Paint the town green

The good folks at Common Ground give high marks to LoVo paint, a nontoxic, low-VOC alternative with a beautiful color selection. LoVo might not get a pass from every canary, but it’s always good to see people making smarter choices about office and household products.

When our building manager informed us it was time to freshen up the lobby of the Common Ground office, we lobbied him for the chance to put our principles into practice. We headed down to G&R Paint Company on Sutter Street in San Francisco, to talk to owner/colorist Philip Reno about eco-friendly paint options (philipsperfectcolors.com) and left with four gallons of C2 LoVo paint (c2color.com). Our building manager loved the nontoxic, low-VOC paint’s rich color and smooth and even finish, and we all loved that the paint was virtually odorless (sparing us all the cloud of stinky, toxic fumes, thank you very much). Now we’ve got a dazzlingly white lobby and a new favorite paint! Oh how we love happy endings.

Link

Link to LoVo Paints

Canary’s Cry for Saturday, January 3

A patron at Sheraton’s Four Point hotel in San Francisco discovers a disturbing environmental hazard inside the building.

Who’s chirping about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity?

Green Living has a article in the Winter 2008 issue called “Wake Up and Smell the Chemicals,” with a section on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. The link will take you to the online version of the issue, go to pages 46-47 for the story, it’s chock full of good information.

Articles like this validate claims made by those of us with MCS, who say chemicals found in many everyday personal care products are toxic not only to us but to everyone. Further, as the article explores, scientists are starting to understand the ways in which low levels of toxic chemicals, such as those found in perfumes and other fragrance, adversely affect the body. Take heart, Canaries, because eventually, science will catch up with us and our claims of exquisite sensitivity.

Glenda at Writing Life Stories tells a story about getting assaulted by fragrance from fellow patrons at a fast food restaurant. She writes:

As soon as I sat down, the smell hit me again. I looked up and saw the guy who had been standing in line near me. He had plopped down fifteen feet away from my table. The odor emanating from him smelled worse to me than a skunk’s spray, the chemicals in that fragrance he wore poisoned me. By the time I got out of there, hoarse and coughing, I gasped, sucked in the fresh outside air like it was my final breath.

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. More and more of my friends are experiencing the same symptoms — spending tons of money on doctors who run tests and tell them they have asthma and to stay away from chemicals. Duh!! The asthma is caused by the chemicals we breathe every day, the chemicals all around us, the chemicals we can’t escape.

Thanks, Linda!

No comment

Who’s chirping about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity?

Not to be outdone by Leslie at The Oko Box Blog and her post on The Crazy Sh!t We Gotta Do where she sealed off a door with foil to keep safe from her roomie’s fumes, Mokihana at Vardo for Two writes about her Denny Foil, golden folds of fabric, and The Kitchenette. “Leslie from The Oko Box Blog posted pictures and story of what it takes to live in ’safe’ fashion with stuff that ‘ordinaries’ or ‘civilians’ have/build with …Least I forget how MUCH WE HAVE living in The Kitchenette I felt compelled to make her our very special pin-up girl. With out her we would be dead meat!”

Keith at Digital Doorway writes about the exclusion of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in the recently released U.S. Census on Americans With Disabilities: 2005. In Keith’s post, “The Census and Americans with Disabilities,” he expresses his profound disappointment that illnesses such as MCS and Gulf War Syndrome are once again left out of the data.

While not addressing Multiple Chemical Sensitivity directly, Julie Mellum, president of Take Back the Air, writes at StarTribune.com about the absurdity of men using fragrances as a secret to business success. In her opinion piece, “Scents do not line the path to success,” she says:

…fragrances contain many of the same toxicants that are in tobacco smoke. These include formaldehyde, benzene, toluene and other hazardous volatile organic compounds that pollute the lungs and airspace of those around them.

Synthetic fragrances are about as romantic as a toxic-waste site, for many of their shared toxicants are on the EPA’s list of most hazardous wastes. They also contain highly addictive class A carcinogens. See www.takebacktheair.com for the facts.

Just as bottled deer musk masks the human scent as a hunting aid, so synthetic fragrances mask natural pheromones in people. Burger King has actually leapt into the fray with a new fragrance that smells like meat. That is downright comical, except for the fact that fragrance chemicals mimic estrogen with hormone-disrupting chemicals that are implicated in early puberty, reproductive birth defects and infertility.

Note: I neglected to add a link on Monday’s story to Leslie’s post on her door project. My apologies for the omission.

Thanks, Linda, for sending the second two stories my way! You find the best stuff on the Interwebs.

Canary’s Cry for Wednesday, Dec. 31

Bloomberg.com reports that a “Coal Ash Spill Leads to Arsenic Warnings for Tennessee Wells” :

Water samples near a billion-gallon spill of coal ash in eastern Tennessee have found levels of arsenic and other heavy metals higher than drinking-water standards, prompting a warning against using private wells in the area.

Samples taken at the site of the spill in Harriman, 35 miles southwest of Knoxville, “slightly exceed” the standards for some metals, according to a statement from the Tennessee Valley Authority, owner of the coal power plant where the Dec. 22 accident occurred. Results from well-water and air tests won’t be known until later this week, the utility said.

The spill at the utility’s Harriman Fossil Plant deluged more than 300 acres of rural Roane County, destroying three homes and damaging 42 other properties. In nearby Kingston, that raised fears of fouled water and air, while 13 families wait to see if their homes can be salvaged, said Carolyn Brewer, finance director for the city of 5,300.

“Some of them are staying with families; some are working with real estate agents, leasing homes, buying homes,” Brewer said in a telephone interview today. “There’s two or three that will just never be able to get back in their homes. They’re just destroyed.”

The sludge-like spill, a mixture of water and residue from burned coal, escaped from a 40-acre holding pond after a retaining wall burst last week. After repeatedly saying the spilled material isn’t toxic, the TVA cautioned residents in its latest statement against touching or stirring up the material.

Leslie at The Oko Box Blog says the same coal ash spill, which happened “just around the bend” from where she lives, is polluting the air in her neighborhood to the point of making her “nauseous, lethargic, and seizure prone.” Take care, Leslie!

On the same topic, the New York Times reports “At Plant in Coal Ash Spill, Toxic Deposits by the Ton.” NYT says, “The spill has reignited a debate over whether coal ash should be regulated as a hazardous waste. In 2000, the E.P.A. backed away from its recommendation to do so in the face of industry opposition, promising instead to issue national guidelines for proper ash disposal, though it never did.”

In other disturbing news, Utne Reader reports about the consequences from marketing chemical-laden cosmetics to younger and younger consumers. In “Not So Pretty in Pink: Marketing Toxic Makeup to Young Girls,” Utne notes, “This rush to cosmetic beauty also represents increased exposure to toxic chemicals. Scientists now suspect that chemicals found in many of the cosmetics for which young girls clamor contribute to a disturbing trend. Girls in the United States, especially African American girls, are entering puberty earlier than their grandmothers did. Half of all American girls now show signs of breast development by age 10—one to two years earlier than 40 years ago—and a significant number show signs as early as 8 or 9.” Take a look at the article to find out why.

Thanks, Leslie and Linda!

Low levels of cigarette smoke residue highly toxic

“Similar to low-level lead exposure, low levels of tobacco particulates have been associated with cognitive deficits among children, and the higher the exposure level, the lower the reading score.”

So basically, once again, people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity are way ahead of the curve on knowing that even extremely low levels of toxic chemicals can be neurotoxic.

Need another reason to add “Quit Smoking” to your New Year’s resolutions list? How about the fact that even if you choose to smoke outside of your home or only smoke in your home when your children are not there – thinking that you’re keeping them away from second-hand smoke – you’re still exposing them to toxins? In the January issue of Pediatrics, researchers at MassGeneral Hospital for Children (MGHfC) and colleagues across the country describe how tobacco smoke contamination lingers even after a cigarette is extinguished – a phenomenon they define as “third-hand” smoke. Their study is the first to examine adult attitudes about the health risks to children of third-hand smoke and how those beliefs may relate to rules about smoking in their homes.

“When you smoke – anyplace – toxic particulate matter from tobacco smoke gets into your hair and clothing,” says lead study author, Jonathan Winickoff, MD, MPH, assistant director of the MGHfC Center for Child and Adolescent Health Policy. “When you come into contact with your baby, even if you’re not smoking at the time, she comes in contact with those toxins. And if you breastfeed, the toxins will transfer to your baby in your breastmilk.” Winickoff notes that nursing a baby if you’re a smoker is still preferable to bottle-feeding, however.

Particulate matter from tobacco smoke has been proven toxic. According to the National Toxicology Program, these 250 poisonous gases, chemicals, and metals include hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide, butane, ammonia, toluene (found in paint thinners), arsenic, lead, chromium (used to make steel), cadmium (used to make batteries), and polonium-210 (highly radioactive carcinogen). Eleven of the compounds are classified as Group 1 carcinogens, the most dangerous.

Small children are especially susceptible to third-hand smoke exposure because they can inhale near, crawl and play on, or touch and mouth contaminated surfaces. Third-hand smoke can remain indoors even long after the smoking has stopped. Similar to low-level lead exposure, low levels of tobacco particulates have been associated with cognitive deficits among children, and the higher the exposure level, the lower the reading score. These findings underscore the possibility that even extremely low levels of these compounds may be neurotoxic and, according to the researchers, justify restricting all smoking in indoor areas inhabited by children.

Link

Photo by lanier67

Thanks, Linda!

Green hospitals are better for everyone

As a follow-up to yesterday’s post on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in a Hospital Setting, here’s a report in Time on Making Hospitals Greener and Patients Healthier. It would be so smart if all hospitals adopted these practices, not just so those of us with MCS don’t have to weigh out the consequences of exposure before seeking medical treatment for any ailment, but for everyone especially hospital staff.

In the typical hospital, “while we are trying to treat or cure illness and disease…we expose our staff and patients to irritants and carcinogens, and our treatments often contribute to the development of other diseases,” says Dr. Kristin Bradford, a family physician in Willits, Calif.

Enter “green medicine” — the effort to detoxify the healing environment and enhance patients’ and employees’ health, while reducing costs all around. The international advocacy group Health Care Without Harm (HCWH) — whose 2006 study of 1,200 nurses suggested a link between the hospital environmental and health problems among the staff — has been a pioneer in the movement, recently initiating collaborative research among major U.S. health systems to document how removing toxins from the environment impacts worker safety and lost time due to employee illness.

[Link to full article here]

We have a hospital here on our island, the North Hawaii Community Hospital, that integrates native Hawaiian cultural practices and other healing traditions such as Feng Shui into the environment. Note the difference in the corridor at left to a more common hospital corridor above. North Hawaii Community Hospital uses HEPA air filters, water filters, low VOC paints, and other nontoxic measures. Here’s a description of The Healing Environment in Blended Medicine at North Hawaii Community Hospital. And here’s a description of the Holistic Care they offer in addition to the traditional allopathic medical care and surgery.

I haven’t been to North Hawaii hospital for awhile for care, but when I was there some years ago for some tests, I did not have a bad reaction to the air quality. Unlike the hospital in California I visited this past summer when I was with my dad for his nutrition consultation– whoa, that was bad from the first breath I took once inside the front doors. But I’d have no hesitation going to North Hawaii hospital again for care if I needed it.

Photo at top by Julie

Thanks, Linda, for sending the Time article my way!

No comment

NEW YORK (AP) — Looking to beef up your mojo this holiday season?

Burger King Corp. may have just the thing. The home of the Whopper has launched a new men’s body spray called “Flame.” The company describes the spray as “the scent of seduction with a hint of flame-broiled meat.”

The fragrance is on sale at New York City retailer Ricky’s NYC in stores and online for a limited time for $3.99.

Burger King is marketing the product through a Web site featuring a photo of its King character reclining fireside and naked but for an animal fur strategically placed to not offend.

The marketing ploy is the latest in a string of viral ad campaigns by the company. Burger King is also in the midst of its Whopper Virgins campaign that features an taste test with fast-food “virgins” pitting the Whopper against McDonald’s Corp.’s Big Mac.

Link

Photo

Air freshener manufacturers disclose product ingredients

Manufacturers disclose a plethora of chemicals in air fresheners including formaldehyde, benzene compounds and naphthalene.

We knew that crap was poison, didn’t we?

From The Alliance for Healthy Homes:

Under pressure from a coalition of environment and health groups, the seven largest air freshener manufacturers have disclosed their products’ ingredients to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The coalition of groups dropped a legal case regarding the issue against the EPA on December 11 and now plan to pressure the agency to evaluate the safety of the ingredients individually and in combination with each other.

The Alliance for Healthy Homes, Sierra Club, and Natural Resources Defense Council petitioned EPA in September 2007 to learn the risks of air fresheners and to require that manufacturers list ingredients on labels. In December 2007, EPA denied the petition but sent letters to the top seven air freshener manufacturers, asking them to voluntarily submit the ingredients in their products and the quantities used annually. The seven companies are Blythe, Dial, Lancaster Colony, Procter & Gamble, Redkitt Benckiser, S.C. Johnson and Shell. The petitioners sued EPA in April 2008 to help ensure that the companies actually provided ingredient information to EPA – which they did in two stages. In May, EPA received data about the non-fragrance ingredients and in October the agency obtained fragrance ingredient data.

EPA now has data for all ingredients present in 0.1% concentration or greater in air freshener products made by these seven companies. This is the first time that EPA has known the main chemical ingredients in a wide number of air fresheners, the function of each ingredient, and the aggregate amount of each chemical present in the products. The agency is now in a position to assess the risks posed by those chemicals and to take appropriate regulatory action. The organizations will continue to request that ingredients present below 0.1% concentration be disclosed to the agency, too.

While EPA received the complete list of ingredients, public versions contained many redactions under company confidential business information claims. Even with the redacted version of the data, however, several hazardous chemicals are listed as air freshener ingredients. These chemicals include formaldehyde (a carcinogen and irritant deliberately generated as preservative), benzene compounds (benzene is a genotoxic carcinogen), naphthalene (a carcinogen), and other chemicals whose safety is questionable.

Because of the redactions in the public data, only EPA and the companies presently know what amounts of these chemicals are used. The coalition of groups is now attempting to use the Freedom of Information Act to challenge the companies’ confidentiality claims and hope to make more ingredient information available publicly. Industry groups are also planning a new ingredient disclosure program for 2010, but say they will continue to keep many ingredients secret including those in their dyes, preservatives and fragrances.

The original petition, EPA’s response, as well as all other public submissions from the Air Freshener Manufacturers

The submission from the fragrance houses

Photo by Crazy Wanda

Thanks, Linda!

Dryer sheet alternatives

We discussed the issue of dryer sheets awhile back when Missy suggested dryer balls as an alternative to dryer sheets.

Here’s an advice column at The Olympian today that suggests using Static Eliminator sheets, something that also might work for people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.

Just thought I’d bring up this topic once in awhile because scented dryer sheets are THE WORST THING IN THE WORLD to peeps with MCS. Am I right?

EarthTalk question: Which is better for our environment: dryer sheets in the dryer or liquid fabric softener in the wash? It seems they both have properties that aren’t green.

Answer: If you’re concerned about health and safety, you might want to stay away from conventional dryer sheets and liquid fabric softeners. While it might be nice to have clothes that feel soft, smell fresh and are free of static cling, both items contain chemicals toxic to people after sustained exposure.

According to the health and wellness Web site Sixwise.com, some of the most harmful ingredients in dryer sheets and liquid fabric softener include benzyl acetate (linked to pancreatic cancer), benzyl alcohol (an upper respiratory tract irritant), ethanol (linked to central nervous system disorders), limonene (a known carcinogen) and chloroform (a neurotoxin and carcinogen).

Because fabric softeners are designed to stay in your clothes for extended periods of time, the chemicals can seep out gradually and be inhaled or absorbed through the skin.

Liquid fabric softeners are slightly preferable to dryer sheets. The chemicals in dryer sheets get released into the air when they are heated up in the dryer and can pose a respiratory health risk inside and outside of the home.

For those who don’t want to give up soft and static-free clothes, National Geographic’s Green Guide recommends adding either a quarter cup of baking soda or a quarter cup of white vinegar to the wash cycle. Either one will soften clothes; the latter also addresses static cling. (Don’t mix either with bleach because chemical reactions could cause noxious fumes.)

If eliminating static cling is your top priority, dry natural-fiber clothes separately from synthetic materials. The combination of cotton and polyester often is the culprit behind static cling.

A few companies have heeded the ever-increasing call for greener, safer ways to soften clothes and reduce static cling. Seventh Generation’s Natural Lavender Scent Fabric Softener and Ecover’s Natural Fabric Soft ener are good choices that rely on vegetable products and natural essential oils instead of harsh chemicals to get the job done.

Maddocks’ Static Eliminator is a nontoxic, hypoallergenic reusable dryer sheet made out of a pro prietary, chemical-free polynylon. The Canadian company originally developed the material to rid mechanical systems of explosion-i nducing static electricity, but soon realized it could benefit consumers as well. One sheet is good for about 500 wash loads.

Don’t want to use the dryer at all? Leslie at The Oko Box Blog made a cute DIY clothes dryer rack out of bamboo yesterday, check it out!

Photo by Queen Roly

Canary manners: Wedding invitations

Kerry from Lemon-Aide, who has Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and a host of other chronic health issues, wrote me and asked if The Canary Report flock has any ideas to help solve this problem:

My son’s getting married this summer and I’m starting to think about how we communicate via the invitations for guests to refrain from perfumes, clothes with dryer sheets etc. Would it be possible to put a question out there on your blog to get your MCS readers input?

Kerry is a wonderfully sweet woman with a blog to match. I know she wants to make this a very special day for her son and new daughter-in-law, but also wants to stay safe so she can enjoy the day, too. Any ideas for her?

Photo by Cherry

Warning: Avoid ozone generating air machines

While manufacturers of ozone-generating machines will tell you that the ozone is harmless and will clean the air you breathe (example of the spin here), the fact is that ozone generating machines are not only ineffective at cleaning the air, but they can be extremely harmful to your health. From the EPA website:

Manufacturers and vendors of ozone devices often use misleading terms to describe ozone. Terms such as ‘energized oxygen’ or ‘pure air’ suggest that ozone is a healthy kind of oxygen. Ozone is a toxic gas with vastly different chemical and toxicological properties from oxygen. Several federal agencies have established health standards or recommendations to limit human exposure to ozone.

Further, I can’t tell you how many stories I’ve heard about exposure to ozone from these types of machines triggering full blown Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in unsuspecting consumers. We’ve discussed ozone machines previously on The Canary Report when one of our flock was exposed in her home.

Please note that while ozone machine manufacturers will tell you that the “unused ozone always reverts back to oxygen in about an hour,” the EPA, using “sound science, only peer reviewed, scientifically supported findings and conclusions,” says, “Some of the potential by-products produced by ozone’s reactions with other chemicals are themselves very reactive and capable of producing irritating and corrosive by-products (Weschler and Shields, 1996, 1997a, 1997b).” So in reality, ozone in the home creates chemical reactions with other chemicals already in the home, and no one has ever studied the impact of that lingering toxic brew.

Here’s the astonishing thing about the regulation of these machines: The EPA has a whole page on their website dedicated to informing the public about the dangers of ozone generators that are sold as air cleaners, and yet the government still allows these machines to be manufactured, sold and used inside homes. I can’t for the life of me understand what’s going on with this. These dangerous machines should be pulled off the market NOW.

Environment News Service reports today:

The California Air Resources Board has issued a consumer alert, advising holiday shoppers not to purchase air purifiers or air cleaning devices that intentionally generate ozone.Some devices that are advertised as “air purifiers,” air cleaners, or ozone generators purposely emit large amounts of ozone, the main component of smog.

“Not only are such ozone generators ineffective at cleaning indoor air, but breathing ozone poses serious health risks,” warns the Air Resources Board, recommending that these ozone generators not be used.

“Consumers should take care when considering purchase of an air cleaning device,” said ARB Chairman Mary Nichols, “Beware of misleading advertisements offering air purifiers that are simply indoor smog-making machines.”

Consumers may unknowingly purchase these “ozone generators” from advertisers touting the so-called benefits of “activated oxygen” that can make the air inside your home “as fresh as the outdoors after a thunderstorm,” the board said, quoting the ads.

In fact, the board says, “Ozone generators are capable of emitting enough ozone indoors to far exceed outdoor health standards and can intentionally create the equivalent of a Stage 1 smog alert inside your home.”

These devices pump a well-known air pollutant into people’s homes putting everyone at risk, especially the most vulnerable - the young, elderly and infirm.

The devices can produce levels of ozone that can worsen asthma, cause serious lung inflammation, decrease lung function, and lead to hospitalization for respiratory conditions, emergency room visits for asthma, and increased school absences.

Link to more of the story at Environment News Service

Photo by M. Stephens

Canary’s Cry for Monday, Dec. 8

USA Today has put out an in-depth Special Report on Toxic Air and America’s Schools.

USA Today used an EPA model to track the path of industrial pollution and mapped the locations of almost 128,000 schools to determine the level of toxic chemicals outside. The potential problems that emerged were widespread, insidious and largely unaddressed.

Click here for USA Today Video by Garrett Hubbard, Steve Elfers, Denny Gainer, and Rhyne Piggott: USA TODAY examines the impact of industrial pollution outside the nation’s schools and explores how toxic chemicals shuttered one elementary school in Addyston, Ohio, three years ago. This video is Part One. Part Two is due out shortly. Click here for USA Today full report and supporting stories.

In other news, The New York Times reports that “A Problem Rises to the Surface in Greenpoint.” Residents of Greenpoint, Brooklyn, have toxic gases “rising into their homes from below, the legacy of dry-cleaning plants, foundries and other manufacturers that once operated in this hub, which has long been home to immigrants and, more recently, artists and young professionals. Such vapor intrusion — chemicals from contaminated soil and groundwater that become airborne, entering buildings through pores and cracks — has become a growing public health concern around the country in recent years. Contaminants that spread from industrial activity, or that were mistakenly believed to have been contained or eliminated in environmental cleanups, have been discovered wafting into basements.”

Toronto’s air choked with carcinogens

Toronto’s new law forcing industry to disclose chemical emissions might start to curb the toxic soup currently found in the city’s air.

This place does not pass the canary test!

Dry cleaning store on Queen East just west of Coxwell that has sign stating they don’t use toxic chemicals. COLIN MCCONNELL-TORONTO STAR

The 25 chemicals captured in Toronto’s new industry disclosure bylaw create a toxic brew of emissions that currently exceed health safety levels, Toronto Public Health says.

Almost all of the chemicals – most of them thought to be carcinogens – show up in Toronto’s air above accepted health standards. But some can surpass the best benchmarks by 25 to 30 times, making the simple act of breathing city air a risky proposition.

Those startling conclusions are part of the research that created the foundation for Toronto’s sweeping new “community right to know” bylaw, the first of its kind in Canada.

Using federal data from four Environment Canada air-monitoring stations across Toronto, public health researchers compared the figures to health measurement levels adopted in California (a rigorous standard founded on being “protective” of the public’s health) and by the Ontario Ministry of Environment.

“Most of us know that Toronto’s air is bad to breathe, especially in the summer,” said Katrina Miller, spokesperson for the Toronto Environmental Alliance, which spent years lobbying for the new bylaw. “We now know that there are certain cancer-causing chemicals in our air at levels that are absolutely unacceptable.”

Link to full story at HealthZone.ca

Thanks, Linda!

Organic farming at Boggy Creek Farm

Organic farmer Larry Butler of Boggy Creek Farm in Austin, Texas, tells us about organic farming. He explains that an organic farm uses not only organic feritlizers, but also Integrated Pest Management. He points out that farms using chemical pesticides also still experience bug problems.

“Chemicals are not the panacea for farming,” he says. “Instead of chemical fertilizers and chemical herbicides and things like that, sometimes we’ll use vinegar for an herbicide, it’s just like Round-Up.”

Link

Judge says woman can sue over co-worker’s perfume

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Mike Adams at Natural News has an excellent critique of a recent court case where an employee is suing the City of Detroit over a perfume drenched co-worker whom the employee says caused her serious respiratory problems.

Adams has a theory that the chemicals in perfume do much more than damage lungs. He says synthetic perfume “literally affects brain function, causing the brain to recede from sensory reality by decoupling neurons, thus making those people cognitively impaired.” Sound familiar?

I’m not sure if I go along with his assertion that the “dumbest people” wear perfume; I guess you have to define your terms. But his feeling about “dumbed-down” consumers getting poisoned in their homes makes a lot of sense to me.

A Judge has ruled that a lawsuit over workplace perfume filed by a Detroit city planner can proceed. The lawsuit alleges that perfume from a co-worker made Susan McBride unable to properly breathe, creating a hazardous work environment and making it difficult for her to complete her work.

The city of Detroit sought to have the lawsuit dismissed in court, but the Judge agreed with McBride that her difficulty in breathing with the excessive perfume did, indeed, qualify for protection under federal laws that protect the disabled from workplace discrimination.

That may seem like an odd law to invoke in this case (is McBride really “disabled” due to her difficulty in breathing?) but at least it is recognizing the reality of perfume toxicity.

Let’s get straight to the real story here, folks: Perfume-wearing people are toxic to the world, and they create a toxic workplace filled with poisonous, cancer-promoting chemicals that cause healthy people to gasp for breath.

[...]

Synthetic perfume chemicals cause cancer

These people also remain oblivious to the fact that perfumes contain cancer-causing chemicals that are absorbed right through the skin. These chemicals enter the blood where they poison the liver and other organs, causing cancer and cellular toxicity throughout the body.

I also have a theory that this onslaught of chemicals literally affects brain function, causing the brain to recede from sensory reality by decoupling neurons, thus making those people cognitively impaired. You can observe this in the real world, too: Have you ever noticed it’s the dumbest people who wear the most perfume or cologne? I do not believe that is by chance: It could very well be a cause-effect relationship between perfume chemicals and brain function.

Keep in mind, too, that dumbed-down mainstream consumers use a lot of perfume-laced products throughout their homes: Laundry detergent, dryer sheets, air fresheners, carpet cleaners, shampoo, shower soap and other products laced with the same toxic fragrance chemicals found in perfumes. This creates a toxic environment in which cancer is accelerated and brain development is retarded.

NaturalNews supports a nationwide ban on perfumes in the workplace.

Link

Love Canal, 30 years later

“It was like a Hitchcock movie.”

Here’s a report on Love Canal by ERIKA ENGELHAUPT, who explores “the toxic waste dump that became synonymous with environmental disaster 30 years ago.” You are not going to believe this, but they are moving people back into the area. Here’s a slide show (or click on photo at left), and here are the first few paragraphs of the report:

Niagara Falls, N.Y. In the middle of an abandoned suburban neighborhood, a long grassy mound pokes up a few feet higher than the cracked streets surrounding it. A green chain-link fence surrounds the small hill, which is covered with wildflowers in summer lavender chicory and small yellow daisies. The fence has no warning sign not anymore but this is Love Canal, the toxic waste dump that became synonymous with environmental disaster 30 years ago.

Adeline Levine, a sociologist who wrote a book about Love Canal, described to me the scene she had witnessed exactly 30 years earlier, on August 11, 1978. “It was like a Hitchcock movie,” she said, “where everything looks peaceful and pleasant, but something is slumbering under the ground.”

That “something” was more than 21,000 tons of chemical waste. The mixed brew contained more than 200 different chemicals, many of them toxic. They were dumped into the canal, which was really more of a half-mile-long pond, in the 1940s and 1950s by Hooker Electrochemical Co. In 1953, the canal was covered with soil and sold to the local school board, and an elementary school and playground were built on the site. A working-class neighborhood sprang up around them.

“The neighborhood looked very pleasant,” says Levine, who was a sociology professor at the State University of New York Buffalo in 1978. “There were very nice little homes, nicely kept, with gardens and flowers and fences and kids’ toys, and then there were young people who were rushing out of their homes with bundles and packing up their cars and moving vans.”

Link to full report

Link to slideshow

Thanks, Linda!

No comment

Link

The hunt for truly nontoxic fabrics

Linda, one of our flock, who has an exquisite sensitivity to most fabrics, even organic cottons, needs help finding safe fabrics and knits. She lives in a very cold climate and needs to bundle up for the winter. Who has ideas and sources for her?

Linda says:

I need beyond “just” organic. For now I need completely non-toxic clothing to simply cover my body/keep me warm. No one else will see them, for the most part, so they can be simple. Stacey and Clinton should try a severely MCS version of What not to Wear…

I’ve been trying to detox a MEC and Cotton Ginny organic cotton bag full of clothing, mostly undyed, with no sucess for over 2 years. There are still traditional chemical finishes or contamination issues. I don’t have a dryer or outside line in the sun, both of which I think help in a detox process, so that may be part of the problem. I line dry indoors.

I’ve discovered that US (Texan) or Peruvian organic cotton has been ok for me, because I did find a couple of pairs of underwear that only took 20-30 washings to be wearable, and the peruvian cotton on some of my bedding/comforters is ok even tho not washed… as long as it didn’t pick up contamination in transit, or from warehouse fragrances, like happened with the last pillows I ordered from a store instead of direct from the company. The store did not follow my instructions about douple wrapping and not storing them in the warehouse, and sent them to me in fragrance contaminated cardboard, so I returned the organic pillows - couldn’t go near them even tho I tried to air them out. The place sells fragranced soaps, and some have non-organic essential oils, as well as stuff like patchouli, which is a killer.

Nothing organic from overseas has detoxed for me. Maybe partially the seeds, but I think all the colours/dyes are problems now, as are the sizing and finishing chemicals. Less toxic processes are fine for less sensitized folk, but not for those of us in clothing/laundry purgatories.

[There are] hazards with shipping containers, how they are fumigated, contaminating everything inside. That is another real problem.

I can’t afford to buy all kinds of clothes/textiles, run them thru the washing machine a hundred times, and still have them unsafe when they’re starting to fall apart. No-one takes returns, or believes I’ve never worn them by that stage (LOL). Whatever is being used these days is just not [washing] out and continues to be irritating and has a neurological impact. I need no chemical/fragrance contact clothing, as pure as it can be made, and stored/transported.

Buying from a lot of the so-called eco-conscious places doesn’t work because they like incense and scented soaps. Even some organic essential oils can be sensitizers. And they are all volatile. You would think it would be possible to find completely fragrance-free / chemical-free clothing and textiles somewhere in North America. Someone needs to start up this business.

Does anybody have ideas for fabrics and sources for Linda? (You guys know you have to click on the title of the post to get to the comment section, right? Go on, click, leave some ideas for Linda! She needs our help.)

Photo by Rachel Lake: Fingerless mitts of Blue Sky Alpacas un-dyed Organic Cotton.

Next Page »