The Oregon Senate is expected to vote today on a bill to ban a type of flame retardant known as deca PBDE.
While many of us have never heard of this chemical, it’s used in a variety of consumer products such as carpeting, furniture, mattresses, computers, and televisions.
Today’s vote comes amid new evidence that PBDEs are a growing threat to fish, wildlife and possibly people.
A 2008 study found high levels of PBDEs in Peregrine Falcons. Photo by: Craig Koppie, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
The bill before the Senate would ban the sale of products in Oregon that contain deca PBDE starting January 2011. It’s almost identical to ban that takes place in Washington at the same time. Both states have already banned the use of two other types of PBDE.
One of the concerns is that PBDEs take a long time to break down in the environment. They are similar to DDT and PCB’s in how they accumulate over time in fish, birds and bird eggs.
A January report by the Environmental Protection Agency shows that while levels of DDT and PCBs are falling in the Columbia River Basin, levels of PBDEs are on the rise. The report pointed to evidence that PBDE levels are increasing in fish such as bass, trout and walleyes. PBDEs have been found in juvenile salmon and clams along the Columbia River downstream from Portland. Other studies found the chemical in the egg shells of Ospreys.
How do PBDEs harm wildlife? Studies show they cause neurological and behavioral problems that can interfere with a bird’s ability to reproduce. In high doses, they can even lead to cancer in animals. The EPA says there’s no direct evidence, so far, that people can be affected in the same way.
If the Oregon Senate approves the ban, it moves forward to the House.
Earlier Stories:
Stubborn Chemicals Still Pollute Oregon’s Water
Flame Retardant Banned In Washington
22-8. On to the House!
This is a recent post in The Oregonian by Oregon Burn Center Medical Director, Nathan Kemalyan, M.D. Readers should also see this:
With Earth Day just behind us, it’s important to ask questions about environmental stewardship. It is also easy to assume that to support a ban on a chemical is to align yourself with the right position on an issue. No argument necessary. While it is true that without careful stewardship, chemicals can be bad for our environment, as burn physicians we also see how many chemicals help protect what little skin a child may have left on their body, or how it might prevent the severe and unrelenting pain that is associated with a major burn.
As the political leaders in our state consider laws such as a ban on flame retardants, we think that it is important for the legislature and the community alike to understand that no issue is ever black and white, especially when it involves something as integral to public safety as flame retardants.
Senate Bill 596 is attempting to ban a commonly used flame retardant by adding it to its hazardous substances list. This list is home to known carcinogens and substances that have years of proven side effects. However the flame retardant chemical they are looking to ban, Deca-bde, is neither a proven carcinogen nor does it display neurotoxicity effects. So why then, would there be a bill proposing to add this chemical to this list? Simply put—a lack of balanced, informed debate.
Deca-bde is by far the most studied and most understood flame retardant available commercially. In fact, it was the sole focus of a 10-year-long Risk Assessment conducted by the European Union, and has also been analyzed and by such other groups as the US EPA, the National Academy of Sciences and the Consumer Product Safety Commission, all of which have concluded that the product is safe for continued use. Most recently, a study sponsored by an industry affiliate concluded that Deca-bde poses no risk to human health. And yet, there is still speculation as to the long-term effects of this chemical on the environment and humans.
While there may still be questions regarding yet-to-be determined risks, there are things we do know about this chemical. We know that it saves lives. We know that its efficacy is unquestioned and that the crucial moments that it adds allow firefighters to extinguish a blaze and would-be victims to escape with their lives and possessions.
Every day, we see burn survivors whose lives are forever changed due the devastation of fires. We’ve spent painstaking hours bringing back victims from the brink of death and then teaching them how to live their lives in their new bodies. Without adequate, proven and effective fire protection, the number of fire related injuries and deaths will likely increase.
While it is important to be vigilant about public health and the environment, we must never be reckless concerning something as vital as fire safety. More study must be done before any premature ban is enacted. The issues raised by this legislation have been closely watched by national fire safety standards organizations, and after much discussion and careful review, two well respected organizations, the International Association of Firefighters and the National Association of State Fire Marshalls, have accepted an offer from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Building and Fire Research Laboratory, “…to serve as an organizer and neutral host of a scientific workshop on this topic.”
The American Burn Association recently endorsed this process at their annual meeting a few weeks ago. The findings of this scientific workshop should be allowed to move forward in a thoughtful way.
We hope that the Oregon legislature will act in the interest of public safety and more study and delay any action on this bill.
[...] Oregon Senate Votes Today On Flame Retardant Ban | Natural Oregon [...]