (don’t worry! I’m not going to start talking about it)
Take care,
Janice
My wife can’t drink dairy. So, every morning, for morning coffee, I make a “hippyccino”™, with steamed soy milk. At first we weren’t too impressed. But now we’re used to the taste. After you add sugar and flavoring, it’s not that much different than low fat / skim milk.
Hi, Cam,
Your wife is blessed that you make her anything to drink in the am — way to go. While I prefer cow milk, it is high-carb, so I drink almond milk (Safeway’s Lucerne brand because they make it thick and “creamy”) sweetened with Splenda (or a generic version). Good on cereal and I’ve gotten so used to it I enjoy it plain, now.
“Hippyccino” — cute. Ya know, most hippies I’ve met aren’t into telling the rest of us what to do (they can be awfully gullible, though, poor souls). It’s those rotters, the Envirostalinists and the Enviroprofiteers. Wouldn’t want to drive a “hippy van,” though. (VW van)
#(:))
Janice
Janice Moore March 5, 2015 at 2:24 pm
Try whipping cream (32% and low carb). Or, if you find that too rich, try heavy cream (18% and still relatively low carb). Apparently, in Europe you can buy 40% cream.
Thanks for the kind words, Janice.
Ironically, the word “hippiccino” was coined by a friend’s wife. He is a VW mechanic who specializes in VW’s Wesfalia camper vans
Aldehydes are a naturally occurring intermediate breakdown product of naturally occurring ethanol in the human digestive tract. Our digestive tracts make ethanol as a result of fermentation in the gut. Some of us add a bit more (ahem) from time to time, as well!
Complete Reaction: C2H6O(Ethanol)→C2H4O(Acetaldehyde)→C2H4O2(acetic Acid) →Acetyl-CoA→3H2O+2CO2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism
Too much of a good thing can be lethal – aye. But, in the right dosage and properly administered, it can make for a very merry evening….
Well you have to be careful. A study about the loss of IQ points caused by cannabis use (8 points) when controlled for alcohol use found cannabis caused zero IQ loss. So it is likely the alcohol was causing the IQ loss the first study found.
Thanks for digging in. I wondered at the levels detected but didn’t feel the need to dig it up.
This is a form of “pushing the tool.” The main concept is using a technique, hardware, or software beyond what it is designed to do and thinking your results are valid.
The second is when policy is made on results of increasingly sensitive instruments. When you did wet chemistry, limits were in fractions of percent. Hence, you marked, say, toxicity, at such a percentage. The AA and the like came along and because you could detect in the ppm range, standards followed,.
Now, detection is in the ppb (or better) and all of a sudden what was acceptable throughout the modern era is dangerous and needs to be regulated, banned, or discouraged.
You can see hysteria over 40ppb or 5ppb or whatever, with most people and government bureaucrats oblivious to the fact these are tiny trace amounts. (Yes, I know: some government types and their paid-for toadies know this and use it for their advantage.) The grossest is, of course, 400ppm CO2 destroying the planet. That number, 400, looks so scary, and its up from, what, 280? (And that’s a good thing.) But the key is that tell-all “ppm.”
Good work RI.
Rud–
The study explicitly states that no claims about health risks are being made. From the Abstract:
“Because health effects depend on many factors, not only individual ingredients, this study makes no claims regarding possible risks. However, knowledge of product composition can be an important step to understand, assess, and reduce potential exposures and effects.”
The approach was headspace analysis, which as you know can identify chemicals in the product and also their tendency to reach a Henry’s Law equilibrium, but considerably more information would be required to estimate actual exposures. Such information on exposures (as well as body burden from measuring exhaled breath) to 32 VOCs was collected 30 years ago in EPA’s TEAM studies of 800 persons in 8 US cities and towns, representing about 800,000 residents. The TEAM studies showed that exposures to virtually all the target VOCs were mostly (75% on average) due to indoor sources such as consumer products and building materials rather than outdoor sources such as chemical and petrochemical plants, oil refineries and storage tanks, etc. which had been the main suspects before the TEAM Studies. You can download 20 or 30 articles on the TEAM Studies from my Researchgate location. Subsequent studies in the Netherlands and Germany confirmed that most exposure to VOCs is from indoor sources.
Upper-bound carcinogenic risk can also be calculated from the exposures if the substance has a risk estimate in IRIS. Three VOCs were identified as highest risk: benzene (mostly from active smoking, at 50 micrograms per cigarette, but for persons living with smokers, benzene exposures were about 50% higher than for nonsmoking households); chloroform (essentially all exposure stems from use of chlorinated water, particularly showers); and para-dichlorobenzene (a terpene used in moth crystals or moth cakes but also in air “fresheners”). p-DCB was finally barred from use in air fresheners in California in 2013.
Formaldehyde has relatively recently been named a human carcinogen by IARC (I think). The main source is particle board or pressed wood products–cabinets, stairs, etc., not the products measured in Steinemann et al. But it is more widespread than the other 3 and depending on the potency (unit risk estimate from IRIS) it might be ultimately a higher risk.
On the other hand, these are all upper-bound risks, the true risk may be much lower, and the total mortality risk from all VOCs together is probably less than a tenth that of the risk from particles, which is estimated globally (WHO) to be on the order of a million and a half deaths per year, mostly women and children cooking using biomass.
Formaldehyde from the glues used in modern construction deactivates the jelly-forming properties of gelatin which is why your jellies don’t gel if the package of gelatin was stored in your cupboard for any length of time. But don’t let me stop you adding extra formaldehyde to the air you breathe from sources other than chipboard/plywood/carpets/bedding etc. And if you really can’t get enough formaldehyde from those sources, you can always drink methanol (methylated spirits). Methanol’s toxicity is caused by it being metabolised by your body into formaldehyde.
Ahhhh but you forgat about that nasty Chinese manufactured laminated flooring….
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lumber-liquidators-linked-to-health-and-safety-violations/
i bought a spray oven cleaner, in seconds i couldnt breathe well
and the kitchen doors and windows were wide open on a breezy day.
I have to wear a mask and gloves and hold my breath
spray n run like hell and wait a while before returning
it does clean the oven
but?
I seriously doubt this product ever had any safety tests applied to it
wont be buying more.
Yes I agree with you, this is playing alarmist.
I think the point however is that you can play alarmist with anything including green products.
There is nothing special, safe or better than green products other than the green, organic or whatever label. A product is either better for you based on it’s intended use or it is not. This obvious common sense approach to evaluating products has never been the intent of marketing, and that is what “green” is, a marketing strategy.
Those findings should not really come as a surprise. It is a case of slightly more or less harmful. What is a surprise is that it took this long to get more exposure, plenty of minor studies, this will carry more weight.
Janice’s comment is correct re the carcinogenic issue.
Just because something is classed as such and may well be at a certain level, most chemical products can be classified within this, in most cases exposure in daily life is well below that.
Too much water kills too.
Now the WHO wants to limit sugar intake and gummints to take action , good idea in my opinion, but why do we even need that sort of regulation.
Sugar is a chemical that can kill in high concentrations. Ascorbic Acid is a chemical also, in the food industry it is known as vitamin C.
Taking sophistry to the next level is ‘carbon-free sugar’ – Google it and weep
I have never found a green product that cleans as well as the traditional cleaners so I don’t bother. Part of the problem with indoor air quality is tighter buildings. When homes leaked, they got some fresh air into them, now some homes are so tight they have moisture problems and poor air quality not only from products like these, but fumes from items like carpet padding, furniture padding, chemicals to make fabrics less flammable, etc.
That wouldn’t have anything to do with a rise in asthma, no, it’s climate change.
“The most common chemicals in fragranced products were terpenes, which were not in fragrance-free versions. Terpenes readily react with ozone in the air to generate a range of additional pollutants, such as formaldehyde and ultrafine particles.”
Terpenes are produced in huge amounts by plants, particularly conifers. Resin is very largely terpenes and it is terpenes that causes the distinctive (and pleasant) smell of coniferous forests. Furthermore the compounds that give hops (and beer) its distinctive taste are also terpenes.
Prohibit trees and beer!
By the way, strawberries contain 11 different terpenes (as well i. a. 38 acids, 39 alcohols, 17 aldehydes, 14 ketones and 23 aromatics).
Source: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/229702563_Strawberry_Flavour_Analysis_and_Biosynthesis
Prohibit all eating, drinking and breathing!
I am with ya bro.
I used to think organic food was safer. Manure as fertilizer is natural and organic after all.
Organic water is the deadliest thing that people put into their mouths. Millions of people die because of the lack safe water.
If you poison the water with chlorine or ozone (iodine in a pinch) it becomes safer to drink.
Jimbo, quoting from that study
Raw animal manure is a forbidden input under the organic farming regulations I helped develop these many years ago. So I stopped reading right there.
The Pompous Git, which country did you help develop organic farming regulations? When did the regulations come into force? The article was written on the 1st June 2004 and talks about the UK and the US. I’m just curious.
[See bottom of page for date of article]
http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/more/?type=feature&author=43&date-range=10-20+years
The Pompous Git, if only you didn’t stop reading. 😉
It is not known how long the deadly pathogens can live in manure.
So aged manure does not have as clear a distinction from raw manure as we all have been led to think. Manure is fantastic for cattle ranchers to put on their fields -,but that is a risk of buying shorter row crops from organic growers.
Besides the fact that organic growers use extremely negative ad campaign attacks constantly against conventional growers.
The composting process is optimal at ~60°C at which temperature most, if not all, pathogenic microbes are killed. Salmonella can only survive at 60°C for 10 minutes!
The chemical industry is responsible for a concerted negative campaign attack against microbes, most of which are actually beneficial. A cow without its essential rumen bacteria is a dead cow. More and more research is showing that many of our current human health problems appear due to deleterious microbe balance in our digestive systems. Example: sugar substitutes have recently been shown to engender glucose intolerance due to changes in the gut flora and fauna of those consuming them. It is certainly the case that encouraging soil macro and micro biota in the soil provides substantial benefits to the grower of crops.
The Git has never engaged in any attack on conventional growers, rather the reverse. He has encouraged, and been encouraged by, conventional growers integrating organic techniques into their production systems. The Greens hate The Git even more than they hate conventional growers 🙂
Also worth bearing in mind that while raw animal manure is verboten for use on certified organic crops, it is allowed on conventional crops.
Obviously, conventional farmers use composted manure because if it is not properly aged, then it will burn the young plants….
Conventional farmers also do not need any mid-season applications of manure, which is closer to harvest time.
Green products=toxic/volatile chemicals.
This goes with the other evidence to confirm that we are living in the Twilight Zone of environmentalism/climate science
Beneficial gas=pollution
Slight warming=catastrophic
Greening planet/increasing food production=negative consequence of man made climate change
Less violent tornadoes, hurricanes, drought= extreme weather
Corn grown for ethanol(high polluting and user of natural resources, (especially water)=good for the environment/world
Actually, it’s really just evidence that those that can gain control/obtain money/support for their ideology or scheme, can twist facts and spin a story to convince people that good=bad and that bad=good.
Well, yes it’s true that plants have toxic/carcinogenic substances. Take the ordinary potato ( do not eat the green or “sunburnt” surface, you could get a tummyache).
Or your stones fruits: cherries, peaches, plums, also pears, apples, almonds, all members of the rose family and all containing cyanogenic glycosides, read _cyanide_.
All of your seasonings, spices, etc. have toxic aspects to them.
So, no surprises from this post.
You’ll get more than a tummy-ache from eating any portion of a greened potato. The toxin causes hemorrhaging of the smaller blood vessels.
Pompous Git, you say “any portion”.
Do you actually mean that the whole of a “sunburnt”, green potato is toxic?
@ur momisugly mpainter
Indeed. The toxin is generated in the green portion, but is subsequently distributed throughout the tuber. Of course you can get away with consuming small amounts of the toxin, but if you are consuming a pharmaceutical such as warfarin, you might want to think twice.
Or aspirin, or ulcers. Small amounts of toxin are not so small for some people. Thanks for replying. Been thinking about the evaporation pans.
@mpainter
You’re welcome. There’s much been made of “dose makes the poison” in this thread and ignoring the fact that living organisms are rather complex and ill-understood. Endocrine disruptors only exhibit their effects at particular doses; too much, or too little and there will be no effect. And then there’s timing; foetuses can be affected by an endocrine disruptor that has no noticeable effect on an adult.
There was an interesting episode in farming with the use of seaweed (bull kelp) extract as a foliar amendment. The effects were only evident when the application rate was very low. Worse, sometimes the expected effect occurred and at other times not. It turned out that the effects were due to different plant hormones: abscissic acid and auxins. Abscissic acid, the hormone responsible for deciduous trees dropping their leaves in autumn confers disease resistance. Auxins are growth stimulants.
It turned out that spring harvested kelp was high in auxins and low in abscissic acid and the reverse was true for autumn harvested kelp. These differences did not show up in simple testing for relative amounts of the kelp’s constituent atomic species (N, P, K etc).
Regarding the pan evaporation paradox, the problem seems to me to be that we have too many conflicting explanations. But then complex systems are rarely amenable to overly simplistic explanation.
Beer contains (VOCs) Volatile Organic Compounds. Ethanol.
Have I said enough? Really? Beer… a food group.
Natural Fragrances…. from nature…. contain volatile organic compounds. Hmm
Like lavender essential oil…
Lavender Fields
etc etc etc… since when did VOCs turn evil?
Paul,
RE: ….since when did VOCs turn evil?
Just about the same time CO2 became pollution……
The biggest toxic hazard of “green”; it can be hazardous to your wealth.
None of this matters. All that matters is that I feel a lot better when I buy the nice green labels.
Just ask a Frenchman about green labels, after hundreds ate vegetables sprayed with human waste, there were some deaths
When you consider parts per billion you can find VOC’s and carcinogens in almost everything.
So strange to me. I have actual physical reaction to several types of conventional cleaners and soaps, havent had such issues with most of the “green” stuff to date. There must be some other variable involved this didn’t cover.
Placebo
nope. I would have scoffed at claims of allergy too..though Id always got rash on hands from laundry detergents if I didnt wash the soapy water off very well and fast.
then out of the blue I started developing rashes all over, where clothes were tight hips shoulders etc
2 years of trying countless detergent alternatives and a new cake of soap every shopping trip and no use.
doc thought it a pharma reaction cut all meds still got the rash
eventually I found one brand of soap n detergent n cleaners I could use, green and far cheaper than commercial crap.
7 yrs on I ran out, started normal products and four showers later using “normal” soap..yup the rash came back.
so its NOT all placebo, cumulative toxin buildup IS known.
lol not a placebo tty. This was ongoing since childhood.